Thank you very much rsolti13, my "love" is for black and white for some reason so most of the time I convert to B&W, I just feel it gives more focus on composition and lightning rather then (sometimes) distracting colors.
Good to hear that it seams to work :-)
"Only" shooting kids isn't bad at all! They are usually very natural (although hard to capture sometimes). Great shots, especially like the first and the third (the B&W)!
As far as focusing goes I only use S-AF, even on the D700 I had I almost never used anything else.
The blur I got when shooting Sandra this time looked a lot like motion blur rather then out of focus, noticed this when looking at them on the computer. The focus points are all right, they hit spot on where I chose them to be, I even used the zoom in function and chose a much smaller point for some shots.
It's really quite anoying, will be shooting wedding pictures today using the EM-5 as well as my brothers EM-5 and I'm slightly bothered about this although not too nervous, most pictures do look sharp. Will have to do some testing in order to find out what's causing it though!
Juju, thanks for the link! Reading it I remembered reading something on Dpreview about the IBIS not working great around 1/100th or 1/125th of a second, can't find the exact thread but found some small post about people mentioning it. It does look like it adds up to the post about Nikon VR and that both (or all VR system) may experience some problems from time to time. Next time I will try and shut the IBIS of completely and shoot the way I normally do, will be interesting to see!
Bobby how do you find the 100-300? Looks quite sharp to me, surprisingly so, nice tight shot of the plane, haven't heard very many good things about the M43 tele zooms before.
Some more, found out why I didn't get EXIF (I had disabled it in Lightroom export window :-O)
Loving Silver Efex Pro 2 more and more. Hopefully the selling of Nik Software to Google won't mess with any upcoming releases but one never knows, maybe Version 2 will be the last one :-(
I think the 100-300 lens is amazing value ... extremely sharp between 100-200mm and reasonably sharp between 250-300mm. Some photos from my first shoot with this lens:
Wilbus wrote:
Bobby how do you find the 100-300? Looks quite sharp to me, surprisingly so, nice tight shot of the plane, haven't heard very many good things about the M43 tele zooms before.
Thank you very much Sagar, feels great to hear it!
Did you have an OM-D and changed to NEX/Alphas?
I was considering the NEX 7 aswell but went for the EM-5, think either would have been good of course, both great cameras I think but what tipped it for me was the far better choices, and more choices, of lenses as well as the smaller size of the overall system. I changed from a Nikon D700 with 24-70 as my main camera/lens and decided that M43 was the only real option if I wanted to go a lot smaller and lighter.
Thank you, Rasmus! The 2 zoom lenses that I have considerable respect for are the Canon 24-70L Mk II and 70-200L Mk II. These zooms are prime-lens quality. As a matter of fact, it even surpasses the sharpness of some Canon L-series prime lenses.
As for MFT the one zoom lens I am really impressed with is the Panasonic 7-14. I have not tried the M. Zuiko 9-18 zoom but the 7-14 is really good:
Several images from N.E. PA. Native American dancer, OM-D with Lumix 45/200. Fall leaf, OM-D with FD 300 F4 L + 25U ext. tube. Also two images from Peggys Cove, Nova Scotia.
Harry Palmer
Don't get me wrong Bobby, zooms can be great, I had very high feelings for the Nikon 24-70 F2.8 but being a zoom it just didn't get me as creative as primes do. Still, it almost lived on my D700 for 3 years and on my D80 a year before that.
Modern zooms are really good I think, atleast some of them, Nikon 24-70 and the almost mythical 14-24. I always wanted the 14-24 but couldn't quite save up for it at the time.
I am considering the 7-14 now, it looks really good and looking though your pictures (loved the Disney pics) as well as other Architectural photos in this thread I want it even more, I've always loved wide angle and ultra wide angle.
It would same me the hassle of buying a wide angle and waiting for a prime ultra wide.
Kingfishphoto, doesn't matter really, very nice pictures no matter what camera they were taken with! Love the two last ones, the second last reminds me somewhat of the West coast of Sweden with barren granite cliffs :-)
The only Nikon zoom I was really impressed with is the 14-24 ... and I had one for my Canon. It is one of the reasons why I got the 7-14 ... because it has a lot of the characteristics of the 14-24 ... the same bulbous front element and construction (the 7-14 looks nicer because it's so much smaller) ... and similar corner-to-corner sharpness and vivid colors. I just wished that it's f2.8 instead of f4 ... but then again I really don't want anything bigger than it already is.
I do want to get the new Olympus 17/1.8 lens ... and the Panasonic 42.5/1.2 and 150/2.8. Exciting time for m43. Can't wait for a pro-grade OM-Dx too.
Wilbus wrote:
Don't get me wrong Bobby, zooms can be great, I had very high feelings for the Nikon 24-70 F2.8 but being a zoom it just didn't get me as creative as primes do. Still, it almost lived on my D700 for 3 years and on my D80 a year before that.
Modern zooms are really good I think, atleast some of them, Nikon 24-70 and the almost mythical 14-24. I always wanted the 14-24 but couldn't quite save up for it at the time.
I am considering the 7-14 now, it looks really good and looking though your pictures (loved the Disney pics) as well as other Architectural photos in this thread I want it even more, I've always loved wide angle and ultra wide angle.
It would same me the hassle of buying a wide angle and waiting for a prime ultra wide.
Kingfishphoto, doesn't matter really, very nice pictures no matter what camera they were taken with! Love the two last ones, the second last reminds me somewhat of the West coast of Sweden with barren granite cliffs :-)...Show more →
Well, I just came back from a business trip to the Netherlands. I had a few days to get out there and do some shooting. I found that I mostly had the 7-14 on the camera. While I expected to use the lens quite a bit for shooting inside churches, I found myself using it most of the time, indoors or out. I previously posted some church shots previously so here's something others and much more to come. These happen to be among the few I took with the PL25.
Beautiful colors and composition rbi2goleez, they almost pop out of the screen. I'm having a hard time removing the PL25 from my EM-5, it's such a nice lens.
Agreed Bobby, the 42,5 and the 150 looks amazing, will be really nice to see how they turn out. I've been considering the Voigtländer 17 0,95, think I might have to add it in the future even though it lacks AF, not a big problem on the EM-5 though, it's easy enough to focus manually with and it adds over a stop of light to the upcoming Oly 17 :-)
I bought the OM-D with the sole intention of using it for my 'personal camera'. I have a Canon 5d3 and 5d2 and L primes that I use for wedding work. I generally leave them packed up for the next shoot. Thats where the OM-D comes in. I keep the Oly loaded with a 32GB card and just shoot the moments as they come. I worry about processing when I have a chance. Here are a few images from the past few weeks.
