mrdavson

<p>My reading of things is that Olympus is NOT abondoning the pro market. </p>

<p>I do weddings, portraits, sport and news/media work. <a href="http://www.mickdavsonphotography.com">www.mickdavsonphotography.com</a> I Use Olympus (E3). The 4/3 format gives me the greatest freedom in composing and cropping pics into all different ratios - 5x7, 8x10 and 6x4. The 2x crop factor is excellent. ISO is an issue in lower light but you work around that easily enough. I also find the colours and tones of the Oly marry well with my style. </p>

<p>Hi all,</p>

<p>I have come across a kodak close-up lens 370 which appears to be in excellent condition. I don't know anything about it though, ie, what it's worth etc. I have googled and tried ebay with nil result really. Anyone have any info they can share or an approximate value? </p>

<p>I know this is a Canon thread and I use Olympus but.....I try to set P mode as my default when I'm not actively shooting - that way, if something happens in front of me, I don't have to dick around too much. But generally, I shoot in A or when doing sport in S mode.</p>

<p>I use the E3 for sports and photo-journalism.  I have used it in pouring rain and sleet.  Very confident in these conditions as it has never failed me.</p>

<p>I have ditched the national flash and bought a Vivitar DF-383 OLY. So far so good. Guide No. of 45 so close to the FL50 and it has a slave function too.</p>

<p>Thanks all....it's going back in the box, or back on eBay :)</p>

<p>A while ago I bought a second hand OM20 on eBay. Along with a few other extras, it came with a national PE 2057 flash. Now, not knowing any better, I put the National flash on my E3 and it works. It's unwieldy and one has to keep the lens speed at no faster than 1/400s lest one gets a black band through the bottom of the pic. But anyway, I have now learnt that using this flash on my E3 might be a bad idea as I have read recently that these old flashes output too many volts for the digital camera's circuitry. So far I have had no problems but it looks like it will go back into the bag. Anyone else have more knowledge/experience in this regard?</p>

<p>I am the proud owner of 2 x Oly E3's but I am intrigued by the E1 for some reason. Common sense would dictate that the E1 is old technology etc etc but I have never really heard a bad thing about that model. Does anyone still use their E1 and, if so, what do you still use it for? I'm thinking of getting one.</p>

<p>There's no shame in going TTL......the use of diffusers etc, plus bounce etc creates so many variables anyway.</p>

<p>I use the 50-200 swd on my E3 for sports photography all the time. Brillient lens. You can see ther eresults on my page. Excellent portrait lens too!</p>

<p>Just on the subject....here in Australia, Nikon & Canon are the industry standard for media photographers as the high-end Nikons and Canons have great ISO capabilities....also they need to keep to a standard re lenses etc. But unless you are a media mogul with hundreds of thousands of $$$ to spend, then Oly is more bang for the buck.</p>

<p>Just to chip in. I am semi-pro. I do freelance media work including sports and events. I also do portraiture and weddings. The Oly E series (I have the E3 & E500) are so versatile, especially when cropping as the 4/3 gives on more room to move. I have had ISO restrictions on the very odd occasion with the E3. The E500 doe shave major ISO restrictions. But good glass like the 50-200mm swd helps here. For 'bang for buck' you cannot beat Olympus.</p>

<p>Well baseball isn't much different to cricket...when I was using the E500 for cricket shots, (and now with the E3) I basically focused in on a spot, say the batter, and then used burst mode to get the action. On a decent sunny day, choose a shutter speed of 1/1000 or faster with a maximum aperture possible (2.8 or better). ISO on the E500 should not be greater than 320 as you get noise creeping in.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have an E500 and an E3...ISO 400 is the limit with the E500 but I am getting quality shots at ISO 1000 on the E3.....it does also depend on the glass you put on too - pro grade lenses like the 50-200mm SWD perform well. In fact, when using both cameras, I usually put the 200mm on the E500 and the 14-45mm on the E3....</p>

<p><br />taken 2 Nov 2008 (my first wedding) , 50mm, F2.8, 1/100 sec, ISO 500, exp comp -0.7....flash bounced off white awning above</p><div></div>

<p>I use the Oly E3 and Oly E500 for sports, events, portraits, news and weddings. The Oly E3 is very fast in the auto focus dept and ISO up to 1000 is pretty seemless. I don't have the 12-60mm lens but I do have the 50-200mm SWD which is great. I also only have the FL-36 flash which lights up any room with ease. But if you get the chance, I'd gop the FL-50R.</p>

Forgot to mention: think what swung me in the end was that the four thirds format gives me greater flexability when cropping, the colour is fantastic, the E3 is weather resistent and the Zuiko glass is very very good even at the cheaper end.

Hi all. I was wondering why you have all chosen to go down the Olympus or four thirds road. I mean, Canon & Nikon

are the "industry standard" for editorial and sport etc and there seems to be an arrogance away from Olympus. I got

into Olympus when a novice, not knowing or really appreciating what four thirds really meant. I bought the E500 and

found it to be a great camera. But now I have the E-3 and have found it to be a lot of bang for my buck that's for

sure. I use it for editorial and for sport too! Yes, the ISO capabilities let it down a bit in low light, but so far I have

been pleasently surprised on more than one occasion with how nicely the E3 attached to my 50mm-300mm 2.8-3.5

lens has performed.

 

Anyway, what do you all have to say?

Sorry, stuffed up.....

 

Well it's now the Cricket Season down here in Australia: !(link) http://www.photo.net/photo/7949184 http://www.photo.net/photo/7949194 http://www.photo.net/photo/7949191 http://www.photo.net/photo/7949189

Well it's now the Cricket Season down here in Australia:

!http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00R4EB&photo_id=7949176&photo_sel_index=0!

!http://www.photo.net/photo/7949184!

!http://www.photo.net/photo/7949194!

!http://www.photo.net/photo/7949191!

!http://www.photo.net/photo/7949189!

I upgraded from the E-500 to the E-3 a couple of months ago. What a difference! I bought it along with the 50-200mm swd lens (I didn't get the 60mm lens). I use it with my 45mm lens and 150mm lens that were kit lenses with the E-500 and it works well. But the 200mm swd on the E-3 is where it's at! I use it for sports photography and am blown away. Only 10mp which is a bit light for a pro camera (one might think) but the sensor makes it seem like it's a lot more. I, too, set it to natural with noise filter standard. Am doing a lot less PS work now. My editor whom I sometimes provide pics to only commented today that my new camera has proved to be worth every cent. More potential clients are noticing my work a lot more which has led to more work. Can't go wrong with the E-3.

Well it has certainly generated some comment. Just for the record, I am only referring to a select few. The vast majority of photographers I come across are friendly and courteous. Like the title says, just a little rant aimed at the ones that don’t play by societies rules..

Yes I agree with the points that pros are there for a reason....but there are times when even the pro has to venture out of the media area to get a shot or two and I think it a bit rude of some to step into someone else's position when they got there first fair and square.

Well I have something to say that has been niggling me for a while and I thought I might just say my piece and be

done with it.

 

Whilst photography is definately not my main income, it has become a REAL source of income none the less.

Whilst i enjoy landscapes and portraiture, media and sports have been generating most of the income thus far.

Anyway, I have always been a respectful and couteous photographer. I have made sure that I do not get in other

photographer’s way (pro or rank ameteur) and have always been up for a chat should anyone approach me. I also

keep an eye on the “pros” with their extremely expensive (probably paid for by their employer given the way they treat

their gear) equipment and try to learn from them by observing what pics they take, where they place themselves and

when they move into new positions etc.

But lately, at some events, I have noticed that SOME photographers’ personality seems to diminish comensurate to

a) the amount of cameras they have around their neck and shoulders; b) the brands/models of those cameras; and c)

the size of the lenses on them.

I was standing next to one bloke in particular who could not give a flying rats arse about anyone else. He quite

readily stood directly in front of me and others to get shots that he knew I and others were also there to capture. It

was not simply a case of him not realising where he was standing, as he actually went from standing beside me to

moving right in front of me at the optimal moment so that I couldn’t get the shot.

Other’s won’t go to that extreme but don’t seem to want to say G’day even after you acknowledge them by a nod or

a “hello”.

 

I know that the full-time pros need to get the shot because it puts food on the table etc etc. and with the dawn of

digital every woman/man and her/his dog is now making money out of photography. But a little ettiquette would go a

long way. I mean, if I am standing there with a pro camera in my hand and a press pass around my neck, I would

expect at least a little respect. But also, saying that, a mother or father armed with their little point & shoot wanting

to get a great shot of their son or daughter kicking a ball or receiving a trophy has every right to get that shot as any

pro does.

 

Am I out of line here?

 

Anyway, I sleep at night knowing that I am not a twat to people and I suppose