Lens advices for E-510

Hi All,

I'm a happy owner of a E-510 kit (14-42, 40-150) for almost a year now.

Pictures taken outside are always looking great (if not then its mostly my fault , but i also take a lot of pictures from sports inside and this means quite dark (TL-light) circumstances. Here is where i have the problem, because i set the shutterspeed myself, the ISO at 1600, use monopod and still i have many "unclear" pictures.

The most indoor pictures are taken in the range of length 40-150 and a few for a complete overview around 14-25.

The question is can i achieve faster shutterspeeds with another lens and of course still "bright" pictures?

If so what lens would you recommand. I was thinking of the Olympus Zuiko E ED 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD. While its not cheap i'm asking here for advice

The Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 18-180mm f/3.5-6.3 seems also a nice overall lens, but i guess this quality is the same as the kit lenses?

Regards,
Arno

...I would expect the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD to be much more useful to you, for two reasons.

One, it's more likely to be able to focus in time. That's pretty much the reason they updated this with an SWD motor; for those who don't need the fast focus, the older lens would seem to be the better buy.

Two, it has a brighter maximum aperture at the longer end, and for low-light action w/o a plan to add enough light to the scene, you're going to want a reasonably fast aperture.

Note: Unless Olympus really mis-engineered the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD, then it should behave quite well wide-open -- the original non-SWD had a touch of vignetting at f/3.5 at the very long end, but was otherwise quite good. No need to stop down for lens quality reasons, albeit 'too shallow DOF' is still a valid excuse.

The simple but unpleasant fact here is that if you want to shoot in low light witout a tripod or flash, Olympus (or, rather, the four thirds system) is not for you. It sucks in low light. You need something that will perform well at high ISO, and four thirds doesn't.

You're looking at pretty big money for those f/2.8 lenses - and it might be worth seeing what that money will get you if you invest in another brand with fair quality kit lenses and better high-ISO performance. Others may disagree with me, but I just get the feeling that throwing money at the four thirds system in the hope of getting good low light shots will be expensive and pointless.

-a

One way to circumvent the difficulty is to buy an old fast prime like:

http://www.praktica-users.com/lens/mlenses/czjson2.8_200.html

http://www.praktica-users.com/lens/mlenses/morp2.8_135.html

and use them with a M42--> 4/3 adapter.

Not rocket science

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/7689141@N06/

I'm not allowed to use flash in those areas, so flash is never an option.

Yes, the lens is very pricy that's why i first ask in this forum for advice. You are saying that the Olympus doesn't does well in dark conditions. I'm sure the Canon does a bad job too (if not worser), so which branch are you proposing?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying - Olympus is not good in low light.

I don't know much about the other brands - but I know they both perform much better than Olympus at higher ISO settings. Maybe someone else can offer better advice about Canon or Nikon - or you could use the reviews on this site as a starting point.

Good luck with it.

From what you say I assume that you are setting a speed that is as fast as the combination of maximum aperture and ISO 1600 will allow without underexposing and yet you are still getting motion blur.

If that is the case then the 18-180 will not make things any better - f6.3 at the long end is worse than the f5.6 you have now.

The 50-200 will give you just over a stop extra at the long end - this maybe enough to stop the blur - it depends how bad it is and what speeds you are able to shoot at currently.

Another option involves a bit of a wait until Sigma releases its 4/3 70-200 f2.8 lens. This will be cheaper than the Oly 50-200 and is a constant f2.8 which will give you 2 extra stops to play with - HOWEVER - how it will perform wide open is as yet unknown.

--
http://www.pbase.com/eyespy

If it moves shoot it ;-)
eyespy.

Hmmm, I don't think the Oly's are much worse than other APS sized cameras, so I wouldn't move to them for the sake of a potentially small improvement. The better option for high ISO would be a FF camera, but that is going to cost an arm and a leg.

Not sure there's an easy answer. The 50-200 will get you better results, but whether good enough to warrent the cost is another matter.
Alistair

--
http://www.al-pasha.com/./gallery2/main.php

http://www.flickr.com/photos/twonker/

Oly is totally useless in dim light, it won't match the performance of a $5000 to $10,000 kit tho.

The 50-200 will definitely help in low light, but will it be enough? You might want to borrow or rent one before you buy to see if it will do the job.

--
Art P



Select images may be seen here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8131242@N04/

I agree with all previous comments. As good as the kit lenses are, I upgraded to the 14-54 and 50-200 SWD for my E-510.

The difference in focusing speed, especially in low light is remarkable. But the 50-200 SWD is just outstanding in terms of focusing speed and accuracy. I have very seldom pictures which are not properly focused. It is the best lens I have for IQ (sharpness and contrast).
--
JMK

ArnoBrinkman said:

... use monopod and still i have many "unclear" pictures.

Click to expand...

If you are using a monopod to keep the camera steady do you still have Image Stabilisation turned on? This affects image quality if camera is on a tripod, and it's recommended that it should be turned off. I assume that this also holds true for monopods?

If IS is turned on then the camera is assuming that the body is moving, even if only slightly. If the body is held rigid by a 'pod then the IS works against you and makes images less sharp.

Try it with IS turned off for these images. It won't make your images 'brighter' but could make them less 'unclear'. Remember to turn it back on when back outside!

All the best.

i have seen great indoor sports shots by Raymond Wardenaer.
Do a search for him...

Kritta said:

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying - Olympus is not good in low light.

I don't know much about the other brands - but I know they both
perform much better than Olympus at higher ISO settings. Maybe
someone else can offer better advice about Canon or Nikon - or you
could use the reviews on this site as a starting point.

Good luck with it.

Click to expand...

Hi

I have just posted 3 pictures using E510 with 18-180mm zoom len for you to see.

Maybe you should try out these Lens at your local shops, and if you always like to zoom in your pictures then 18-180mm will be your choice.

Cheers
aspire

I've tried all options with the IS (off, 1 and 2) over many pictures and sometimes there was a little help with IS turned on, but didn't see worser pictures compared to off. At least thats my experience under these circumstances.

Here is a handheld picture taken well after sunset yesterday that I thought turned out well.



e-510 + Leica 25mm, f/1.4, 1/25 sec, ISO 400, no postprocessing

Hi e1man,

Are you saying, if I were to turn the IS off and use a tripod or monopod the IQ of my shot will be sharper and more clear? What about higher shutter speeds hand held?

Ok. Worth a go though as it wasn't obvious what you meant by 'unclear' i.e. whether this was dark or blurred.

Looks like you do need a 'faster' setup. As you've pushed the ISO to an acceptable limit and are shooting in shutter priority mode then you probably do need a faster lens. The 18-180 is not the answer as it's slower than what you currently have. The 'reasonable' option is the 50-200. I have the original version and have used it a lot for motorsport and while it can sometimes hunt for focus it is of excellent quality. It just weighs a lot more than the 40-150. I take the tripod collar off when using it hand held and I think it's better balanced when I have the grip attached to my E3.

All the best.

Hi,

I use my 510 and now my e3 for sports shooting every weekend. I shoot soccer and gymnastics as my daughter plays soccer and is a gymnast also. I use the 50-200. The image quality is outstanding.

Use the center focus point. If you can set it for "small" do so. Shoot wide open and adjust the ISO to get the shutter speed up to a level where you don't get motion blur from your athletic subjects. For U12 soccer this usually means you need a shutter speed of at least 1/1000th. For younger players who move slower, a slower shutter speed will work.

Outdoors, on cloudy days, I shoot soccer at 200-400 ISO. Shooting in gyms is very hard for any camera and lens. Gyms are always poorly lit. Try to position yourself in a place where your subject is moving towards you rather than only shooting them moving across your field of view. Doing so will enable you to shoot at a slower shutter speed, like 1/500th or a little faster.

With a monopod, the 510 and a 50-200 you'll be in good shape. If you're shooting for fun, as I do, the original 50-200 will be fine (and a whole lot cheaper than the SWD model). I started with this combo, and upgraded to an E3 and the 50-200SWD la couple of months ago. I get a faster burst rate with the E3 (5 frames per second rather than 3 fps on the 510). The E3 handles high ISO noise better, but the 510 produced loads of good pictures of sports events I shot with it.

-- rand

Garretray said:

Hi e1man,
Are you saying, if I were to turn the IS off and use a tripod or
monopod the IQ of my shot will be sharper and more clear? What about
higher shutter speeds hand held?

Click to expand...

Yes. The manual states:

+ The image stabilizer cannot correct excessive camera shake or camera shake that occurs when the shutter speed is set to the slowest speed. In these cases, it is recommended that you use a tripod.
+ When using a tripod, set [IMAGE STABILIZER] to [OFF].

As I said before if you have IS on and the camera is attached to a tripod the sensor will still 'move' trying to counteract camera movement. As there shouldn't be camera movement in this setup then any sensor movement will result in 'blur' in your image. Of course this is more likely to be seen the slower the shutter speed. While I have a monopod I've not used it since I got my E3 - it tends to travel with me when weight restrictions prevent me taking my tripod, and as I like to take panoramas my tripod is a key bit of my kit.

I guess that if you used a monopod for its panning ability than IS mode 2 would still be sensible.

The faster the shutter speed then the less impact IS will have a on image quality i.e. at 1/4000 second any camera movement is hard to 'see' if holding it steady.

All the best

Wow, very nice and clear picture