The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

e410 test shot

G

GLJ

Guest
I think the bokeh sweethearts are there,
I'm not so sure.

Remember Jono, I'm becoming to bokeh, what you are to sharp corners. I think we need to be careful what we're talking about in terms of 'bokeh'.
Not that I want to be coming over (as I seem to be!) in a particularly negative way, but working on the assumption that this forum has some people of ... er ... a more discerning nature than in some other places, then I think its only right to point out that a number of olympus lenses exhibit less than stellar OOF rendering when compared to other optical formulas (probably because they have chosen optimisation in other areas of the design), and I've seen enough examples posted even from the 35-100 to know that the top pro lenses can also show it - at least in certain situations.
As an illustration .. I wouldn't consider the old 50mm f1.4 AFd Nikkor a 'bokeh sweetheart' either, even if it has got a fairly wide aperture.
YMMV of course ... hey ... I happen to like mirror lenses for some things :)

G.
 

Lili

New member
Lili, your last two pix are superb. The one of the cat is really delightful - we had a 'rescue' cat once - its mother left it on our doorstep - have you ever tried bottle feeding a tiny kitten?
Thanks Bertie!!!
Not had the pleasure yet of bootle feeding such a tiny Cat yet.
However we do feed the strays in our area and the Mom's have introduced us to their Baby's. They bring them by when we are out, to get fed and to show them where the Nice Humans That Feed Us are ;)
 

Joan

New member
Joan just read your comment , too late. I am not so sure about the 40-150 either read the reviews and they are okay. I may sell it if it does not work at least it was cheap reason I just said heck with it. I think with 10 percent off it was 269.00. Worth a shot

What is the best fast lens least in like 24,25 and 30mm there are a couple at 1.4
I think you'll be surprised that it is pretty darned good and so light that it's worth carrying around for the long shots. Certainly worth the tiny price tag.

If I had choose a fast lens, I would definitely go for the PanaLeica 25 1.4. It's a stunner IMO, and I want it, BAD! :D
 

Joan

New member
Lili, I love the train shot, especially with your new PP. I'd print that one BIG! Nice job on the kitty photo, too!
 

Lili

New member
Thanks Joan!
While I find the PanaLaice 25/1.4 fascinating, I went with the 25mm 'pancake'
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi There
I'm not so sure.

Remember Jono, I'm becoming to bokeh, what you are to sharp corners. I think we need to be careful what we're talking about in terms of 'bokeh'.
Not that I want to be coming over (as I seem to be!) in a particularly negative way, but working on the assumption that this forum has some people of ... er ... a more discerning nature than in some other places, then I think its only right to point out that a number of olympus lenses exhibit less than stellar OOF rendering when compared to other optical formulas (probably because they have chosen optimisation in other areas of the design), and I've seen enough examples posted even from the 35-100 to know that the top pro lenses can also show it - at least in certain situations.
I quite agree - they aren't perfect . . . but for my purposes, when shooting 4:3 I'm aiming for larger depth of field most of the time

As an illustration .. I wouldn't consider the old 50mm f1.4 AFd Nikkor a 'bokeh sweetheart' either, even if it has got a fairly wide aperture.
YMMV of course ... hey ... I happen to like mirror lenses for some things :)

G.
I owned that nikkor for about a week - the discovery of how sharp it is rapidly being superceded by the bokeh. Much worse (IMHO) than the Olympus lenses . . but I do take on board the principle:)
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Hi Lili,

I love your shots here...especially the colour horse and the train - really sharp and vibrant!

Keep going! I'll be back to see more :)

Kind Regards

Brian
 

Lili

New member
Thanks Brian, I am really liking this little camera, ordered the pancake too, in for a penny and all that, eh?
 

Riley

New member
I'm not so sure.

Remember Jono, I'm becoming to bokeh, what you are to sharp corners. I think we need to be careful what we're talking about in terms of 'bokeh'.
Not that I want to be coming over (as I seem to be!) in a particularly negative way, but working on the assumption that this forum has some people of ... er ... a more discerning nature than in some other places, then I think its only right to point out that a number of olympus lenses exhibit less than stellar OOF rendering when compared to other optical formulas (probably because they have chosen optimisation in other areas of the design), and I've seen enough examples posted even from the 35-100 to know that the top pro lenses can also show it - at least in certain situations.
As an illustration .. I wouldn't consider the old 50mm f1.4 AFd Nikkor a 'bokeh sweetheart' either, even if it has got a fairly wide aperture.
YMMV of course ... hey ... I happen to like mirror lenses for some things :)

G.
can only agree about the wider DoF disposition of FT gear, but there is the Sigma 50/1.4 available now which is 100mm EFL, Im optimistic it will add well to the mix, but i havent seen any in use yet on FT. However from the darkside.....
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_50_1p4_c16/
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Question on the 410 ,420, 510 and 520 raws affected by any in camera settings like sharpness, contrast or anything like that. Or better said are the Raws left alone
 

jonoslack

Active member
Question on the 410 ,420, 510 and 520 raws affected by any in camera settings like sharpness, contrast or anything like that. Or better said are the Raws left alone
Hi Guy
Brian may know better, but as far as I'm aware the RAW files are 'left alone' as you say!
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks Jono , just a little soft and wondering what it is , still getting through the settings and I may have something off also with regards to focusing. I have yet to read a manual.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

I may have to add more sharpening than I am used too, which seems normal given the difference between MF and 4/3rds so I may have to increase that. These are at my normal settings in C1 Pro. Also the house the highlights are hot so in C1 i have a lot of elbow room to work it better, which i expected it not to have that DR like MF. Trying to balance it and maybe harder for me since i am used too MF . i need to get my head wrapped around that to which is perfectly normal
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Just need to get out and play more but I like it. It is a fun camera and cheap to boot. I really want Mikes Pan/Leica 14-150. I bet that is a kick ass lens
 

Riley

New member
Question on the 410 ,420, 510 and 520 raws affected by any in camera settings like sharpness, contrast or anything like that. Or better said are the Raws left alone
yes i think they are Guy
you can change them of course in the RAW image editor, but the RAW's will set to what are normally jpeg settings from within the camera. I will try to find out which settings affect RAW output.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks Riley i had a feeling something is up with that. I have everything off right now but with some good sharpening it is coming to life
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
BTW in C1 Pro I can control CA and Purple fringing and correct for that. Pretty cool features.I can also vignette the corners. New features
 

Lili

New member
Is looking good Guy :)
Not played with Oly RAW enough yet to answer your original question tho :(
 

jonoslack

Active member
Sharpening and hot highlights
Hi Guy
They do need sharpening - the E3 files are the same, but they do take it.

My first rule with exposure is to expose for the highlights, the dynamic range isn't bad, and you can pull details from the shadows without too much noise, but once a hightlight is gone . . . it's gone.

Of course, it's quite the opposite in low light.

I have the E3 set to -1/3 for normal bright daylight, and +1/3 for 800 ISO, +2/3 if I go higher than that.

I had the 14-150, and it's a great lens . . . but I got rid of it because I liked the 12-60 better, and of course there is stabilisation in the lens anyway.
Each to his own!
Looks like your having fun!
 
Top