mike_smith2

Hunt down and snap up an OM 90 F2 macro, it's a heavy old lump of glass with stunning build quality, it is a truly great lens, for macro photography you are better off with manual focus anyway........... one of the top three 100mm macro lenses ever made. If the E-Zuiko comes anywhere near matching it, it will be stunning,

Swap your ballhead set up to the "Arca- Swiss" style clamping system, you can then buy an L bracket mounts for your body which does the same thing, plus the sliding style of lens plate are better as it allows you to recentre the lens for centre of gravity changes if you add a teleconverter or extension tube to your longer lenses, something you cannot do with a fixed clamp system such as the hex plate bogen/manfrotto

there is usually a time lag of a couple of months before new body release and Adobe updating the RAW converter. The 420 body is just too new at present.

 

Your 'meantime' fixit is to convert .orf to .dng with Adobes DNG converter and you can then open the .dng file in any version of CS

 

Mike

I'm not sure that this has drop on filters, the UK Contax camera website confirms 82mm regular front filter thread for the F8 cat lens but does not mention drop in filters in the spec

 

see here

 

http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/slr/slrmanlenses/mirotar5008.asp

 

I used to have a tokina 500cat lens that came with a 2 stop ND and 3x B&W filetr set, these simply screwed into back of lens and were not drop in filters - the huge fat design and rear close fit to the camera body would make it impracticle to access a rear mount drop in filter slider/hatch

 

Mike

Judging by a sample of three A3+ size prints sat in front of me right now taken with my trusty old Oly E-1 5MP camera, you should be able to go to A2 size with no sweat at all from a 10MP sensor......provided:

 

(i) you use a sensible ISO setting

 

(ii) you use lenses that can give the resolution required and

 

(ii) have a sharp image to begin with

 

Gargbage in = garbage out no matter what camera system has been used.

Price wise the Top Pro OZ-E lenses are no different to Canon or Nikon, sizewise OZ-E lenses should really be considered on a field of view point and not focal length comparison and so are about 30% smaller - the OZ-E 150mm f2 should be compared to the C/N 300mm F2.8 and the OZ-E 300mm F2.8 against the C/N 600mm F4 big gun lenses. The benefits of 4/3rds then really become apparent - The main exception to the rule is the thumping great big OZ-E 35-100mm F2 lens which is bigger and heavier than the equivelent Canon 70-200 IS L lens.

 

 

The mid pro telephotos are a shade smaller, eg the OZ-E 50-200mm is smaller and lighter than the Canon 100-400 IS L and image wise just as good (I have both) the OZ-E 50 macro is smaller and lighter than the Canon 100mm macro and the OZ-E 14-54 is definately smaller and lighter than the Canon 24-108mm L

 

 

At the wide end of course the tables are reversed it easier to make a smaller lighter zoom for a 35mm camera than an equivelent 4/3rds sensor based camera

 

 

I know that I now would rather carry my OZ-E 300mm f2.8 than a C/N 600mm F4 lens, I can use it on a smaller lighter tripod set up as well so there are other weight savings in use other than the physical lens sizes

The ballhead looks like a very early edition Arca Swiss B1?

Sigma - Half a stop in aperture does not really make up for,

 

inferior angle of view, 36-100 vs 28-104

 

slower focussing

 

lack of weatherproofing

 

uncertainty on future compatability - it is early days in their 4/3rds partnership/foray, Canon mount Sigmas are notorius for needing update chipping as new bodies are released

 

Mike

If you are contemplating insect photography, a key aspect is the working distance needed to prevent spooking the subject, in which case the 50mm (effective 100mm) lens is the better choice. For even longer working distances - rattle snakes or anything venemous, or if you are still spooking your subjects consider the 50-200 with the extension tube or 1.4 teleconverter. For static flowers the shorter working distance of the 35mm (effective 70mm) is not such a problem.

 

For macro you you need to stop down to get the necessary depth of focus, - the closer you focus a lens the narrower the depth of field for any given aperture.....so the 50mm F2 lens, whilst optically faster than the 35mm will still probably be used at the F8 range rather than wide open at F2, so negating any "shutter speed" considerations.

 

Mike

By The 135-400 I assume you mean a Sigma lens?

 

In which case it is not showerproof, is slower focussing and not as sharp edge to edge as a digiZuiko lens.

 

otherwise your logic is correct - so it depends on how important these factors would be to you.

Focussing short or 'beyond' infinity? - telephotos lenses have some "slack" in the focussing range, it is not uncommon for the focus point for infinity focus to fall beyond the sensor/film plane, you cannot rely upon twisting to lens to its stop point for true infinity focus - the slack enabled manual focus lens to cope with climate conditions cold/hot : shrinkage/expansion of the metal barrel and components ie infinity focus point may be short of the infinity mark/lens stop point

One problem with the 1.4 tc is that you lose "1 stop" of light.

 

Your standard kit lenses are F3.5-5.6 and F4-5.6. As you increase the focal length as you zoom-in the F stop effectively gets dimmer towards F5.6.

 

Most digital SLRS will not accurately AF when the lens F-stop exceeds f5.6, ie when you add the 1.4 tc F4 effectively becomes f5.6 and F5.6 effectiely becomes F8, as the light levels fall and contrast reduces the AF system struggles to accurately focus hence it begins to hunt for focus lock

 

The Oly E system semi pro 14-54mm and 50-200mm have f stop ranges of F2.8-3.5 so when the TC is added the effective F stop remains below F5.6

How can it have a focus issue? - it has a calibration function to tweak the focus with specific lenses to overcome the numerous 'backfocus' issues of earlier series cameras

I used to use something very similar in the 1970s but that was when you had manual focus lenses and needed to use your left hand to focus rather than support the lens, in these situations your right hand/arm becomes the support and you need the trigger cable release mechanish to activate the shutter.

 

As others indicate modern AF lenses now enable you to use your left hand to cradle and support the lens leaving your right hand free to hold the body again.

 

These days there is little advantage to using gun stock type rests, you can cope just as easily without them

In AV mode the flash is automatically configured to act as fill in, not main flash, so the shutter speed is set by the ambient light source for teh aperture selected, it does not default to the X sync speed.

 

Shoot in Tv or fully manual at the X sunc speed, set a highish aperture (ie just above ambient light reading) to let the flash act as the main light source

OM to Oly-E converter allows you to use the older manual focus OM series of lenses on the E-digital bodies, so you could use the 50mm F1.8 or F1.4 lenses, or 50mm/55mm F1.2 on the E500 as portrait/short telephoto lenses, BUT the viewfinder on the E-500 is small and therefore it is difficult to accurately focus any of the older manual focus OM lenses

If you envisige printing no bigger than A3, a secondhand good condition Olympus E-1 is a much better camera than the E-500. In MHO useable iso for the E500 is only iso400, for the E-1 with the bigger photosites it is iso800 (ie more latitude for dark churches). The E-1 is a more robust camera, bigger brighter viewfinder and has better Raw file buffer capacity compared to the E500. 12 vs 3 frames - I doubt you will shoot jpeg when you get up and running, Raw is a much better format for "serious" post production work

 

Wedding photography is mainly static so you could mount the older OM 50mm F1.8 lens (with adapter) for a fast portrait prime lens - lets not forget legions of pro wedding photographers used manual focus medium format gear for decades before the advent of DSLRs and they coped OK! - if you find focusing tricky there are 3rd party fresnel screens available for the E-1 as a direct swap, (E-1 has interchangeable screen design so an easy swap, the E500 does not)

 

For nature photography I find the E-1 is a much more capable camera than my E-500 especially with the optional booster grip, I have tried both bodies with a manual focus Nikon AIS 300mm f2.8 lens and Oly E AF lenses (150 F2 and 50-200), and always prefer to use the E-1 over the E-500

 

One thing rarely mentioned is that the Oly E cameras re whisper quiet in operation compared to Canon (or Nikon I would hazaard a guess), so for low intrusive church shots I would guess the Oly-E system is better suited

 

Mike

Lots of Leica R lens /canon body info on the Fredmiranda website - the "alternative digital" forum, although the former Leica/Canon guru has since left the group - the general concensus there was that the Leica 21mm is not as good a performer as the Leica 19mm or Olympus OM 21mm lenses (either F2 or F3.5) - you will have to search back to about a year ago to dig out any meaningful Leica R comparison lens test threads now

 

The best current "exotoc lens on canon bodies" comparison site is "16-9 photography";

 

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/

1D series are sports orientated and have a very noisy shutter mechanism to achieve the rate of fire, it has a quiet mode, but not sure just how effective that really is.... 5D makes a better wedding camera for in church use where noise would be an issue, (or a Ds series but they are still quite noisy) Quietest DSLR system I have used is the Oly E system, - you can hardly hear the shutter operation on their cameras - due to their small mirrors/viewfinder and resultant low mirror inertia but that doesn't really help!

 

There will be restrictions in live view operation, the sytem does not use a pellicle mirror or second sensor like the Oly 330/Panosonic cameras so the main mirror has to lift to access the sensor - ie AF is disabled whilst in live view mode (you can manual focus only), neither does the back LCD hinge

 

the 28-70 is soft at the edges only when compared to fixed focal length lenses - landscapers have outlined the problem and use exotic glass to get edge to edge sharpness, it is still a very good lens

The E-1 replacement was shown in advanced form code named P-1 at Photokina last month, rumoured release date is later this year, but Oly owners have been hearing that for 4 or 5 years now. Do not exect it to be cheap though, think in terms of Canon/Nikon Pro body prices

 

My experience in nature photography is that the E500 body is not really well suited to action photography, you would be better off with a second hand lower resolution E-1 body, it is a more resiliant faster focussing and has a larger capacity buffer when shooting RAW files

Yep you have to be in single shot AF mode, not continuous AF mode for FTM to work as expected

Ah, but that's an Olympus E-1, and unlike Canons 1D series it is really truly showerproof - so the picture is not as daft as it first seems - the Oly waterproofing on the pro and semi pro series lens works like a dream on the E-1

 

Mike

On a monopod you want the simplest solution possible to prevent sideways flop - that is why the 3232 swivel head that moves in 1 direction only is the most used and recommended solution. Any form of true tripod head has too much movement in all directions, you will spend more time fighting the head and monopod movement than taking photo images

 

One main advantage of the 3232 when used with the Arca Swiss dovetaiol plates system is that you can balance the lens and slightly slacken off off the head tension so when panning you have some easy up down movement, you cannot do this with any other head that gives sideways movement without risking "ballhead flop"

The Contax yashica mount lenses have sharper accutance so out-resolve the medium format lenses on DSLRs, so usually no one bothers

E330 maintains autofocus throughout because it has the second live view sensor, the 410 and 510 needs to interupt the live view process whilst (auto) focussing, the mirror has to flip back down to enable the secondary mirror to reflect the image to the autofocus sensors. Per DPReview this takes about 1.5 seconds to complete the mirror flip and refocus process. However the live view presumaly allows manual focus tweaking tho' at zoomed in magnification, otherwise a pointless feature!