akajohndoe

<p>I have been using an E-P1 almost exclusively for several months now. The only downsides I have found are the lack of fast primes and the omission of a simple optical viewfinder, which I find to be a major disadvantage.</p>

<p>Photoshop/CS4 shows all the Windows 7 Libraries in browse, as does the Windows Explorer. It does not seem that Bridge/CS4 does.</p>

<p>I came across an oddity with Bridge and was wondering if anyone with a similar configuration could confirm it.</p>

<p>Running Windows 7 Home Premium 32-bit and PhotoShop CS4.</p>

<p>I am finding that the browser (not the Favorites) within Adobe Bridge only sees Windows 7 Libraries that are optimized for general use. That is, for example, Image Libraries optimized for Pictures are not shown. I have an open issue with Adobe already, but it would be useful to know if others can duplicate this. Thx.</p>

<p>BTW, the file explorer within Windows 7 does show all the Libraries.</p>

 

<p>Yes. They are both micro four-thirds mounts.</p>

<p>I have been trying Bridge again - it appears to be faster in the CS4 version.</p>

<p>I have been using a manually maintained folder system, which continues to work; however, it does lack an indexed search capability. So, I am considering options.</p>

<p>I run 32-bit Windows 7 and Photoshop CS4 (I still have CS2 installed for some reason, too). So I do not really need additional editing capability, but many choices seem to come with it anyway.</p>

<p>I do not have a massive library, only about 50,000 images; however, they are RAW, DNG, JPG, and the random BMP and PNG. The majority are RAW and DNG.</p>

<p>I am considering discarding the RAW and keeping the DNG.</p>

<p>So, what I have found:</p>

<ul>

<li>Continue with Manual Folder System</li>

<li>Google Picassa</li>

<li>Adobe Lightroom</li>

<li>Apple Aperture</li>

</ul>

<p>I am leaning towards either remaining with my manual folder system or going with Lightroom. It may be unfounded, but I have experienced Google applications (e.g.: Picassa; Chrome) as being quite invasive and difficult to eradicate from my systems. Also perhaps unfounded, but it would seem intuitive that Lightroon might behave better with the DNG files than Aperature; perhaps not?</p>

<p>What I am looking for is primarily structure and indexing with minimal management and maintenance with the ability to extend the libraries easily as well.</p>

<p>I may regret this, but ... opinions? Thanks.</p>

<p>Also, Panasonic makes cameras in micro four-thirds mount.</p>

<p>An Olympus E-P1, (Digital Pen - micro four-thirds mount) with the Olympus MF-2 Adapter will mount the old OM lenses just fine. No autofocus of course!</p>

 

<p>Where did you get the adapter to mount MF Olympus Pen lenses on the Micro four-thirds Pen body? I have one to mount OM lenses on the micro four-thirds already, but would like the former, too!</p>

 

<p>I use a <a href="http://images.akajohndoe.com/photo/bogensuperclamp1.gif">SuperClamp </a> and a <a href="http://images.akajohndoe.com/photo/ponyclamp.gif">Home-made clamp</a> .</p>

<p>I came to the same conclusion as your final statement, Jay. UPS will deliver my E-P1 today!</p>

 

<p>https://store1.adobe.com/cfusion/store/html/index.cfm?store=OLS-EDU&event=displayCatalog&catalogOID=2386539&fpr=true</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you decide to do the coastal tour you might just as well cut over on 199 and include Crescent City in CA and the redwood groves.</p>

 

<p>Portland is just about equidistant from Mt. Rainier to the north and Silver Falls State Park (near Salem) to the south. Both are recommended.</p>

<p>BTW, I use FireFTP with Firefox myself.</p>

<p>If you are using FileZilla then you are simply using FTP and any FTP client should work</p>

<p>It at least partially depends upon your subjects and the way you like to see them. Aside from any image quality discussion, any 50mm will have a different angle of view and telephoto compression effect than any 85mm lens.</p>

<p>I love an 85mm lens, whether on full-frame or crop bodies. I suppose that probably means that my view of the world through a lens tends towards the short to medium telephoto focal length.</p>

<p>As for the original query: I have both of these lenses (50/1.4 and 85/1.8) and would recommend the 85/1.8; however, the advice to look at the images you have taken to determine from the EXIF data what focal length you gravitate towards is pretty good avice.</p>

<p>I sold my original model Mavica on eBay a few years back as "collectible".</p>

<p>A USB floppy drive should read them just fine. They were FAT32 as I recall, but they may have been FAT16.</p>

<p>I found that a nutdriver works better than a wrench or a socket.</p>

<p>ND filters <em>and a tripod</em></p>

 

<p>LOL. My example in the prior post has been modified to use an image from B&H Photo rather than the one that had been there from my website. Apparently a moderator on that site assisted as my referring post (that included the image from my website) has also been changed.</p>

<p>I guess I am a contrarian in this respect: I do not particularly like the L-Plates.</p>

<p>On the Canon EOS cameras I have the Accessory Grip (or Power Winder on film bodies) and use the E1 Hand Strap. I have gotten used to the form-fitting custom bottom plates from Really Right Stuff being there as a neccessary evil for tripod use, but I do not really like them there, either. Anything that detracts from the familiar form of the camera body in my hand I find obtrusive.</p>

<p>Are you certain it is not the (more desireable in my opinion) Pen FV?</p>

<p>Actually, I use the free Adobe Raw2DNG converter program.</p>

 

<p>I have found a number of digital P&S cameras whose M mode would be called P mode on any SLR. However, M is almost certainly a real M mode on the Canon.</p>