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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 5, 2013, 2:03 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,567
Default ............I reached for the 14-54 vI and

fitted it onto MMF-2 to the P3. I did use the (FT) 9-18 and 70-300 for a bit but the 14-54 was what I used for the main files yesterday.

First a 9-18 wildflower landscape (Greg - this is the meadow at Veterans Park)





.....then these with the FT 70-300





.........and the rest of these are from the 14-54












I can hardly believe it but this was 2-days back to back that I went 'shooting', it has been a while since that happened AND I am retired, I have nothing to do and nothing to do it with.............

I am getting anxious for the new camera(s), for sure I am getting a new camera when it/they happen. I want to see what is happening with the FT mount lenses on the OM-? and maybe an EM-5 if the '5' will be a best choice for me......... BUTTTTTT, something is going to happen when the time comes.
__________________________

In the mean time I have used my FT lenses on the P3 for going on 2-years and I just don't have a problem getting anxious for 'the quick focus' for what I do. It will be quite nice to see the FT lenses do better on the future cameras.... when I use my E-3 it is easy to know how slow the P3 really is but the quality of files from the FT lenses is darn good, I like them, and I already have them. I need to get the 50-200 out next time for a reminder of how well it performs on the P3.
__________________
.
boBBrennan .. FB=> http://tinyurl.com/dxlwxfz

.......he likes Olympus, Apple MAC & SmugMug best of the choices; he likes that he has choices

boBBrennan.smugmug.com

Last edited by boBBrennan; Jun 5, 2013 at 9:48 PM.
boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 5, 2013, 3:09 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
folob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 856
Default

Very nice serie !!!!
__________________
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 Jun 5, 2013, 5:36 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

Bob: There are folks out there, who are using much more expensive big cameras, and they would love to have the superb results that you are getting. The colors, composition, contrast, focus, and detail on those shots are all super!! Well done.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 6, 2013, 12:25 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

That field does look familiar

The park looks in wonderful condition, and the 14-54 is a great optic to be using to capture it.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 6, 2013, 11:44 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

great series Bob!

You've confirmed that I made the right choice in recently buying a 14-54 MKII (it's on it's way).

I searched my self and I just couldn't spend $1000 for the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 which is the only fast zoom equivalent. I also started looking at the cost and PITA factor of multiple primes and ended up deciding that the 14-54 MK II made real sense for me.

My kit will now be; Panasonic Lumix 14mm f2.8, Olympus 14-54 f2.8-3.5 MK II, Olympus 45mm f1.8 and the Olympus 70-300mm f4-5.6. That's right I'll have two FT zooms and two primes. And I have a feeling I could live without the two primes if I tried.... but then again the 45mm is a real gem and the 14mm is so small and light I can't imagine I will get rid of those. I did however sell off the Sigma 19mm f2.8 and the Panasonic Lumix 45-200mm. The Sigma is just redundant now and the 45-200mm is rarely used since the 70-300mm is much better.
__________________
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 Jun 6, 2013, 1:06 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,380
Default

Great shots Bob, makes me glad I bought the 14-54mm and at a great price considering it's in mint condition...$200.00. I'm with Ramce, with my budget I can't afford a bunch of primes, etc, but will make my kit with basically zooms with the exception of the 35mm macro I have now. My next lens will likely be the 40-150mm which is darn near dirt cheap at Kef Camera and for the money it's a great lens. Then the next will be the 70-300mm. Which one comes first, I don't know, likely the 40-150 since it's very affordable.
__________________
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 Jun 6, 2013, 1:39 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Emory View Post
My next lens will likely be the 40-150mm which is darn near dirt cheap at Kef Camera and for the money it's a great lens. Then the next will be the 70-300mm. Which one comes first, I don't know, likely the 40-150 since it's very affordable.
If it were me I'd skip the 40-150 and just go straight to the 70-300. Otherwise you end up with 40-150 range being completely covered by the 14-54 and the 70-300, making it redundant, kinda like my 45-200 became once I got the 70-300.
__________________
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 Jun 6, 2013, 1:49 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,380
Default

You are probably correct Ramce, it's just that it may be a while before I can afford to get a nice used 70-300 so at least the 40-150 will give me an equivalent to 300mm and I will have some extended focal range. And for 60 bucks in LN- at KEH with caps and hood, how can I go wrong. I'm sure I could sell it for that or even 50 when the time came.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
If it were me I'd skip the 40-150 and just go straight to the 70-300. Otherwise you end up with 40-150 range being completely covered by the 14-54 and the 70-300, making it redundant, kinda like my 45-200 became once I got the 70-300.
__________________
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 Jun 7, 2013, 12:24 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,567
Default

I am glad y'all got good $$$ deals, the 14-54 is a great lens, you will really enjoy using it. I bought my 14-54 and 50-200 on the same purchase in 2006 to go with my E-300, love them all , still.
__________________
.
boBBrennan .. FB=> http://tinyurl.com/dxlwxfz

.......he likes Olympus, Apple MAC & SmugMug best of the choices; he likes that he has choices

boBBrennan.smugmug.com
boBBrennan 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 12:19 AM.