analox

<p>Hi,<br>

 

I currently use Olympus E520 & flash FL-36R. I realize that in wireless control mode (wireless-RC), the built-in flash also fires (together with the external flash) and does contribute to the image exposure. In many cases, I really want to disable this built-in flash (like in portrait-profile).

<br>

I hear that the built-in flash needs to send some commands to the FL-36R using its light, so blocking the built-in flash's light is not possible (I tried, and the FL-36R did not fire, as expected)<br>

I'm a bit surprised that Olympus doesn't have a mode in which the built-in flash only sends commands as a pre-flash and just don't contribute to the image exposure...<br>

Anyone has an idea of what to do in this situation?<br>

Thank you & Regards<br>

Nghia</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this question, but this is about Olympus system, so here it goes :D</p>

<p>I currently use Olympus E520 & flash FL-36R. I realize that in wireless control mode (wireless-RC), the built-in flash also fires (together with the external flash) and does contribute to the image exposure. In many cases, I really want to disable this built-in flash (like in portrait-profile).<br>

I hear that the built-in flash needs to send some commands to the FL-36R using its light, so blocking the built-in flash's light is not possible (I tried, and the FL-36R did not fire, as expected)</p>

<p>I'm a bit surprised that we don't have a mode in which the built-in flash only sends commands as a pre-flash and just don't contribute to the image exposure...</p>

<p>Anyone has an idea of what to do in this situation?</p>

Many thanks to everyone for your insightful explanation :)

Many thanks Craig, <i>"Now add to that the fact that the intensity of the light is inversely proportional to the square of the distance it travels"</i> - it's just what I've been missing :)

Thanks Craig for the clear example! To me, AoV, focal length, sensor size (crop factor) are some equivalent terms as one can be translate to others. Sorry for any confusion :)

 

Initially, I understand the term "exposure" = the amount of photons received by the sensor. Thus, "correct exposure" is the amount of photons received so that the metering point will be appeared in "middle gray". From there, I try to see the system (camera, lens) as the flow of photons, passing through the aperture hole (area) & received by the sensor. Please correct me if I'm wrong at this very beginning :|

 

My question lies in this example: Using DX camera, I measure the "correct exposure" at focal length 50mm, which is 1/60s, ISO 100, f-stop f/5.6. I know that this setting is still "correct exposure" when I zoom in at 150mm. However, I can not clearly explain it using the "flow of photons" concept: here the area aperture is bigger by (150/50)^2 = 9 times, same shutter, same sensor, ironically I think the sensor will get more photons, thus over-exposed. Something's wrong, but what I'm missing?

Guess I've better explain my point on the sensor size and exposure.

<p>

For example, let say camera with DX sensor (cropped) at certain settings (ISO, shutter speed & aperture), give

you an image with "<i>correct exposure</i>".

<p>

Now, another camera using FX sensor (full-frame) at the same <b>ISO</b>, same <b>angle of view</b> (so equivalent

focal length), same <b>shutter speed</b> & same <b>area of aperture</b> (by adjust its f-stop) will result in a

"under-exposed" image of the same scene. Why it is so? It is because the same amount of light (measured by the

number of photons, I guess) get through the lens aperture now is not sufficient for a larger full-frame sensor...

To get the same "correct exposure", you may either increase shutter speed or ISO in this case :).

Thanks Craig for the fast response!

 

I understand the point of f-stop and its relationship to the actual, physical area of aperture, thus leading me to the question. Can I interpret your saying "The longer the focal length the larger the aperture needs to be to allow the same amount of light through" to "the amount of light also depends on the angle of view, since longer focal length means narrower angle of view..."?

 

By the way, I guess sensor size should be taken into account when you compare between different camera systems (i.e., full-frame vs. cropped)

From several articles in photo.net, I come to an understanding that the photo's exposure depends on these factors

 

1. The sensor (i.e. "pick-up" device) - so it's about ISO setting, sensor size

 

2. An amount of light get through the lens - which relates to

 

- The time of exposure or shutter speed (measured in second)

 

- The area of aperture, which is proportional to (f/N)^2 where f is the effective focal length, N is the f-number

(f2.8, f5.6, etc)

 

With these thoughts, I draw to a conclusion that: for a same camera (same ISO, sensor size), same shutter speed

(like 1/60s) and aperture (e.g. f5.6), then the amount of light (thus the exposure of the photo) for longer focal

length (like 150mm) will be more than that for shorter focal length (40mm), since the areas of aperture are

different.

 

However, I took two photos at the above settings of the same scene and compare the join area of 2 photos (which

is a green field). To my surprise, both look the same...

 

Did I misunderstand something?

 

Regards

Thank you all for your responses :). Very much appreciate some new insights about manual focus that I got from here!

 

Besides, I'm also interested in the situation (or your experience on "when") that we can take the advantages of manual focus into actions. Here we got "hard-to-focus" objects in low-light or macro photography, actions in sports. What else?

 

@Kari Vierimaa: oh, I forgot to mention that my friend use OM lens on his E510 with OM-adapter. Hope I'll have a chance to try on OM-1 in the near future :-? :D

This question comes to my mind when I was discussing with a friend who uses Olympus OM lens (manual focusing

lens). To me, auto-focus is much faster & easier to use. Rotating the focusing ring & see through a small

viewfinder to know when you get it right is difficult and mostly inaccurate for me (!). Yet, things usually come

in 2 sides, there should be cases when manual focus shows to be useful. What do you guys think? Please help me

name some examples (hah, I can hear some "low-light photography" whispered :D)

 

Well, I go first with the trick of "focusing lock": you get the focus right by auto-focus (with flash assisted if

necessary), then switch to manual focus immediately. By this, the focus now is locked at the "correct" position.

It's similar to the idea of locking exposure. Focusing lock would be useful in the case of low-light situation,

you don't want flash and the camera auto-focus just confuses. You can turn on flash assisting + auto-focus to get

it right. Then lock the focus, turn off our flash, and take the shot :)

 

Now, your turn :P...

 

Regards

14-54mm f2.8-3.5II Standard Wide Zoom seem to be a very good lens by far, and quite less expensive than 12-60mm.

However, as you're working on portrait & glamor work, you may want to look at some prime lens at longer focal

length & wide aperture, e.g. 50mm F2.0 Olym or 35mm F1.4 Sigma. This would help you to achieve a thinner DoF in

your work, if you need it...

 

I guess the problem of E510 & its kit lenses with indoors lies in these factors: (1) not fast enough lens

(14-42mm f3.5-f4 and 40-150mm f4-f5.6), (2) noise at high ISO (usable ISO400) and (3) you don't use flash. So you

may want to invest to light equipments or some faster lens before switching to other systems.

 

Hope it helps :)

Hi,

<p>

I posted this picture here (<a ref="http://www.photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00R2zM">link</a>) to ask how can I

improve the image quality, especially the level of noise

<img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/7941625-md.jpg"></img>

<p>

Here is one of the answer I got from Kari Vierimaa: <i>"Next time try using some fill flash and if you end up

with too bright image you can make it darker in post while good ambient light + flash exposure minimizes noise

and prevents sky/clouds from burning (at least to a degree)"</i>. Well, I'm learning to use my new Olympus flash

FL-36R now :). The auto-mode works fine (as usual :D). But the Manual mode (with these parameters Guide Number,

Zoom & Distance to object) still confuses me a lot.

<p>

I would appreciate if you guys can look into this situation and show me how can I use my flash MANUALLY to

improve the image?

<p>

Thank you in advance :)

<p>

Regards

I very appreciate the image quality that Olympus zoom lens offer, thus I'm not interested in prime lens because

of the prime vs. zoom myth. Thanks guys to bring up 3 other points about prime lens:

 

1. compactness

 

2. different form of creativity by limiting options (sometimes I just fix my zoom lens at 35mm or 25mm and start

moving :D)

 

2. lower DoF at longer focal length (like 50mm) for portrait & close-up work :)

 

Guess I'm still waiting for some standard-grade Olympus 40mm or 50mm f2.0, if they intend to make...

 

By the way, there is another story I hear from a friend that I want to ask you guys if it's correct: Olympus

builds the auto-focus motor inside the lens while Canon/Nikon has auto-focus motor in the camera and their prime

lens do not require a auto-focus motor. This explains why Olympus prime-lens is generally bigger than their

counterparts... Is it correct?

Thanks Matthew for an insightful answer ! :)

 

According to your saying, am I right to say that if a lens is more than 37mm in focal length, it need not to be a retrofocus design (larger, more complex, thus expensive)? Actually my interest is on some 4/3rds prime lenses at 40-50mm f1.8 or f2.0. However, the Olympus ZD high-grade 50mm f2.0 is the only available lens for this requirement, but very expensive (for a prime lens).

 

Do you think if Olympus is going to produce some standard-grade 50mm f1.8, it will be at a competitive price to the Canon/Nikon 50mm f1.8?

Hi,

 

Can anyone enlighten me on why there are not many standard-grade prime lenses for Four-Third at wide aperture

(f1.8, f1.4)? Till now, there's still no prime lens that is equivalent to the cheap and good Canon 50mm f1.8 EF

II. Well, there is Sigma 35mm f1.4 but way too expensive &... not Olympus ZD! OM 50mm f1.4 is great but no

autofocus...

 

I guess there would be some technical difficulties or reasons behind. Hope to get your answers ;)

 

Cheers

Nghia

Hi,

 

Can anyone enlighten me on why there are not many standard-grade prime lenses for Four-Third at wide aperture (f1.8, f1.4)? Till now, there's still no prime lens that is equivalent to the cheap and good Canon 50mm f1.8 EF II. Well, there is Sigma 35mm f1.4 but way too expensive &... not Olympus ZD! OM 50mm f1.4 is great but no autofocus...

 

I guess there would be some technical difficulties or reasons behind. Hope to get your answers ;)

 

Cheers

Nghia

@Kelly Burke: hi, your link is redirected to http://www.photoreflect.com/PhotographerSearch.aspx ...

@Gerry Siegel: yeah, I'm thinking of buying a Olympus flash 36R soon.

Now the second part is to ask what you guys think of using 4/3 format for wedding & photojournalism. The article (http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/equipment) gave me an impression that full-frame is the choice & I'm not sure how so?... I have some photos taken in my friend's wedding using E520 & its kit lens (http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=866409), but no external flash was used so I can't say much about image quality or other aspects.

 

So what is your experience?

Hi,

 

First of all, many thanks for your responses!

 

I guess I should put my question into two parts. First is about some "world-class" photographers (kind a misleading word) using 4/3 Olympus system. Well, I first have this question when came to know about the Canon Ambassador for Canon. So does Olympus have this group of photographers to represent their fine technology? If not officially, I would like to build my list, as a Olympus supporter :D. So now I have David Bailey, Eli Reed, Nick Danziger and the list pointed out by Paul Miller.

 

If you have more, please add into this list :)

Hi guys,

 

I've been looking at work by some well-known photographers in wedding photography (e.g. Jeff Ascough) and

photojournalism (i.e. James Nachtwey). A question comes to me that if any recognized photographers in these

fields using Olympus camera (guess E3 would be the choice then)? If you come to know any, please help me know the

names :)

 

Also, full-frame cameras seem to be a popular choice for wedding photography

(http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/equipment). Any of us using 4/3 system for this work and what is your opinion?

 

Hope to get your answers... Thanks in advance :)

Thanks Josh!

 

 

Glad to hear that you guys are working on it and I'm looking forward to seeing the feature rolled out soon ;)

Thanks Christine,

 

I hope to see the code soon as it would be great and convenient to make this code available to

photo.net users :)

Hi all,

<p>

Any ideas of how to embed photo.net slideshow (e.g. like <a

href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/slideshow?user_id=4539372">this</a> :D) into your blog or webpage? I'm pretty like

the presentation of the slideshow but can not find an option of doing so...

<p>

Thank you & Regards

Thank you all for your quick response :). Very useful indeed! The photo was taken during my going out with friends, so I simply capture to jpeg to avoid the RAW processing...

 

Kari: what do you mean by "Move your black point a bit to the right..."? Is "black point" the focusing center in the viewfinder?