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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 13, 2013, 9:18 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Thumbs down 45mm f1.8 plus indoor sports, a winning combo!

Well this is going to be a rarity for me, a thread with no pictures...

My daughter's cheer team competed in the state division JV title competition meet this past weekend.

As a proud parent I of course attempted my best to photograph her and the team. This is my third attempt since getting the e-pl2.

The first time out I used the 45-200mm and got some good shots but noticed all my shots were at the wide end of the lens and there was some blur from not fast enough shutter speed and noticable ISO noise.

Second time out I opted for the 25mm f2.8 and got closer to the action. The results were better but I ended up cropping more.

This past time out I brought the 45mm f1.8 and I am happy to report that it got the job done pretty well. I was able to opt for a 1/500 shutter priority without having ISO get very high at all. The gym was lit by overhead florescents and natural diffuse light from the upper parts of the gym.

My shots were much sharper and absolutely noise free. Details in the kids faces is great. Action is frozen. Skin tone and wb are excellent as I've come to take for granted from Olympus.

I did a spray and pray multi-shot sequence writing RAW only, using single point AF I would grab focus on first shot and snap away. Even with a class 10 card I did have to pause There were two sequences where I missed focus and grabbed it on the back wall instead of the kids, which was a bummer but really was also my fault. The rest of the sequences were good with decent depth of focus even at f2.0

I had positioned myself next to the pro photographer who was shooting with some FF Canon, not sure which model, with the requisite 70-200mm f2.8 USM L lens. The size difference between his rig and my e-pl2/VF-2/45mm f1.8 was staggering to say the least.

So end of the day the 45mm did what I had wanted for my cheer photos, it gave me a bright fast aperture which allowed a fast shutter speed at a good focal length.
__________________
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

Last edited by ramcewan; Mar 15, 2013 at 8:17 PM.
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 13, 2013, 9:25 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Beaver, PA
Posts: 903
Default

Interesting. What have you found to be the minimum acceptable shutter speed for such an event? Did you have a problem getting close enough with the 45?
SammyKhalifa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2013, 10:28 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SammyKhalifa View Post
Interesting. What have you found to be the minimum acceptable shutter speed for such an event? Did you have a problem getting close enough with the 45?
I don't have a set minimum in the past I would usually take a few shots ahead of time to determine what I can get away with. When I shot with the 25mm f2.8 I found visible motion blur at anything below 1/250. With the 45 I could have gone faster but chose 1/500 because it was recommended for sports.

I did not have a problem getting close enough with the 45, I was seated on the edge of the mats. If anything I might have backed up a bit. At 10-15 feet an average person will fill the frame on the 45mm vertically. The first time out with the 45-200 really opened my eyes to the fact that when shooting people (as opposed to birds) you don't really want to go much longer than a 45mm, unless you're going for head shots.

I've had a few online chats with other folks who have indicated that a pro 35mm setup for cheer would be two people, one working the mat area with a fast 85mm and another on an elevated platform with a longer lens on a tripod. I think seeing the pro who was there with a 70-200mm f2.8 USM L lens confirmed that a 35-100mm lens range for MFT was right. From what I could tell he didn't do a lot of zooming in and out, and from the images I saw on display I think he was shooting right around 80-100mm focal length or equivalent of 40-50mm on MFT.
__________________
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

Last edited by ramcewan; Mar 13, 2013 at 1:43 PM.
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2013, 10:46 AM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Please post some of the images from the competition. It's always helpful to illustrate the points you've made about the gear. It might also be helpful to show the results from the other lenses so people can see the affect on the photos.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2013, 10:54 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Please post some of the images from the competition. It's always helpful to illustrate the points you've made about the gear. It might also be helpful to show the results from the other lenses so people can see the affect on the photos.
Sorry but I don't post pictures of my kids or other people's kids. Although it is a public event and obviously there is no expectation of privacy I just don't feel comfortable posting pictures. Especially when I consider the number of perverts out there who would love to ogle some teenagers in their cheer outfits.

Again sorry but it is what it is, a discussion about photography without pictures.
__________________
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 13, 2013, 11:43 AM   #6
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

well perhaps when you photograph indoor action of adults you can post some photos. It's a bold claim that your photos are every bit as good as a professional's photos. Past experience on the internet forums usually shows similar claims to come up lacking.

It would be fantastic for everyone if, as you say, they could buy equipment at more than 1/2 the cost and 1/5 the weight. And, after only 3 attempts at shooting produce photos that were just as good as seasoned pros.

Technology has come a long way. And, it's also possible you're a savant sports/cheer photographer. But viewing actual photos over the years your claims don't coincide with evidence others have presented.

Perhaps you'd be willing to share some photos privately. For comparison' sake, here are some posts from youth photography pros from last year. I really would like to get on board your bandwagon that such results are easy with little practice and cheaper kit. I look forward to seeing some of your photos via PM to see how they compare.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...cheer#10608808

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...cheer#10606899
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2013, 1:10 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
Again I did not make such a claim, in fact I think I pointed out that my technique was likely no where near the pro in terms of timing as I had to rely on spray and pray.
Your quote was that if someone looked at your images and the pros on a viewing station no one would be able to tell the difference. I'm sorry you're offended that such a statement comes across as a bit egotistical - especially without any photos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
I only posted to share my experience with fellow Olympus micro four thirds users about a micro four thirds equipment.

I'll kindly ask you to please stay on topic which is Olympus micro four thirds photography, if you'd prefer I'll edit my post to remove my comparison to the full frame gear being used.
When you say your photographic results were indistinguishable from the pros and that your gear was "the same as his" at lower cost and size - then you open the door to discuss your conclusions. If you do not wish your opinion to be discussed, don't post your opinion.

For example - the notion that focal length and aperture are the only important criteria for photographic gear when shooting action is simply not factual. That's like saying the Panasonic FZ200 will give a person the same results as a Nikon D4 and 400mm 2.8. They won't. Auto focus performance plays a huge part, as does image quality at higher ISOs as does buffer handling, frame rate and a host of other variables. Again, your original post set the boundaries for what was "on topic".

You might ask - why do I care? I care because I've run into a lot of parents over the years who bought gear because they were told by someone that's what they should own to shoot a given sport. Invariably when talking to them they would say they never saw photos from the person for the sport in question.

That's the great part about photography forums - usually you can see photos so you don't have to just trust someone who says their results are indistinguishable from a professional's results with much larger and more expensive gear. They can judge for themselves.

While you might make such claims for your "own amusement" they are dangerous to people who don't know any better and are just doing research on gear to buy.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2013, 1:59 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Okay johng you win.

I deleted all my "claims"

please go away now.
__________________
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 13, 2013, 2:06 PM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
Okay johng you win.
I deleted all my "claims"
please go away now.
Fortunately this is a discussion forum about photography. If you don't want opinions from other photographers you should probably just post your photographic opinions on facebook . So, unfortunately for your ruffled feathers/ego I'll probably still hang out at Steve's.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2013, 2:31 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Fortunately this is a discussion forum about photography. If you don't want opinions from other photographers you should probably just post your photographic opinions on facebook . So, unfortunately for your ruffled feathers/ego I'll probably still hang out at Steve's.
John the problem is you didn't express an opinion. You attacked my opinion and demanded that I share personal photographs with you so that you could judge the validity of my opinion.

You keep bringing ego into this, my intention was not as you have repeatedly accused me of to make claims that I was the best cheer photographer in the world, I just wanted to share my experience with others who use the same cameras as I do. I am a proud parent who was happy that after numerous tries I achieved pictures I was also proud of and wanted to share my experience.

Frankly since you've brought it into topic you know what I notice every time you answer one of these parent in need of help questions you drive them off. My opinion is that is because you bring your "my way or the highway" attitude to every discussion. Like this thread here where you recommended
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG
a sigma 70-200 2.8 OS for $1300 or the canon 70-200 2.8 non-IS for $1500.
to a mom who had just bought a budget two lens T3i kit. In the end you convinced the original poster that there was no other option and she was SOL instead of trying to find a compromise that might work, great job! way to be a proponent of photography as a hobby.

Other threads on the topic also have degenerated into an argument between you and the other regulars on this board as to what is an effective tool for cheer photography instead of ever solving the parent's problem which is they want decent pictures of their kids.

My guess is you are a pro cheer photographer who wants to convince parents that they should buy your shots instead of trying for themselves.

Each time this topic comes up you go into attack mode insisting that it is your way or the highway. Maybe you think this is what a photography discussion board is about.

And here again we have another thread ruined by you, thanks
__________________
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
 
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 8:58 AM.