olyflyer
Forum Pro
Did you ever tried the OM1 with a motor drive? A real heavy beast that was compared to any DSLR, even if not as heavy as the F3 with motor...
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Louis_Dobson
Forum Pro
until I can't hold it. I find the G1 perhaps a tiny bit too small, everything bigger, too big.
The issue is carrying it.
Three camera bags here.
Smallest is MFT. I'll carry that anywhere on foot, although it is still not small enough to take on the Harley (G1 plus 20mm f1.7 is though, fits in the tool bag).
Next is the E3 bag. I'll carry that anywhere, but it can get a bit awkward getting on and off boats or eating in fisherman's shacks. It won't even begin to fit on the Harley, but it straps to the back of the Triumph.
Finally we have the D3 bag. I hate carrying this. A wedding is OK, a fifteen mile hike is purgatory. I can use a rucksack, but then you never bother to use the camera.... Won't fit on the Harley or the Triumph, but fits in the top box on the KTM, just.
What is the RIGHT size? The MFT bag. But the D3 bag is the most flexible. The E3 bag is a good compromise.
E3 plus 7-14 plus 12-60 plus 50-200, my fave all purpose system. For now.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
The issue is carrying it.
Three camera bags here.
Smallest is MFT. I'll carry that anywhere on foot, although it is still not small enough to take on the Harley (G1 plus 20mm f1.7 is though, fits in the tool bag).
Next is the E3 bag. I'll carry that anywhere, but it can get a bit awkward getting on and off boats or eating in fisherman's shacks. It won't even begin to fit on the Harley, but it straps to the back of the Triumph.
Finally we have the D3 bag. I hate carrying this. A wedding is OK, a fifteen mile hike is purgatory. I can use a rucksack, but then you never bother to use the camera.... Won't fit on the Harley or the Triumph, but fits in the top box on the KTM, just.
What is the RIGHT size? The MFT bag. But the D3 bag is the most flexible. The E3 bag is a good compromise.
E3 plus 7-14 plus 12-60 plus 50-200, my fave all purpose system. For now.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
I dont like big lenses but my decision for 4/3 has more reasons [nt]
Before you go to bed, say good night here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=35837166
Before you go to bed, say good night here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=35837166
Gregm61
Forum Pro
If I find myself in the position of having to go elsewhere, Nikon is the direction I'd be going, and the 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 AFS VR Nikkor (24-120 equivalent) is the lens I'd be buying to use with either a D5000 or D300s.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/545654-USA/Nikon_2178_16_85mm_f_3_5_5_6G_ED_VR.html
Not nearly as fast as my 12-60, I know, and not built nearly as well, either....but it works with what would be two superior cameras where the higher ISO ability will offset being slower by one stop at the long end than the Zuiko and the couple of reviews I have read on the lens are very good, and $630 is a good price.
Pete_CSCS
Senior Member
... so your right answer may be different than my right answer.
A camera is too small if:
'When nothing seems to help, I go and look at a stonecutter hammering away at
his rock perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it.
Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two,
and I know it was not that blow that did it,
but all that had gone before.'
-- Jacob Riis (1849 - 1914)
Stay Well,
Pete K.
IMHO an African Elephant is too large a pet for a one bedroom apartment. A microbe is too small a pet in a 30 room mansion. Opinions vary.
A camera is too small if:
- it doesn't fit comfortably in your hands.
- the control buttons are so close together you can't distinguish them.
- the size is so small that it prohibits the feasibility of fast enough lenses for your needs.
- it doesn't fit comfortably in your hands.
- you find yourself leaving it and/or the proper lenses home because you didn't want to heft it around.
- you are getting exhausted lugging it around.
- you don't have the space to store it and its' accessories.
'When nothing seems to help, I go and look at a stonecutter hammering away at
his rock perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it.
Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two,
and I know it was not that blow that did it,
but all that had gone before.'
-- Jacob Riis (1849 - 1914)
Stay Well,
Pete K.
They are all good points. Add to that a sexist consideration.
I live in one of the centers of world tourism and I can see trends in cameras. There are more and more young women using dSLR, while man satisfy themselves with compacts.
By Kirk Tuck's definition:
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/07/re-appraisal-of-olympus-pens-as-fine.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheVisualScienceLab+%28The+Visual+Science+Lab%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
Women are asserting their right to photographic imperialism, while men become more gentle and artsy, or perhaps more bored with big cameras.
In this sense it's a remake of the film era when rangefinder sized cameras replaced a market saturated by dSLR, and Canon began its hegemony over Nikon.
OC the OP makes no sense without considering Micros, which have the same IQ of 4/3 dSLR. Personally like Kirk, I feel stimulated by using one, with just one lens.
If other cannot let go and feel the need of dominating the environment with a panoply of photographic weapons, well at least it's a macho thing that doesn't kill anyone. It's really their psychological problem.
In any case in this era of of tough airport regulations, and areas restricted to photography, compact cameras with high IQ are on the rise, and dSLR on the wane, at least in Japan.
Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
boggis the cat
Veteran Member
Have you tried the camera straps that clip onto the front of your pack?
I used to use such a system when I took my Canon system hiking (EOS 10 and 35-135, kept the 75-300 and flash etc. in the pack). The weight wasn't as noticeable and it is always "to hand" for shooting.
The only real problem was shielding it properly from intermittent light rain; I didn't do so and didn't have any problems, but it is a risk. (For heavy rain it had to go back in the pack.)
TXforester
Senior Member
I don't have either motor drive, but I do have the winder 2. I wouldn't call and OM-1 with the winder a beast.
--
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: I don't think they wanted me to say anything. It was just their way of having a bit of fun, the swines. Strange thing is they make such bloody good cameras.
--
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: I don't think they wanted me to say anything. It was just their way of having a bit of fun, the swines. Strange thing is they make such bloody good cameras.
ginsbu
Senior Member
This does seem like one of the better options, I agree. If I was looking for lens speed for ISO reasons, I'd probably be quite happy; but I'm more concerned with DOF control, and f5.6 is a long way from f3.5 (on my 14-54) on the long end. (Since I prefer squarer formats (4:5, 1:1, etc.) the larger APS-C sensor doesn't reduce DOF much at all.)
kernow
Forum Pro
I don't know, I don't have any big gear, all my stuff is tiny.
--
Oll an gwella,
Jim
--
Oll an gwella,
Jim
J
jkrumm
Guest
Very similar to my system, but with a 620, and boy it all gets heavy in a backpack, at least to me... But it sure is a nice package, compact but dense.
--
John Krumm
Juneau, AK
olyflyer
Forum Pro
A solution for the D3 bag and the HD:
olyflyer
Forum Pro
No, not a beast but it is huge and heavy.
olyflyer
Forum Pro
The DOF advantage is 1 stop with the Nikon DX format. The difference between the 14-54 and the 16-85 is 1 and 1/3 stop in aperture, so I don't think you'd notice the DOF difference between the two. The 1 1/3 stop difference is noticeable in shutter speed but not in DOF. If more DOF control is necessary there are plenty of fast and cheap primes to do that with, where the DOF differences clearly are noticeable. These mid range zooms have limited use in anything other than general photography for which they are great, but for DOF control the only alternatives to primes are the top range type of constant aperture zooms. Olympus is no exception. Not even the top range zooms can match the fast primes when it comes to DOF control.
http://dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
If you prefer 1:1 you have to crop even the FT image anyway, so cropping to preferred format's isn't an issue. It has been done all the time, ever since the invention of photography.
antoineb
Veteran Member
I mean we are all aware of the phallic symbolism that goes with a huge lens in front of one's big DSLR.
So it would only be natural to see at least some men wanting this. It's probably the same logic that drives the need for big engines on cars or motorbikes, and so on
Now in the US as we can see, women take all the lead roles. In many series, the woman is the serious cool-headed unemotional person, and the guy is the emotional softy who doesn't get it but whose intuitions sometimes help achieving the result.
In essence, its a 180 degree turn from what the same shows had in the 50s.
Given this, it would seem only logical that it's now US women who want big lenses in front of their DSLRs, while men don't.
personally I've never had the big engine complex (if it is a complex), and outside of the US the world has remained rather more macho (w the exception of the UK of course ;-)
so a smaller camera is my natural choice. I like to be free to photograph whatever I want, whenever I want, wherever I want, come rain or high water or cold or a sand dust or whatever.
So it would only be natural to see at least some men wanting this. It's probably the same logic that drives the need for big engines on cars or motorbikes, and so on
Now in the US as we can see, women take all the lead roles. In many series, the woman is the serious cool-headed unemotional person, and the guy is the emotional softy who doesn't get it but whose intuitions sometimes help achieving the result.
In essence, its a 180 degree turn from what the same shows had in the 50s.
Given this, it would seem only logical that it's now US women who want big lenses in front of their DSLRs, while men don't.
personally I've never had the big engine complex (if it is a complex), and outside of the US the world has remained rather more macho (w the exception of the UK of course ;-)
so a smaller camera is my natural choice. I like to be free to photograph whatever I want, whenever I want, wherever I want, come rain or high water or cold or a sand dust or whatever.
First the wolf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bad_Wolf
Then John
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bad_John
And now photo gear. When will it end?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bad_Wolf
Then John
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bad_John
And now photo gear. When will it end?
Al Patterson
Leading Member
Some of the Oly products appear to be designed for children or tiny adults. They seem to be designed by the same people who design airline seating...
Maybe when they grow up, they'll realise some of us are 6'2" and have large hands.
--
Al Patterson
Maybe when they grow up, they'll realise some of us are 6'2" and have large hands.
--
Al Patterson
I
illy
Guest
lol tell me about airplane seating, i have this picture to send to Singapore airlines about their dreadful seats on the Airbus A380, I'm 6'7" and i couldn't even get the food tray into position without hitting my knees, truly the world feels as if it's made for tiny people some times.
--
http://illy.smugmug.com
every day's a curry day
goblin
Senior Member
That speaks good of the A-380...
I am 5'8" and am pretty much in the same position on a transatlantic 747...
I am 5'8" and am pretty much in the same position on a transatlantic 747...
MusicDoctorDJ
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,400
- Reaction score
- 11
I think it was this day . . .
*
Or maybe this day . . .
*
Or perhaps this day . . .
*
- My question is this:
--
J. D.
Colorado