Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus Micro Four Thirds

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 14, 2013, 4:19 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,380
Default

Ramce, I never linked any pictures to JohnG. As to the last two pictures, the top one is noticeably better. It really isn't fair to compare pics from one camera to the other. The skill the person has behind the camera is heavily responsible for good images, the quality of the camera just gives him a better tool to work with if he knows how to use the tool. An experienced photographer could shoot better pics with a E-PL2 than an inexperienced one shooting with a Canon 5D and a L lens. That is likely why no one is going to start out with a Canon 5D or other high end camera until gets to the point where he feels the money spent will help improve/advance his photographic skills. Just my two cents.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2013, 5:31 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

I've been away for a day or two and when I came back and read this, I thought I had mistakenly been transported to the Olympus Website at DPreview.com

The old timers there such as bootstrap, John King and others would have spun this into a 150 responses in a heart beat arguing over everything germain to photography including wether your sister wore combat boots or not.

Aah, the good old days
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2013, 7:09 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: oakville, on
Posts: 491
Default

Will a Pen with a good lens perform to the same degree as a full frame with a good lens. Personally I doubt it. But given enough foot candles and if RA was shooting at 1/500th then I'm guessing there were sufficient illumination, then the pen will be will perform very well capturing good images that will make the owner happy. Will it focus as fast/as accurate as a ff, no. Will the successful capture ratio be as high, again I doubt it. But properly handled, the Pen will do what is asked and that is to capture an image as good as its specifications allow. And that can be a very good image. And to capture images that that you like while standing beside someone using some heavy artillery, well, that just increases the smile on one's face.
KulaCube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2013, 7:45 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
No - I wouldn't guess. Not when you can cherry pick images from Flickr..
But you had no problem cherry picking from Fred Miranda a professional sports photographer Paul Alesse at the Cheer and Dance 2012 Worlds to compare to the photos you demanded from me?

Seems again like a one way street. It would have been big of you to admit that at these resolutions both cameras can produce comparable sports shots. Instead you chose to pass judgement...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
neither of the images is very good I wouldn't say they are indicative of good sports photography work.
So tell me is it the equipment that makes you say neither shot is good?
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2013, 8:34 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
folob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 856
Default

This a very interesting conversation ... well, not really. I think that both of you have valid points and neither will win anything by shooting at each other.

As a owner of the 45mm, I know that this lens can give very nice results with any m4/3 body (I am not talking about composition, etc...) given the proper lighting, etc... and for sure any pro camera will give you very good results with the proper lens and setup.

I was one of the official photographer for my company at the Corporate Challenge last year and after I met the "Official" photographer, I was quite happy with the performances of my old E-30 and my new OM-D even if that Pro was using FF. Interesting enough, we compared shot and both agreed that we did a good job ... at our own level.

I am sure that Ramcewan is perfectly happy with his shots using the hardware he used. Good for him ... and good for the Pro!
__________________
Portfolio: http://agilephotography.deviantart.com/

Gears: OM-D E-M5 Mark II and E-M1 MK 1 with 14-150mm Mark II, 12-40mm f2.8, 15mm f8 cap lens, 60mm Macro, 75-300mm, Olympus Trinity -> 25/45/75mm f1.8. On the 4/3 side: 9-18mm and 50-200SWD with the MMF-2 4/3 adapter, FL-36R and FL-50. Also Rokinon mFT 7.5mm f3.5 Fisheye, Pentax 50mm f1.7 with K to m4/3 adapter, Olympus OM 200mm with OM to m4/3 adapter.
folob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2013, 8:46 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 402
Default

Well, i Have to agree with Ram on this one. M 4/3 is great for shooting indoor gymnastics. Check out this shot I happened to take today:



drew881 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2013, 7:50 AM   #27
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
But you had no problem cherry picking from Fred Miranda a professional sports photographer Paul Alesse at the Cheer and Dance 2012 Worlds to compare to the photos you demanded from me?

Seems again like a one way street. It would have been big of you to admit that at these resolutions both cameras can produce comparable sports shots. Instead you chose to pass judgement...
The BIG difference again is you didn't say it was a GUY with a rig - you said PRO. So, it becomes relevant to show photos from other PROS using the gear. Plenty of photographers take very bad shots with expensive gear. If you had said - "there was another parent there with big expensive gear and looking at his shots mine were just as good" that would be a completely different case. Now, it is true I'm giving the "pro" the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he is doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
So tell me is it the equipment that makes you say neither shot is good?
Shot #1 the overall color detail is poor - with too much sharpening. It looks very much like a photo from my 8 year old 20d. There is better action in this shot and exposure is good but the image quality isn't.

Shot #2 is underexposed, crooked and doesn't really have a lot going on. The defender isn't really involved in the play and the framing pushes the ball handler way too close to the edge. The ball handler is a much more interesting subject than the uninvolved defender so the shot would have been better framed concentrating on him. Judging the image quality would have to wait until the photo's exposure was adjusted. The fact that it is underexposed (and crooked) tells me the operator is somewhat of a novice - basketball gyms may be dim but most HS gyms are consistently lit. So, it's fairly easy to set a manual exposure that is proper for the predominant skin tones.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2013, 10:13 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
The BIG difference again is you didn't say it was a GUY with a rig - you said PRO. So, it becomes relevant to show photos from other PROS using the gear. Plenty of photographers take very bad shots with expensive gear. If you had said - "there was another parent there with big expensive gear and looking at his shots mine were just as good" that would be a completely different case. Now, it is true I'm giving the "pro" the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he is doing..

If this is really a matter of my calling him a "PRO" would you accept it if I changed my statement to the following?

Quote:
there was another person there with big expensive gear who was selling copies of his pictures in the lobby and my pictures appeared to be just as good in terms of IQ and clarity were at the resolution being displayed
Seems the crux of your argument is that because I said he was a "pro" therefore had professional skills as good as the full time sports photographers like Paul Alesse. I think that's a very big benefit of doubt you are giving.

Further you've framed this as a discussion about gear all along, insisting that there was no way that my gear could produce images comparable at 1024 x 768 to images from pro gear. Going so far as to say that my claim was "dangerous" because someone might take it to mean they could get decent shots with the same gear as opposed to dropping $5k on a pro setup.

If this is truly a discussion about gear then the person using the camera isn't germane.
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2013, 10:18 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post
I've been away for a day or two and when I came back and read this, I thought I had mistakenly been transported to the Olympus Website at DPreview.com

The old timers there such as bootstrap, John King and others would have spun this into a 150 responses in a heart beat arguing over everything germain to photography including wether your sister wore combat boots or not.

Aah, the good old days

did I mention I have a teenager at home? arguing on the internet is like sparring for the real matches I have at home
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2013, 10:42 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
did I mention I have a teenager at home? arguing on the internet is like sparring for the real matches I have at home
Having raised two of my own, I can only say, I feel your pain....

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:08 PM.