Ernie Aubert wrote:
Wilbus wrote:
michael49 wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
.... I may even pare down my kit a bit.

Heresy!!

, Agreed!

... I'd like to have a long hard discussion with whomever decided they shouldn't include those accessories with the lenses.

Yes - a wall-to-wall conference. And when you do, also mention the issue of the finish, please.

True! I almost regret not getting the silver EM-5, my brother has it and it looks drop dead gorgeous with silver lenses and quite all right with black ones. I opted for the black finish to be more discreet but a silver lens kind of takes that away. Then again, M43 system is very discreet no matter what.

Wilbus wrote:
Looks like you have some great nature and landscapes around you Michael, looks lovely!



Thanks, we are fortunate to live in an area where the "outdoors" is always close at hand.

rsolti13 wrote:
will have to look at that LR Mogrify, thanks for the heads up

45 f/1.8

...

Nice set.

Some samples with my new Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8:

100mm @ f/2.8:

Looking good ... but I will stick to my primes for now ... and wait for some good news about the Oly 40-150/2.8 lens.

Jman13 wrote:
Some samples with my new Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8:

Oly 45 1.8....


PL 25 1.4...

A somewhat boring sunrise shot with the 12-50 lens. Been too busy, but I will be going to Hong, China, Singapore and Cambodia after Thanksgiving, mostly for work for half the time. This will be my first trip with the OM-D.

In my continuing search to eliminate the horrible blue cast LR 4 seems to give to high ISO OMD images, I somehow came across some customized LR 4 settings for an OMD.

So tonight I dutifully typed them all in and saved as a preset -- I had my reservations at first, but perhaps they look pretty good.

So without further ado - can anyone tell me if something looks "off" about any of these? Most are with just the preset applied, which I tweaked with a bit of sharpening masking and vignetting and a slight camera calibration change in the shadows.

I'm especially interested if they look over-sharpened to any 1920px or 1680px monitor users-- it's hard to tell that on 1024px images when I'm running 2560x1440. and me outputting to around 1500px (for my viewing) isn't exactly the same.


P9220193 by J L Smith, on Flickr


P9220128 by J L Smith, on Flickr


P8170130 by J L Smith, on Flickr


P8110061-2 by J L Smith, on Flickr


P8040230 by J L Smith, on Flickr

Two quick snaps this morning with the Panasonic 35-100/2.8. I'm really enjoying this lens. I think my primes might see more limited use in this range.

75mm @ f/2.8 (ISO 1250):

cputeq wrote:
....So without further ado - can anyone tell me if something looks "off" about any of these? Most are with just the preset applied, which I tweaked with a bit of sharpening masking and vignetting and a slight camera calibration change in the shadows.
...


First 3 look pretty good to me, 4th one is a little on the dark side.

Jman13 wrote:
Two quick snaps this morning with the Panasonic 35-100/2.8. I'm really enjoying this lens. I think my primes might see more limited use in this range.
....

Looks pretty good Jordan.

One bite at a time...

PL 25...

PL25mm

Ice cream! PL25


Earthquake by alkanphel, on Flickr

Local greenhouse, Pany 14 2.5....

Very stimulating thread

Edit. Sorry tried many times but could not post image from my picasa web album
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-BCq40K7I9qg/UKhDpOCWIPI/AAAAAAAAA3Q/vwX9-Ufol9k/s912/PB073271-Edit%2520copy.jpg

Julian - you need to stop posting - you make me feel like such a hack. Your photos are consistently outstanding.

Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH on OM-D

^ I like that bokeh quality!

One from the 12-50 in macro mode, with hand-held FL-600R in wireless to camera left. I'm not sure what this tiny spider was thinking - maybe he thought his web was "already done" ? Heavy crop:


Tiny Spider on Paint Roller by J L Smith, on Flickr