bobbytan wrote:
Nice. Different how? Good, bad, ugly ...?
Well, still experimenting OMD with 60 2.8:
Goods:
- Very compact, easily fits inside a small shoulder bag. I carry the camera with me even when I go to work. Was infeasible with the old system (Rebel + 100 2.8 Macro)
- IS is great, especially for video. Matches my handholding habits.
- Low light performance is quite satisfactory.
- Touchscreen helps when object is large. Also its resolution is a great improvement.
Bads or "should-be-improveds"
- Implementation of flash. Either I'm a going to lose it or it will stay at home (both of which has the same impact )
- OLED Screen could have been fully articulated.
- Object isolation is quite hard if not impossible. Need to obtain an adapter for using old good 100/2.8 to see if focal length makes any change.
- Olympus' colours are easy on the eyes but at first it reminded me of the images taken with old Powershot. As if they are "inorganic". Hard to describe.
- 60 macro is a nice lens but 4 different distance switches is far too much. I rarely switched the two of Canon 100 2.8.
- Focusing can be surprisingly difficult for close items with dense background. For flowers as an example I have to spend more time compared to the past.
- Manual focusing is less attractive.
- Magnification is a good option but if I am not wrong it starts from 5x which may be too much for some occasions.
All in all in good hands this machine has the capacity to deliver...
Trying out my newest "vintage lens" buy. I have a soft spot for old manuel lenses, wierd bokeh and i like to shoot them wide open.
The lens is a Meyer-Optik Görlitz Primotar f/3.5 (Red V) with 15 aperture blades. It was produced in Germany from 1956 and has a characteristic ring-like bokeh
Shot with the OM-D + Nikon F to M4/3 adapter + M42 to Nikon F adapter @ f/3.5
Great results, juju1958. I find the contrast detect focusing to be miserable when shooting unpredictable fast action.
I did an air show recently and the keeper rate plummeted. What was supposed to be brilliant captures during certain defining moments came out too soft to consider showing anyone. I left demoralized with a meager catch.
Savas K wrote:
I find the contrast detect focusing to be miserable when shooting unpredictable fast action.
I did an air show recently and the keeper rate plummeted. What was supposed to be brilliant captures during certain defining moments came out too soft to consider showing anyone. I left demoralized with a meager catch.
But that's a known issue with this camera. Not trying to sound facetious, but you sound surprised.
I see the first as a photograph of a ferry with some interesting piers in the foreground. In the second, I see some interesting piers - the ferry is essentially not part of the composition as it is not is focus. So which one is "better" depends on the intent. As the piers take up so much of the foreground, I think I might suggest that they make a better subject as composed, so I would probably vote for the second.
)
