claude-mtl

<p>At the end of the day, it is the energy you place behind the camera which does the work. You seem to have a lot of it, and you came up with great looking images. Congratulations and thank you for sharing your thoughts.</p>

<p>Thank you Greg for sharing these technical points and your experience in sports photography. As well, Godfrey, I appreciate the perspective you bring to my question.<br>

<br /> Job well done.</p>

<p>Second attempt to load my insert.<br>

<img src="www,solstice-image.ca/CG_278782-view.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<div></div>

<p>I have been using the E3 with the 50 - 200 mm lens for 2 winter seasons to do winter sport photography. My capture of choice is ski competition. It is common to hear that the E3 has one of the best AF mechanism available. I love the camera and the lens. The form factor is also great: holding a 400 mm equivalent zoom lens for a complete day is not a small task.<br>

I have tried over numerous ski competitions all kind of set-ups to come to the conclusion that manually setting up my shooting conditions is the best way to insure predictable results, including speed, f-stop, ISO, white balance and focus. Is it not ironic that I have to be manually configured in these days of high performance cameras? I don't mind setting up manually all my conditions, but the focal distance is a real challenge since sharpness is dependent on a precise focal adjustment.<br>

I love shooting on manual mode, but doing so on a fast moving subject creates many constraints. I need to choose a fixed shooting point and all shots are framed the same, unless I decide to redefine my focus, which requires some doing and a few lost shots until I have it set up perfectly.<br>

From my experience the E3's AF is not fast enough to keep up with a fast moving subjects. It is fast enough if my subject is slow: for instance, I do great golf pictures on AF. Any attempt to be on C-AF with my fast moving subjects has been a disappointing experience, even under best lighting conditions. Thus my approach using manual focus.<br>

I notice that my Canon and Nikon friends are shooting the same subjects on AF and are generally providing sharp images. I have seen some soft-focussed images, however, i do not feel I could match their quality of dynamic focus with my E3.<br>

<img src="www.sosltice-image.ca/CG_278782-view.jpg" alt="" /><br>

E3 with 50-200mm, f 6.3, 1/800 s, 200 m</p>

<p>Many thanks Gerry for your insighful and emotional response. In many ways, I feel for your overall approach to photography and I too resent the excess attention directed towards equipment and 'technological' advances.<br>

As per myself, I was with Canon equipment 5 years ago, using a DS full frame. When came the time to replace it because of malfunction with the captor, I was faced with dishing out another 10K to get the next Canon body.<br>

Instead, I made a lateral move and got the E3 just as it was coming out at a price which made a lot of sense. I felt it was a fair transition. As I started to acquire a new set of high grade Zuico lenses, I never looked back; I felt I had made the right decision. To the point where I started selling my Canon lenses a few months ago, to find out that they really keep their value.<br>

I am dealing with situation now there the resolution of my files are sometimes deemed to be substandard. So, I rent a Capture One back for those occasions.<br>

My hope is to see the next version of the E3 capable of handling more pixels, with maybe a few less buttons to do the job and some other improvements.<br>

I realize Gerry that your E3 is brand new for your, however, the longevity of digital equipment is not to be compared to a film-based camera. In those days, you could keep a camera for life and never feel left out on the sidewalk when the parade was going on.<br>

For me, I am ready to move on to the next E3 generation.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Any body know what Olympus is working on, when it comes to an encore for the E3.<br>

The camera is now well over 2 years old by now, which represents at least one generation of equipment.<br>

My wish is that the future replacement will be able to handle a higher density of pixels. But is this possible on the small Olympus captor?</p>