Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Camera conference > Olympus E-3

Olympus E-3 E-3 specific discussion.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 27th August 2008
DerekW DerekW is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 3,108
Thanks: 92
Thanked 337 Times in 264 Posts
Likes: 33
Liked 542 Times in 380 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Slight movement off topic - but how much sharpening was involved in the post processing of the images - were the images originally taken as RAW and then post processed or were thy stored as Jpeg and if so what degree of hardness had been set in the camera.

I will be starting a new thread on this are very shortly

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 27th August 2008
Chillimonster
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Every persons budget is different, and for the money the 70-300 CANNOT BE BEAT (in my opinion of course!).

I too had one when they first came out and was impressed with the clarity and sharp focus - even at full stretch. The focus in all but the dimmest light was acceptable and improved as the light got better. Yes the lens is not as fast as the SWD a focussing, yes the apature is smaller at full zoom, but these are all 'features' of the lens - not weaknesses and, as with any lens, you learn to adjust your approach to using the lens and getting the best out of it as John ably proves time and time again. I was in the fortunate position of being able to upgrade to the 50-200SWD and EC14 so i took it, not everyone is so fortunate.

To say it is not sharp is ridiculous, to say YOU could not get sharp pics while using this lens is more to the point and proves that the lens is not for you ( i know people that cannot get a sharp shot at 100mm at F2.8 for various reasons!)

I think everyone will agree it is no competition for the 50-200 SWD - its not meant to be, but instead it has it own niche.

I would advise trying to find somewhere local that has it in stock for you to have a play with, or alternatively order it online and use the distance selling regulations to return it within 7 days (Check with the shop concerned for further details), i think you will be pleasantly surprised by its performance.

Chris
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 27th August 2008
theMusicMan's Avatar
theMusicMan theMusicMan is offline
E-3 Enthusiast....:)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,878
Thanks: 143
Thanked 267 Times in 178 Posts
Likes: 8
Liked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekW View Post
Slight movement off topic - but how much sharpening was involved in the post processing of the images - were the images originally taken as RAW and then post processed or were thy stored as Jpeg and if so what degree of hardness had been set in the camera.

I will be starting a new thread on this are very shortly

Thanks
Hi Derek - I always shoot my images in RAW.

In the case of my Skomer island Puffin shots, and of the shots posted in this thread, after importing them to Lightroom I simply added meta keywords in my library, converted them to jpg and applied the then mandatory sharpening for web, then simply uploaded them to my Zenfolio gallery.

EDIT: I must add that I do have the sharpness settings in my camera set to +1.
__________________
John


Last edited by theMusicMan; 27th August 2008 at 09:48 AM. Reason: Additional comments added.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 27th August 2008
PeterD PeterD is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,248
Thanks: 44
Thanked 88 Times in 73 Posts
Likes: 14
Liked 37 Times in 12 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

John,

I do not wish to get into a argument. If you feel upset at all in any way about my last post then I apologise. It certainly was not meant that way.

My first post on the subject described my experience (in brief) and offered Malcolm another thread to view where others had made both positive and negative comments. This I thought would be enough to help Malcolm make up his mind. It was important, given the comments re poor light performance, that Malcolm appreciated that the photos you posted on this thread were taken with flash.

I have admired your earlier photographs using the 70-300 lens and wished I could have achieved something similar. I tried hard but just could not get on with the lens. I take photos on the hoof as the opportunity arises. Not in fixed locations using tripods, lighting etc. This is what I mean about 'field photography' and I have missed far too many opportunities due to focussing issues. The lens is just not suited for these conditions when lighting conditions are not ideal. Yes, I could have learned to accept this and adjust the subjects I shoot and where, how and what I shoot to suit the lens. Sorry, but this is not what I want from photography and certainly not worth spending £250 or so on a lens when I have a limited budget. I was very pleased to have found a use for the lens as I felt cheated about its limitations. These were not obvious at the time of purchase.

Its a shame that Oly have not introduced a better long focal length lens but suspect that the wide use of the Bigma at its price is a disincentive. If they did though, wouldn't it be great with SWD?

I really do appreciate the quality of Oly lenses. This one though IMHO lets the others down.

cheers and sorry again if I offended.

Peter
__________________
Best Regards

PeterD

www.imageinuk.com/
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 27th August 2008
theMusicMan's Avatar
theMusicMan theMusicMan is offline
E-3 Enthusiast....:)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,878
Thanks: 143
Thanked 267 Times in 178 Posts
Likes: 8
Liked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Hey Peter, no probs - we're all here for a good debate eh!

I too take all my shots on the hoof, well... maybe the use of a pop-up hide when I use it certainly helps I guess, but the Skomer shots, all the garden bird shots and all the family day out shots are taken on the hoof too. it is only this last week where I have decided to have a try at birds in flight shots - where the use of a flash will yield better (though some may say somewhat 'unnatural') results. Not managed anything to write home about yet - more 'bird bum' shots than faces... hehehe

"Oh yes, you betcha" re the Oly longer focal length lens - how I wish for one of those, I'd jump at one if Oly ever came out with one. I think I mentioned in another thread that I would love to see an Oly 500 f4 lens...
__________________
John

Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 27th August 2008
Howi Howi is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 180
Thanks: 6
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: 70-300 Any good?

I would have thought it boils down to the simple fact that if you can afford the 50-200 then buy it, if you can't the 70-300 is a more obtainable option.
Yes! you may have to work at it a bit harder, but that is all the fun.
There are always those that will throw money at anything in the hope it will improve their performance/results etc and there are those who use what they can aford, to it's best capability, having to live with any inadequacies as they arise. This is a simple fact of life for many of us without bottomless pockets.
I have seen numerous threads on this lens, this one has to be the most negative. There are lots of examples from this lens on other boards, that show it's fantastic capabilities. What do you expect for <200
Lets not forget folks - it is 95% photographer 5% equipment.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 27th August 2008
PeterD PeterD is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,248
Thanks: 44
Thanked 88 Times in 73 Posts
Likes: 14
Liked 37 Times in 12 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howi View Post
I would have thought it boils down to the simple fact that if you can afford the 50-200 then buy it, if you can't the 70-300 is a more obtainable option.
Yes! you may have to work at it a bit harder, but that is all the fun.
There are always those that will throw money at anything in the hope it will improve their performance/results etc and there are those who use what they can aford, to it's best capability, having to live with any inadequacies as they arise. This is a simple fact of life for many of us without bottomless pockets.
I have seen numerous threads on this lens, this one has to be the most negative. There are lots of examples from this lens on other boards, that show it's fantastic capabilities. What do you expect for <200
Lets not forget folks - it is 95% photographer 5% equipment.
When you are on a limited budget and want advice on the performance of anything. You listen to what is said, make a descision on whether to buy or not based on what is said. The comments on this thread have been both positive and negative and I believe that they have been reasonably balanced. People are expressing their views based on personal experience. This I would say is invaluable as at least it is practical advice.
John has produced some very good images with the lens as have others. What you do not see are the poor results which may be down to the operator or the lens.
The cost of this lens was approx 250 not <200 (unless you know of a source I don't)

Cheers

Peter
__________________
Best Regards

PeterD

www.imageinuk.com/
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 27th August 2008
Howi Howi is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 180
Thanks: 6
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Hi peter
There are lots on ebay under 200, as for poor results, at the end of the day a crap picture is a crap picture, it may be pin sharp corner to corner, it may have fabulous bokeh, it may have super DR, it may have been taken on the most expensive equipment there is - but it is still a crap picture. Lets face facts here, we all take crap photos,unless your one of the gifted few who only produce masterpieces!! Obviously it is only the good ones we want other to see.
The good photos hit you straight away, you see a good pic and think Wow!, closely followed by 'I wish I'd taken that'. The composition is more important than how sharp it is, or what camera/lens is used. If you are lucky enough to try the high grade lenses, then yes I totaly agree with you, all the 'faults' start to crawl out of the woodwork when you compare to their cheaper siblings , but where do you draw the line. If you have the money, it is a no brainer , always buy the best you can afford.
If you can consider the 50-200 on a limited budget, then my budget must have been strangled at birth - I simply do not have that option.
The 70-300 is capable of very good performance but you do have to take in it's limitations - for the price, I like many others, can live with those limitations....
end of rant, sorry to bore you all to death
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 27th August 2008
PeterD PeterD is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,248
Thanks: 44
Thanked 88 Times in 73 Posts
Likes: 14
Liked 37 Times in 12 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howi View Post
Hi peter
There are lots on ebay under 200, as for poor results, at the end of the day a crap picture is a crap picture, it may be pin sharp corner to corner, it may have fabulous bokeh, it may have super DR, it may have been taken on the most expensive equipment there is - but it is still a crap picture. Lets face facts here, we all take crap photos,unless your one of the gifted few who only produce masterpieces!! Obviously it is only the good ones we want other to see.
The good photos hit you straight away, you see a good pic and think Wow!, closely followed by 'I wish I'd taken that'. The composition is more important than how sharp it is, or what camera/lens is used. If you are lucky enough to try the high grade lenses, then yes I totaly agree with you, all the 'faults' start to crawl out of the woodwork when you compare to their cheaper siblings , but where do you draw the line. If you have the money, it is a no brainer , always buy the best you can afford.
If you can consider the 50-200 on a limited budget, then my budget must have been strangled at birth - I simply do not have that option.
The 70-300 is capable of very good performance but you do have to take in it's limitations - for the price, I like many others, can live with those limitations....
end of rant, sorry to bore you all to death
Thank you for your reply above and I respect your opinions however, do you or have you ever used the 70-300 lens? The discussion here is not in any way snobbery as your post implies. It is about giving honest advice on our findings with the lens. When we as a group started thinking about longer focal length than the kit 150mm (which incidentally is a superb kit lens), we looked at the options to us. The 70-300 appeared to be superb value for money and we all looked forward to the extra reach. Some were saying at the time the best value for money would be to use your feet and get closer. I bought the lens and coudn't wait to fit it to the E3. I went for months taking poor pictures with it and trying to convince myself, once I got the hang of it it would be alright. It turns out the the 'new' lens was defective and the poor images were the hardware and not me. This was confirmed by luympus who gave me a foc replacement without argument and supplied me with the fault diagnosis saying that a complete re-build was required. The new lens was fitted and I found that some of the complaints that I had with the old lens were present on this new one. Slow focus/mis-focus under poor light conditions. This has been noted by others. Under good light conditions the lens works well - no one disagrees with this.
So, to put it in a nutshell, this is what we have found and reported. Others can make their choices about whether they feel that they can live with this or not. And by the way, this is not poor images we are talking about but the ability to even take an image!
Lets for heavens sake get back to discussing the pros and cons.

Peter
__________________
Best Regards

PeterD

www.imageinuk.com/
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 27th August 2008
Howi Howi is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 180
Thanks: 6
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Hi Peter
Yes, I do have this lens and have found it to be better than the kit lenses, which as you say are super lenses at their price point.
I think anyone who has had a bad experience like you have, will have his judgement clouded to some extent (I know I would, we are all human after all).
As someone else has mentioned, if anyone is in any doubt, try it, if it doesn't suit sell it on and go for the 50-200 you won't have lost much, probably cheaper than hiring.
I will but out of this one for now, don't want to turn this into a slanging match
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 27th August 2008
theMusicMan's Avatar
theMusicMan theMusicMan is offline
E-3 Enthusiast....:)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,878
Thanks: 143
Thanked 267 Times in 178 Posts
Likes: 8
Liked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Peter - I don't think Howi was implying snobbery of any form - well at least I didn't pick anything like that up in his response. I read his post simply as another '+' for the 70-300mm lens.

Also... I am not sure your comment re the 'goup' is correct as, unless I have misinterpreted your post, this implies all of us on e-group looked for a longer lens, and subsequently arrived at the same opinion - which of course, is simply not true.

By all means speak as you find, and offer your valuable opinion based on your experiences - but these are not the same as everyone elses opinions or experiences.

I have to say once again, that I disagree with several of your comments in the post above. You state;

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterD View Post
...Under good light conditions the lens works well - no one disagrees with this.

...So, to put it in a nutshell, this is what we have found and reported. Others can make their choices about whether they feel that they can live with this or not. And by the way, this is not poor images we are talking about but the ability to even take an image!
Lets for heavens sake get back to discussing the pros and cons.

Peter
... but, this is not what 'we' have found reported - it is what 'you' have found and reported...!

I also have found the lens works fine under low light - not as well as the 50-200mm, but not that far behind the Sigma 50-500 which also hunts in low light conditions. By all means provide us with your experiences, I for one appreciate them as I am sure others do too, but please don't then consider and report these to be those of 'the group'. The group per sé doesn't have an opinion.

Finally, I am confused at your continued critique slating the lens, and making profound comments such as... "this is not poor images we are talking about but the ability to even take an image!" - which are comments that are so obviously incorrect. Yes, you had an awful experience with the lens, and I am sorry for that, but myself and many others haven't had this negative experience with the lens - on the contrary...

Nothing is personal here Peter, some like the lens, but it appears fewer don't.
__________________
John

Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 27th August 2008
garethlovering garethlovering is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 175
Thanks: 4
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
Likes: 1
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

I have a 70-300mm lens and have found it to be a very good lens.
IS & 70-300 a good combination. I have to admit that I have used it more than I thought I would.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 27th August 2008
stryker stryker is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Stoke on Trent
Posts: 122
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: 70-300 Any good?

I have the 70-300 and I love it. I think its a bargain for the price.
I found focussing a problem with my E500 in any sort of light, so much so that I sold my E500.
I upgraded to the E510 and the autofocus is quick and locks easily. The lens is great fun with the image stabilisation and better higher ISO performance of the E510.
When I bought it I thought I would use just for wildlife photography but I find that I am using it more and more, so much that I always carry it in my camera bag, often leaving out my 40-150.
If you can't afford or justify the 50-200 then its a very affordable and worthy alternative.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 28th August 2008
Howi Howi is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 180
Thanks: 6
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: 70-300 Any good?

http://fourthirdsphoto.com/magazine/ftp_01_03b.pdf
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/zd-070-300.html
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 28th August 2008
Chillimonster
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: 70-300 Any good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howi View Post

The last comment on that article says it all

Quote:
Looks like Olympus (with some help from Sigma this time) has a winner here, providing a very attractive compromise between specs, performance, size/weight, and price. I hope they will sell lots of these.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
14 - 54 - Is this too good to be true? E-P1 fan Telephoto 19 27th July 2008 08:48 AM
Good Deal??? andym Lens focus 6 15th June 2008 09:33 AM
Another good day wasted snaarman The lounge 0 10th June 2008 08:12 PM
A good night sidy2001 The lounge 0 8th February 2008 08:24 PM
A good use of the E-3 liveview Invicta Olympus E-3 5 6th January 2008 08:04 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:29 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger