Jman13 wrote:
You do know all Panasonic lenses work on Olympus m4/3 bodies, right?
This is the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 X OIS.
Some pics OF mine:
Yes they do, but you have no auto-CA or PF correction at all. Which in case of 12-35mm f2.8 is really needed. Your 35-100mm is good on its own, but that cant be said about that 12-35..
You can always vote with your wallet and buy Panasonic bodies if its that important to you. It has zero impact on my workflow, though, since I always shoot RAW and I've been using Lightroom for a long time before I shot m4/3. It's not like there aren't a bazillion CA correction tools available in or for most any RAW converter or PP program.
..I call that daylight robbery (and thats polite version).
I am curious ... what would you call those Leica and Zeiss lenses that cost more money than a comparable Canon, Nikon or Olympus lenses ... and it does not come with image stabilization or auto focus?
Those are all great pics, but really like the lighting on the 3rd. May I ask how you achieved the lighting isolation on the upper third of the camera body? Pardon if this seems an ignorant question. I bought an OM-D a couple of months ago and am following your and bobbytan's postings religiously
The shot is lit from the right, so the lens blocks the bottom 2/3 of the camera from the light. I can't remember if I took this with direct flash or if I bounced it off a white panel on the right. I think it was direct for that shot. I do my off camera flash with a set of very cheap, but so far for me, extremely reliable radio triggers from Cowboy Studio (a set with two receivers and one trigger is $30 from Amazon) with manual flash. I have yet to have a misfire with them, and they work from as far away as 30 feet.
Jman13 wrote:
The shot is lit from the right, so the lens blocks the bottom 2/3 of the camera from the light. I can't remember if I took this with direct flash or if I bounced it off a white panel on the right. I think it was direct for that shot. I do my off camera flash with a set of very cheap, but so far for me, extremely reliable radio triggers from Cowboy Studio (a set with two receivers and one trigger is $30 from Amazon) with manual flash. I have yet to have a misfire with them, and they work from as far away as 30 feet. ...Show more →
I use the Chinese flash triggers too when I am shooting with studio strobes, but I just bought a Metz 58 speedlite to use mostly hand-held off-camera with the Rogue 3-in-1 honeycomb grid, and using the mini OM-D flash as a radio trigger for low-light shots like this one taken a couple of years ago with my 5D II. This time around I will be shooting with the OM-D and the Metz. Wish me luck.
I use Metz 58 AF-2 as a commander flash with pocketwizard plus II transmit to canon 430 speedlite (with cheap ISHOOT hotshoe on EBAY) to shoot at HSS all the way to 1/4000 on OMD body. It sounds weird but I did it.
The attached picture I test with Metz 58 AF-2 at 1/64 power (HSS) wireless trigger to Canon 430EX/ on ISHOOT hotshoe). This technique is perfect for shooting model at sunset to slow down the ambient light with OLY 75mm len. I used all these technique on OMD EM5 body.
Please let me know if anyone has a better idea how to Shoot HSS with off camera flash by using RADIO trigger (NOT to use RC feature on OMD).
Yes, I meant to say using the Metz in the slave mode and using the mini OM-D flash to trigger the Metz. The mini flash has no effect on the subject other than maybe adding a catchlight. I would mount the Metz to my OM-D for HSS shooting during the day, mostly just to fill the shadows. I suppose I could also use the FL-600R on-camera as the fill-flash in HSS, and the flash from the 600 will trigger the Metz if I use that as the main light, or as a second fill or separation light. I am new to using speedlites off-camera but it's not exactly rocket science.
hiep wrote:
I use Metz 58 AF-2 as a commander flash with pocketwizard plus II transmit to canon 430 speedlite (with cheap ISHOOT hotshoe on EBAY) to shoot at HSS all the way to 1/4000 on OMD body. It sounds weird but I did it.
The attached picture I test with Metz 58 AF-2 at 1/64 power (HSS) wireless trigger to Canon 430EX/ on ISHOOT hotshoe). This technique is perfect for shooting model at sunset to slow down the ambient light with OLY 75mm len. I used all these technique on OMD EM5 body.
Please let me know if anyone has a better idea how to Shoot HSS with off camera flash by using RADIO trigger (NOT to use RC feature on OMD).
All the way up to 1/4000 with Zero banding...Show more →
Jordan, Nice lens and pics. I have a question. I am starting from scratch and don't need long telephoto. Will you pick 45 f/1.8 + 60 f/2.8 + 40-150 VS 35-100 f/2.8 (May be more expensive). Thanks!
That is a very tough question indeed. I actually own all of those lenses, so I'm familiar with their strengths and weaknesses (though the 40-150 is likely to be sold very shortly).
A lot depends on how you work. Do you prefer primes? Do you need macro capability? Do you need speed in the 45mm range? The 40-150 is optically very good in the close to medium range, though it softens towards infinity. From 5-15 feet, though, it's absolutely stellar (especially given the price). The 45/1.8 is an excellent lens, well worth its cost, and it's TINY. The 60/2.8 is near flawless. Very low CA, very sharp, compact, quick focus for a macro, good focus selection switch, weathersealed. Of course the 35-100/2.8 is going to be the most versatile with the fast aperture and range....it's also weathersealed and very well built. Internal zoom too.
Ultimately, for me, I'd probably take the 35-100, but it would be really hard for me to let the 60/2.8 macro go. I don't shoot a LOT of macro, but I do shoot enough to make it worthwhile to have a dedicated macro lens, and the 60/2.8 is hard to beat. I like and use my 45/1.8 a fair bit, and it's great for being super compact, though I've found myself using it far less since I got the 75/1.8 and 35-100/2.8. Part of that is because I prefer a little longer FOV for portraits than the 85-90mm (35mm) range, and so the 60/2.8, 75/1.8 and 35-100 are more appealing to me for that purpose, but I know a lot of photographers prefer that 85mm view over, say, 100mm or 135mm.
I've said that if I could only have 3 lenses for Micro 4/3, I'd take the 7-14, 25/1.4 and 35-100/2.8. If I was making a prime kit and could only choose 3, I'd choose the 12/2, 25/1.4 and 60/2.8. (sub the 45/1.8 for the 60/2.8 if you never shoot macro, just for the size savings and faster aperture).
Thanks!!! Very informative. I don't shoot much macro, but would like to learn some more.
Jman13 wrote:
That is a very tough question indeed. I actually own all of those lenses, so I'm familiar with their strengths and weaknesses (though the 40-150 is likely to be sold very shortly).
A lot depends on how you work. Do you prefer primes? Do you need macro capability? Do you need speed in the 45mm range? The 40-150 is optically very good in the close to medium range, though it softens towards infinity. From 5-15 feet, though, it's absolutely stellar (especially given the price). The 45/1.8 is an excellent lens, well worth its cost, and it's TINY. The 60/2.8 is near flawless. Very low CA, very sharp, compact, quick focus for a macro, good focus selection switch, weathersealed. Of course the 35-100/2.8 is going to be the most versatile with the fast aperture and range....it's also weathersealed and very well built. Internal zoom too.
Ultimately, for me, I'd probably take the 35-100, but it would be really hard for me to let the 60/2.8 macro go. I don't shoot a LOT of macro, but I do shoot enough to make it worthwhile to have a dedicated macro lens, and the 60/2.8 is hard to beat. I like and use my 45/1.8 a fair bit, and it's great for being super compact, though I've found myself using it far less since I got the 75/1.8 and 35-100/2.8. Part of that is because I prefer a little longer FOV for portraits than the 85-90mm (35mm) range, and so the 60/2.8, 75/1.8 and 35-100 are more appealing to me for that purpose, but I know a lot of photographers prefer that 85mm view over, say, 100mm or 135mm.
I've said that if I could only have 3 lenses for Micro 4/3, I'd take the 7-14, 25/1.4 and 35-100/2.8. If I was making a prime kit and could only choose 3, I'd choose the 12/2, 25/1.4 and 60/2.8. (sub the 45/1.8 for the 60/2.8 if you never shoot macro, just for the size savings and faster aperture).
Nice pictures with your Panasonic 35-100mm.
I am asking myself "Should I give up my canon 70-200mm II and buy a Panasonic 35-100mm?" I still have a Canon 70-200mm and who know one of these days I may switching back to Canon body. For now, I enjoy my OMD EM5
BTW, Pana 35-100 is now on sale ($1399).
I'm so used to the light weight, I could never go back to the Canon zoom. I owned the 70-200 II, and it is the better lens, but the differences aren't enough to make me want to lug quadruple the weight.
