PDA

View Full Version : Should have gone with Olympus


rutwij
10th March 2013, 05:22 PM
I was at the 6 Nations match yesterday between Scotland and Wales. All the press togs present and running about the side of the ground carrying canikons made me sympathize they hadn't chosen a system which would make their running about easier :)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8231/8544602245_4920d9db67.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/16487131@N06/8544602245/)

Rutwij

Graham_of_Rainham
10th March 2013, 06:22 PM
The sad thing is the images will at best make it onto the TV at 19201080 or onto the sports pages at a resolution which will mean their precious pixels will be seriously "processed" down from sensor resolution. :D

Stewart G
10th March 2013, 06:42 PM
I don't see such huge glass here very often, but I do see a lot of amateurs carrying around what appears to be way more camera than they'll ever use. Which is fine, of course, it's their money. As jealous as I might be of the latter (never the former), my retaliation is to photograph the photographers. Just a couple of days ago I was photographing the Golden Gate bridge from a popular hill above it and a tourist came up with some huge FF thing and asked if I'd put my gear away (I'd handed him my 410 so I could operate his rig) so I could take his picture, specifically from down low showing him as tall as a bridge tower. A cell phone would have done just as good of a job. But stupid me, I didn't take his photograph, was too intent on catching the failing light with the 410 (after he left).

David M
10th March 2013, 06:54 PM
But the Olympus shots would have been out of focus because everyone knows Olympus cameras can't photograph moving subjects.

David M
10th March 2013, 07:02 PM
BTW, what was the result of the England v Italy game?

Bikie John
10th March 2013, 07:18 PM
BTW, what was the result of the England v Italy game?

Look away now if you don't want to know the result....

England 18 Italy 11. Fine ferocious performance from Italy which seemed to rattle England, I suspect some Welsh supporters are rubbing their hands gleefully in anticipation of next week's showdown.

Ciao ... John

Imageryone
10th March 2013, 11:09 PM
Good match, but regardless of Italy's pressure, England were only in danger for 3 minutes during the whole match.

gregles
11th March 2013, 12:12 AM
Never mind the rugby - did you see the Rangers v Annan football score on Saturday:D:D:D:D:D*chr*chr*chr*chr

PeteBoo
11th March 2013, 09:08 AM
But the Olympus shots would have been out of focus because everyone knows Olympus cameras can't photograph moving subjects.

Totaly agree, thats why I moved to a Canon 7D for my main camera.

Jim Ford
11th March 2013, 11:32 AM
Totaly agree, thats why I moved to a Canon 7D for my main camera.

There's a post on the dpreview Olympus forum by an ex Olympus E5 user that states that when he had one it was a 'focussing speed demon' with over 90% keepers. It was all a matter of having it set up right. I've posted the link here before, but can't at the moment because dpreview is currently experiencing problems. When they're sorted out I'll post the link.

Jim

reggieb
11th March 2013, 11:49 AM
There's a post on the dpreview Olympus forum by an ex Olympus E5 user that states that when he had one it was a 'focussing speed demon' with over 90% keepers. It was all a matter of having it set up right. I've posted the link here before, but can't at the moment because dpreview is currently experiencing problems. When they're sorted out I'll post the link.

Jim

In daylight, the E-5, and the E-3 were just fine in terms of focusing speed. I have shot sporting events, birds in flight, etc with the E-3 and 5, and gotten plenty of keepers. That said, moving over to a D3s, it's a totally different experience. Holy crap it's fast.

No complaints about the E-3/5 autofocus system, don't get me wrong, it was good. But there are better out there, if you drop the cash. No idea if a 7D, though, would be that much better

Jim Ford
11th March 2013, 12:51 PM
So what do you make of this then?

"I want to add that I also used briefly the E-5 with grip and the 50-200 SWD and it was the fastest AF performance I have ever saw. It was like lightning, a Nikon D3 with 70-200mm seemed very slow by comparison."

Full post here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50099629

Jim

reggieb
11th March 2013, 02:07 PM
So what do you make of this then?

"I want to add that I also used briefly the E-5 with grip and the 50-200 SWD and it was the fastest AF performance I have ever saw. It was like lightning, a Nikon D3 with 70-200mm seemed very slow by comparison."

Full post here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50099629

Jim

All I can tell you is that I had the E-5, I have the D3s and the 70-200 VR II, and it is just shockingly fast to find focus. Now, the D3s also has a kajillion autofocus settings, and it's easy to screw them up. Besides all of that, if you do it right, the E-5 can certainly hold its own.

Without knowing how the camera was set up, or which of the 70-200s he was using, it's tough to give much weight to that post. We know what Oly lens he was using, but there are a few Nikkors he could have had, and as I said, several different autofocus settings.

rutwij
12th March 2013, 09:53 AM
At the rugby I used my Sigma 50-500/E5 and didn't have any focusing issues at all. Lightning quick focus through low light. At one point I had to switch to my E510 and then all hell broke loose :)
I had taken my ZD 50-200 SWD along too but didn't use it as I wanted the longer reach of the Bigma. However if I had used the 40-200, I'm sure AF would have been even quicker!
My only problem was AF locking in on the background (spectators) in my middle of me clicking. Fair few shots were OOF because of that. So much so I switched to MF at one point. Switched back to AF soon enough though.
My only problem with the E5 was the noise level at ISO 1250 and upwards. Otherwise no complaints.

Rutwij