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!

Fun with the Olympus OMD

bcaslis

New member
The writer of the manual should be shot for the explanation of some these.

You haven't had the chance to see a Panasonic manual then? Much much worse.
True all camera manuals I've seen are bad. But the one killed me was trying to figure out flash. On Canons (back when I used them) the flash and the ambient exposure seemed pretty separate. On Nikons, changing the exposure will also affect the flash. On the OM-D I couldn't figure it out, it seemed like exposure compensation didn't affect the flash but also didn't affect anything with the flash on but worked fine without the flash.

Finally did a web search that commented on another Olympus camera that with a setting with an icon that looks like a flash compensation plus an exposure compensation that setting to on makes it work like the Nikon but off means that exposure compensation is ignored with a flash. That sounded like exactly what I was seeing.

Sure enough under custom F there is a setting like this and changing it worked (I never even suspected that flash behavior would be something you could customize). But the manual description is "When set to [On], it will be added to the exposure compensation value and flash intensity control will be performed." Doesn't help me at all with that description.

But at least I know understand how it works!
 

jonoslack

Active member
HI There
I thought I'd try shooting some surfers today with the 100-300 - at 300mm (they were a good way out, and without a wetsuit the Atlantic in May is no place to go wading brrrr!)

First of all I tried C-AF . . . not a chance - I was getting a hit rate of about 20% we all know that it doesn't work well with CDAF - I wasn't surprised.
So I thought I'd try S-AF and just mash the shutter at the critical point . . it worked just fine, the AF on the OMD is really fast, and I was getting a hit rate of about 80% - excellent (remember, this is 600mm equivalent, hand held).

Here are a couple of shots:





It was a lovely clear morning (after one lot of rain . . and before the next!)

here are a couple with the 12-50 kit lens of Gwynvor.



 

Amin

Active member
Nothing special, but the evening light was nice and the dogwoods were in bloom. Same PL25mm lens, first at f/1.4 and second at f/4:



 

Tesselator

New member
No offense Tess, but an ISO 25600 shot at 1/500 with F13.0 doesn't tell much at all, of how the camera really handles that ISO in real world situations. You have plenty of light. My Olympus e-300 from years ago takes decent ISO 1600 shots at high noon.

- Raist
And that would only ever be the reason and condition where high ISO should be used! If the exposure is under 1/60 or so with the high ISO setting then get a tripod like you're supposed to. Never ever shoot high ISO at low shutter speeds unless you want your images to look totally crappy or unless you're trying to introduce shot-noise and false color.

High ISO is typically for fast shutter speeds when you also want lots of DOF or fast (enough) shutter speeds when there isn't enough light otherwise. Like you wish to shoot at 1/500 - 1/8000 with f/8 for BIF or similar for indoor gym sports etc..

Using high ISO with low shutter speeds is a rookie mistake. It's that way with film too BTW. If you're shooting night photography for example you should use the lowest ISO film feasible and use a tripod - for the best results. Shooting 1600 or 3200 ASA color film at night just to get the shutter up around 1/60 to 1/125 is a huge mistake if image quality is at all a concern. I wonder if they still make those films???

Anyway, you said it yourself: Your e-300 actually worked at 1600 when there was enough light. ;) As in... when you could achieve a fast shutter speed. :) Depending on conditions and the specific equipment being used, my general rule is to never go below 1/250 at ISO 800, and never below 1/500 at ISO 3,200. And I don't have enough experience with these ultra high ISO speeds to know if faster than 1/500 is better or not yet but I suppose 1/1000 is slightly better than 1/500 at ISO 6,400 and above.

I learned this back in the 80's when fast color films first started hitting the market and was making the same mistakes you are here. Later I read several pro photography books which said basically the same thing. It hit me again while I was working at a film development studio and my boss walked over with this gorgeous 8x12 of a morning (around 10am? maybe) water-skier with a beautiful perfectly frozen water-plume and said: This is the new Konica thirty-two-hundred film. I was stunned as all my high ISO shots were turning out terribly grainy with very poor color - but this was better than some of my ASA 200 shots. I asked the shutter speed and he replied 1/4000 f/8 200mm. From then I had a lot of success shooting fast films and I learned something:

Fast ASA films or ISO digital settings are not for slow shutter speeds below 1/500 or dark scenes.

And this generally holds true today on digital as you yourself observed.
 

etrigan63

Active member
Was over at a friend's house for his kids' birthday (twins) and they had to keep their overly friendly dachshunds under control. They (the wiener dogs) really wanted to be at the party:


Jailbirds by Carlos Echenique, on Flickr

OM-D + 12-50 kit lens
ISO 3200
ORF processed in AfterShot Pro + Nostalgia B&W plugin
 

Paratom

Well-known member
HI There
I thought I'd try shooting some surfers today with the 100-300 - at 300mm (they were a good way out, and without a wetsuit the Atlantic in May is no place to go wading brrrr!)

First of all I tried C-AF . . . not a chance - I was getting a hit rate of about 20% we all know that it doesn't work well with CDAF - I wasn't surprised.
So I thought I'd try S-AF and just mash the shutter at the critical point . . it worked just fine, the AF on the OMD is really fast, and I was getting a hit rate of about 80% - excellent (remember, this is 600mm equivalent, hand held).

Here are a couple of shots:

It was a lovely clear morning (after one lot of rain . . and before the next!)

here are a couple with the 12-50 kit lens of Gwynvor.

Great colors and overall look in this image.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Using high ISO with low shutter speeds is a rookie mistake.

snip . . .

Fast ASA films or ISO digital settings are not for slow shutter speeds below 1/500 or dark scenes.

And this generally holds true today on digital as you yourself observed.
This implies that, for instance, shooting in low light at an event or bar should be done on a tripod? Let's face it, a tripod is only a help if you're subject holds still.

Of course, I agree in principle - but in practice one usually uses high ISO when the lighting is poor, and slow shutter speeds may be the only way to get the shot.

all the best
 

jlm

Workshop Member
lower manhattan, here is where i realized i was processing jpegs! couldn't control the dynamic range
 

jlm

Workshop Member
for those not familiar with the streets of NY: Fulton St, in one block, and just one side of the street: russian baths, dentist and optometrist, newsstand, indian restaurant, texas BBQ, buy gold, barber, Irish Pub, cleaners, foot massage, two girls painting their nails ... from a jpeg
 

Tesselator

New member
This implies that, for instance, shooting in low light at an event or bar should be done on a tripod? Let's face it, a tripod is only a help if you're subject holds still.

Of course, I agree in principle - but in practice one usually uses high ISO when the lighting is poor, and slow shutter speeds may be the only way to get the shot.
No, if you read the whole message it doesn't really imply that. :) Check the qualifiers I used. "Mostly", "Usually", "generally", "if image quality is at all a concern", and so on. Of course there times when there's no other way and it's either accept the inevitable or go without the shot. Remember, I was responding to someone saying that 1/500 at f/13 is a meaningless test for ISO 25,600. LOL

So I stick by my remark:
Fast ASA films or ISO digital settings are not for slow shutter speeds below 1/500 or dark scenes.

And this generally holds true today on digital...​

and add: Sure, we all use our tools for things other than what they are for. At least we should! :D
 

Amin

Active member
Fast ASA films or ISO digital settings are not for slow shutter speeds below 1/500 or dark scenes.

And this generally holds true today on digital as you yourself observed.
I disagree. A great deal* of excellent photography, especially photography of people across several genres (documentary, travel, street, fine art), is done at higher ISO values and lower shutter speeds under conditions where a tripod is neither convenient nor practical and where ultimate image quality is a minor contributor to the the quality of image.

*Far more than implied by your qualifiers such as "generally"
 
Top