Fun with the Olympus OMD

[m_driscoll]

Caught! She wasn't fooled by me looking down at the tilted up LCD.

E-M5; Olympus 75-300mm; 75mm; 1/80s @ f/7.1; -1/3 EV; ISO 320

Cheers, Matt

Zenfolio | Matt Driscoll

 

[MGrayson]

Shallow water reflection with 12-50. Almost straight OOC.
A disjointed combination of individually interesting elements. To paraphrase a Russian mathematician, "Photography is very easy! The only difficulties are light and composition." :banghead:

--Matt

 

[Braeside]

One in monochrome from Edinburgh yesterday:

Lumix 12-35mm

 

[Braeside]

A colour one from Edinburgh:

 

[RavenMad]

Took this wondering around the charming ye-olde-worlde of Hahndorf (South Australia) on a dismal winter afternoon:

This is my beautiful better half, Holly, practicing her cello. Taken hand-held in dim lighting at ISO 6400 at F/9 1/8th! (desaturated and minimal unsharp mask applied in post) I freaking love this camera!

 

[PerThorup]

A couple from wet wet Denmark..

2 From my garden - OMD with 45/1,8

and 2 of a new work of art called 'Echo'

Regards
Per

 

[Braeside]

Per, looks rather dry in those super photos. Love the Echo Art too.

 

[MGrayson]

I really like the 45/1.8..

Although the 12-50 has that macro thing going for it..

--Matt

 

[Braeside]

Hi Matt, yes the wee 45/1.8 is super, its possible to get some nice differential focus with it.

 

[MGrayson]

David,

Yes, it's tempting to go for too much separation, but even at f/4 or so, I just like the look of the 45mm. Over in Canon land, there were endless debates over the 85/1.2 vs. the 85/1.8 at any aperture above f/2 - were they the same? Was the cheaper lens better? etc. etc. I always liked the bigger lens's look, but it may be that I was just impressed with that huge chunk of glass.

Not surprisingly, I have the 75/1.8 on order

Best,

Matt

 

[Terry]

The problem with the 45mm is the min focus distance.

 

[Diane B]

I've considered adding the 45/1.8 also but know I wouldn't carry both and I've had and liked the 45/2.8 macro for several years. I am not a macro shooter per se but I do like closeups and the Panny Leica does a fine job. Still, I was surprised how well the little 12-50 does in macro for that kind of shooting.

 

[MGrayson]

The problem with the 45mm is the min focus distance.

Terry,

I couldn't agree with you more, but at its size and overall performance, I think it will have a permanent spot in the backpack. If the 45 could do macro, I'd get the 12 and 25 primes and leave the 12-50 at home.

Diane,

The 12-50 is an impressive combination with the OM-D's focusing capabilities. Well, this may not be a good example, as it focused on the leading edge of the flower, but:

and a 100% crop

Best,

Matt

 

[Diane B]

Matt, I love my 25 and before getting the EM5 I was carrying it and the 45/2.8 and debating what to do at the wider end (I do have the ZD9-18). The 12-50 surprised me a bit as I had planned to sell it. In my bag for the present for the 12 and sometimes just it and the 25 for a very small kit.

Thanks for the 12-50 crop of macro. I'm just about to upload to Ipad to look at one from 12-50 and 45/2.8 of same object.

Diane

 

[Braeside]

I guess they really made the 45/1.8 as a portrait lens where it's min focus is right for head shots. Normally real macro lenses are a bit slower in terms of aperture and focus speed, so I prefer the 45/1.8 for its properties and I have the 12-50 for close up as well as the 12-35/2.8. I know how annoying longer MFD can be though, for example with M lenses.
Not sure if I need or want the 75/1.8, it's not a focal length that I would use a lot, but it does look to be very nice indeed from the samples seen so far. Trying fairly unsuccessfully to restrict the number of lenses I accumulate!

 

[scho]

I guess they really made the 45/1.8 as a portrait lens where it's min focus is right for head shots. Normally real macro lenses are a bit slower in terms of aperture and focus speed, so I prefer the 45/1.8 for its properties and I have the 12-50 for close up as well as the 12-35/2.8. I know how annoying longer MFD can be though, for example with M lenses.
Not sure if I need or want the 75/1.8, it's not a focal length that I would use a lot, but it does look to be very nice indeed from the samples seen so far. Trying fairly unsuccessfully to restrict the number of lenses I accumulate!

+1, but I'm determined to see if I can survive with two zooms and one prime.

 

[MGrayson]

With the big Canons, I got lazy and ended up carrying just the 24-105/4 and the 70-200/2.8. Sometimes the 50 macro, as it's small and light. I can see something similar happening here: 12-35/2.8, some macro, and a longer zoom, if it ever gets released. The 12-35 has a very nice look, although I tend to shoot stopped down landscapes at those focal lengths. At some point, I have to see how the 12-50 and the 12-35 differ at f/8 in the 14mm range.

Of course, I'll end up with all of them. It's a question when and in what order. :ROTFL:

--Matt

 

[JMaher]

Just playing around with HDR. 12-50, 3 shots in Portofino, Italy.


20120702-P7020310_1_2-Edit by jmmtampa, on Flickr

Jim

 

[MGrayson]

Rain overnight. Flowers. Macro lens. I see where this is going...

It's ridiculous to be shooting hand-held macros. Choosing a focus point is difficult, but it shouldn't be even remotely possible!

Best,

Matt

 

[jonoslack]

Rain overnight. Flowers. Macro lens. I see where this is going...

It's ridiculous to be shooting hand-held macros. Choosing a focus point is difficult, but it shouldn't be even remotely possible!

Best,

Matt

HI Matt
I've been doing the same today (snaps later). 300 (read 600mm) hand held at 1/200th second and pin sharp. Actually, I've not found focus too hard either, using the small focus point.

It's just such good fun, and the results are absolutely fine.