POTW_October 16th, 2015

<p>The Aquarium</p><div></div>

<p>Sunset, Whiten Head</p><div></div>

<p>Nothing fancy, just wanted to try out the IBIS in my new (to me) E-M1. Was pleasantly surprised, as I usually can't handhold very well at lower shutter speeds.</p><div></div>

<p>Late afternoon/early evening reflection. E-M5II and 12-40mm f2.8 M. Zuiko.</p>

<p><img src="https://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/OlympusE-M5II/i-Q9kws9Q/0/X2/PA130820-X2.jpg" alt="PA130820" /></p>

<p>Hosteen, yes! I found the same thing, the difference between the E-M5 and the E-M5 in image stabilization took me by suprise. Just curious, which setting do you have it on? <br>

My images this week are taken from around my back yard. The first one is of a grape vine growing wild along our back fence. It has just started to grow again this year, and even though it seems to take some time, I can see some bunches of grapes beginning as well.</p>

<div></div>

<p>New grapes growing...</p><div></div>

<p>Grape leaf...</p><div></div>

<p>Anthea, I went out one day to a vineyard to get my perfect bunch of grapes on the vine shot and I'm convinced it doesn't exist. I think photographers are buying the grapes and taking to the vineyard and staging the whole thing...</p>

<p>Lol Sanford - perhaps you're right! But remember that 'perfect' is in the eye of the beholder :) On a related note, I have been trying to photograph a waterfall for ages, but there always seem to be some major hindrance. The first time was a few years ago. After doing all my research, and driving for about an hour, we arrived to find that because some months ago someone had hurt themselves while trekking to the waterfall, the 'easy' route was closed. Because it skirted along the edge of a private property, they had to been able to successfully sue the owners! Long story short, they closed it. The alternate route was along the side of the creek itself, so off we set, carrying tripod and camera bags only to find huge boulders taller then me in the way. A younger person with good knees could scramble up and down them but not this little old black duck with bad knees. So we gave up and I took out my macro lens and got some nice close up shots instead.</p>

<p>Second attempt was earlier this year, there is a well known waterfall called the JC Slaughter Falls not too far from home, so off we went again. We trekked for about an hour (following the signs to the Falls) and couldn't find it! The signs just stopped appearing. We asked everyone we saw if they knew where the Falls were, and no-one else knew, and hadn't seen them either. I decided that waterfalls don't actually exist any more either, as I haven't seen on since my youth. Ah well, maybe one day :)</p>

 

<p>Anthea, Sanford - nice to hear that it's not just me that can't get photos of chosen things. I've never got a good picture of bilberries (our small, local and wild version of blueberries) among other things; and then there was the time I wanted a waterfall (we're never short of those in north Wales) picture with fallen autumn leaves on the rocks in front of it. Waterfall perfect, but the water had been much higher and washed all the fallen leaves away. Next time....</p>

<p>Man replacing the plastic "cane" in the seat of a chair.</p><div></div>

<p>Morning Light.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi Anthea,</p>

<p>I'm very new to the E-M1, so not familiar with all its settings. According to the display, it is set on S-IS (1).</p>

<p>Shades of red.</p><div></div>

<p>Interesting, Hosteen, thanks. Why I asked is because I had my EM5 set on IS1, and I can't remember if I set the IS on the E-M1 or not - all I know is that after I did a firmware upgrade recently (a consequence of which is the camera goes back to its' factory settings) and now the IS is on Auto. I can't say I've noticed any difference, but I can't remember what I had it set on before, so I might put it onto IS1 and see what happens.</p>

I did my first test with a 40 year old lens that my neighbor bought in Singapore during his tour of duty about 1972. I just got a copy of a glassless Metabones adapter for micro four thirds to Minolta MC or MD manual lenses....I know, I am a capitalist,spent 99 dollars for this adapter, but wow what a hunk of metal, and brass and chrome. Reminds one of the extension tubes that Canon used to make by wage slaves with visions of Japan as Number One. Well enough of that. A young lady at my clinic agreed to let me take her photo. Needed some sharpening since the lens is soft or kinda soft at full aperture of F 1.2. But I can see it added to my little stable of primes for special purpose. Black cat in coal bin type stuff. Portrait length a la some of the classic looking Voigtlander releases. Was a gift, so good price.<div></div>

I must add that the Metabones company makes a really solid piece of metal. With a tripod ready base if you can use it. Too close to the battery grip on the OMD E-M1 rig but balances well enough and focus on lens is super duper. I recommend the Metabones product if you can see your way to pay the cost. I do not want nor need the Speedbooster function which runs $200 more, but that would make the F1.2 well I lose track, but it would be some kind of speed demon.... Here is the ensemble for your interest. I got burned once with a Fotodiox early release model which I had to unwind with a wrench, no fooling. I assume they got that under control. Anyway, it only cost the equivalent of about 6 medium size pizzas with two toppings, less tip...aloha all...

 

( PS, Below camera set up via my GX 7 and Lumix 20mm LED)<div></div>

<p>Gerry, I think you did right getting a top quality adapter. I have a cheap Chinese MD to M4/3 adapter which has seized up on the camera a couple of times, making me wonder if I had the first MD4/3 camera on my hands. Some wiggling and jiggling got them apart and I am now very cautious about using it. Since I've got some nice old Rokkor lenses I really should spring for a good adapter.</p>

Brian, the Metabones is a delight to use. On and off like a native to the mount. I did a couple more photos under cloudy skies today. The lens at its widest aperture and it is a little soft for greenery so I sharpend it a tad. For portraits I see it as a good legacy lens. Prices on eBay here and in Germany are ridiculously high for this lens even with its 7 elements and beefy construction. For the prices asked I would consider a new fast Voigtlander in a suitable focal length. Here is photo #1.<div></div>

Photo #2 of our potted umbrella (octopus) plant.<div></div>

<p>My experience with adapters and MF Minolta lenses is they are excellent but in 43, not m43 (Stopped down by one or 2 points of course).<br /> There is something about optics and physics that doesn't work the same in m43, despite is easier to focus.<br />An MF Lens could be cheap and bring some fun, but think is better to go only with m43 lenses.<br /> A better addition to a kit lens than old MF lenses. is an external flash and a radio trigger or optical slave. Even cheap Chinese units work well.</p>

Hi Claudio. I have read and seen that adapters of Four Thirds like the E-1 and E-3 to Rokkor are very narrow and may cause problems in attachment. I could be wrong. The micro 43 can take, with possibly a few exceptions any 35 mm SLR lens due to the short distance from flange to sensor...I think I remember that correctly. As to the design of the lens, well four thirds lenses claimed they were telecentric and adapted to the camera and micro cameras have some built in corrections. In practice I read few if any complaints. And having a set up that uses an FD lens to do slide copying, I plan to get a Metabones FD to micro four thirds adapter for that purpose. I wish I discovered this product a year ago. I agree though that it is wiser to spring for small specific lenses. And to the deficit of my budget, yes I have:-) Aloha nui. -g-

<p>Hello Gerry. It is true. Rokkor adapters in 43 are short. Even have a screw to fix the lens to prevent a fall. Besides the lens mechanism used in SLR can touch part of the camera chamber so needs to be trimmed a bit.<br /> I still use my MD lenses, that I got time ago, in m43 with a Fotodiox adapter and images look good. However I think images in my E-510 look better than in my E-P3 with those lenses.<br /> I have a tight budget. Only got a used E-P3 and never plan to get another new camera or lens. Just m43 used ones :P<br /> Here a picture with a cheap Minolta Zoom macro mode in E-510 and off camera flash</p>

<p><img src="https://claudiocortes.smugmug.com/Family/201303-Varias/i-z38jDBH/6/700x500/201303005_Heroes_Lego.4-700x500.jpg" alt="" width="667" height="500" /></p>

<p>This is with an off brand MD 135mm f2.8 at f4 in E-510<br>

<img src="https://claudiocortes.smugmug.com/Family/201205-Varias/i-2dbcxNt/1/700x600/201205018-Futuro-Azul.4-700x600.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="525" /></p>

<p>The last with a MD Vivitar 24mm at f2.8 in E-510<br /> I cannot get the same quality in the E-P3 (colors, sharpness). Something is different or wrong.<br /> <img src="https://claudiocortes.smugmug.com/Family/200910-Primavera/i-fpCS3N5/1/700x600/200910-Octubre-014.4-700x600.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="517" /></p>