Reading mode: Light Dark

Olympus lens department sucks

Go to last post
You know nothing about lenses. Large aperture is not everything. How many people like to drag around bunch F1.8-F2 7 pounders? Have you tried the 50-200 and 11-22 oly lenses. Give me a lens from another brand that has the quality, reach, and price the oly offers.

I bet you are not even 20 years old. "Before 30 years", my .
dMatic said:
Troll? If you have critical opinion about Olympus lens department,
that makes you troll. You are pathetic!!!

--
dMatic
http://dmatic.fototrip.org
Click to expand...
 
I love small fast primes!

--
SIGNATURE

'This is a picture I did not take of a tall, greying man with crooked teeth whom I've encountered three times while photographing downtown, and each time he's approached me quickly from the front with a long stride, and each time he's leaned toward me and said the exact same thing 'old one's are better' while palming his ancient brass Leica, opening his hand enough to show me what's there, but not enough really showing-off!' (An Unknown Leica Street Photographer)

 
dMatic said:
If you have 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 and shoot at 800iso wide open on
1/30s, you get not so good photo
Click to expand...
iso 800 wide open at 1/30s??????

Use a flash. Use ISO 200 - use f 5.6 - use 1/125 sec.
This is what most people do in low light.
There is a reason why flash was invented.
 
Well, I'm not most people; I like to use ambient light and to have some atmosphere on my pictures. And you don't get that with flash and f5.6 1/125 sec.
archphoto304 said:
dMatic said:
If you have 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 and shoot at 800iso wide open on
1/30s, you get not so good photo
Click to expand...
iso 800 wide open at 1/30s??????

Use a flash. Use ISO 200 - use f 5.6 - use 1/125 sec.
This is what most people do in low light.
There is a reason why flash was invented.
Click to expand...
--
dMatic
http://dmatic.fototrip.org
 
ok then - use a tripod. use iso 200 - use f 8 - set the shutter to get a good exposure.

No way yopu can blame one of the best lenses in existence for your desire to shoot low light ambient.

blame your technique i think.
 
I have Canon 5D on my job we use it for shooting in studio, and I will not buy it because

1. I prefer CCD
2. Camera build quality is not good
3. Canon service in Croatia SUCKS big time

4. After only one week of use it had more dust on CMOS, then Nikon D2h in six months and Olympus in 2 years...
5. It is to expensive for what it is
6. Do you want more reasons?
Scott P said:
--
http://srpluta.zenfolio.com/
Click to expand...
--
dMatic
http://dmatic.fototrip.org
 
I didn't blame existing lenses they are fine if not excellent, I blamed Olympus for not producing fast primes as they promised on their first road map. And give us more choice.
archphoto304 said:
ok then - use a tripod. use iso 200 - use f 8 - set the shutter to
get a good exposure.

No way yopu can blame one of the best lenses in existence for your
desire to shoot low light ambient.

blame your technique i think.
Click to expand...
--
dMatic
http://dmatic.fototrip.org
 
I am 67, is that old enough for you? Why should you call someone a troll because he is expressing wish for other lenses than Olympus has made till now? I wouldn't say that anything "sucks" here, but I have long wanted a small normal or wide with at least 2.8, or stronger. I have 11-22, 14-54 and 50-200 already. None of them are small. It must be possible, even if you are 20, to express some critisism here without being attacked like this.
--
Raymond
http://home.online.no/~rwardena
http://www.volleyball.no/t3.asp?p=57227
 
Thank you for support!
Raymond Wardenaer said:
I am 67, is that old enough for you? Why should you call someone a
troll because he is expressing wish for other lenses than Olympus
has made till now? I wouldn't say that anything "sucks" here, but I
have long wanted a small normal or wide with at least 2.8, or
stronger. I have 11-22, 14-54 and 50-200 already. None of them are
small. It must be possible, even if you are 20, to express some
critisism here without being attacked like this.
--
Raymond
http://home.online.no/~rwardena
http://www.volleyball.no/t3.asp?p=57227
Click to expand...
--
dMatic
http://dmatic.fototrip.org
 
Ya - i remember trying to shoot sports with ambient in say an arena or sumpin.

used iso 800 film push a stop to 1600.

the shutter speed was never enough and u were lucky to get a snappy contrart pic. Grain -?? forget about it lol.

At least now with 1600 iso you get far better image with noise and false colour supresion from raw conversion with studio.

This becomes way better than with film.

the diff between f1.2 and 2.8 becomes moot.

Your depth of feild at f1.2 is almost usless anyways.
 
And the reason you're accused of being a troll is, " sucks" is undeniably flame bait.

If you bought into a system promising new, designed for digital lenses, that did not initially even acknowledge that legacy lenses could be used at all , rather than one of the others with boatloads of legacy primes, blame yourself.

Olympus knows full well they couldn't recover the costs of developing and manufacturing a fast 14mm or less prime lens, even if it were possible. The reason all those old 35mm primes exist is that zooms in that era were awful.
dMatic said:
I didn't blame existing lenses they are fine if not excellent, I
blamed Olympus for not producing fast primes as they promised on
their first road map. And give us more choice.
Click to expand...
 
prime has to be changed all the time.

Sorry, don't want one.

You want one, buy another brand.

Keep your eyes open though, Oly say primes are coming. No use to ME, but YOU may like them. Check back in a couple of years.

In the emantime, the lens don't "suck", they are fast zooms for people whp prefer fast zooms. Same way the flight to LA doesn't "suck" - if NY was your destination, take another flight.

Pentax have nice bodies and loads of primes. You'll like them. No fast zooms though, so no interest here.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
IIRC, there were a couple of primes in the original roadmaps. One wide angle, one approx normal and a slightly longer one. The normal and tele were labelled 'fast'. The longer 'portrait' lens disappeared, and the 'normal' lens morphed into a macro one, and later came out as the slow 35mm f/3.5.

So, yes, Olympus did break their 'promise', as far as you can call a roadmap that. I will take their future roadmaps with a large grain of salt.

Cheers,
Simon
 
okay, I managed to google up the old roadmap. Here is the link:
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_files/zuiko_sched0405.pdf

As you will see:
  • the fast wide has become a fisheye (and slow)
  • the fast normal macro has become a longish slow macro
  • the fast mid-telephoto has disappeared
The moral of this story: don't place too much value on a roadmap. I certainly won't when the time comes to upgrade my E-1. Whichever system offers a good lens selection at that time gets my money.

Cheers,
Simon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top