How do u know they're E-1?
Pic 4 through 8 are under a title that contains "E-1".
?? Yes, that would be interesting to know, can you tell us, William?
You can't, but you can download the original file (there is a blue button beside the thumbnail, saying "original")
Pic 4 to 8 are E-1 sample image ...
so download the original file and see the EXIF data youself
(blue button beside the thumbnail, saying "original")
all pictures are taken at ISO 100 ... from the EXIF data shown ,
the lens should be E 14 - 54 mm F2.8 - F3.5 ....
well this is the best E1 image i have seen so far ....
Looks nice.
.This is not fair IMHO. Of course you can take good pictures with
Aha! Thanks, I didn't see that. Wonder what the purpose of this page of photos is?
Roland,Looks nice.
At ISO 100 they are of course "noise free". Good lightning
and a pretty girl also helps
The pictures are rather sharp and has nice gradiation. The
second one I find really good, even though there are some
oversaturated parts.
One surprise though - the first image has chromatic
aberration in the upper left corner. This gives a rather
strange feeling - Phil takes unsharp pictures without CA
and this is sharp pictures with CA. Sharp pictures with CA
you can take with any good DSLR, even withou CA with
a good lens.
Roland
If you were shooting those on FILM, would you choose ISO 800 film?
--
Of course. Maybe I was unclear. Those pictures are fine.
No, it is not. It might be proven wrong. But it is relevant until then.
Yes, of course.
There are cheaper cameras that can take great pictures at ISO 100.
Actually I own at the moment a Leica digilux, great camera but I need a DSLR especially for the naturephotography I need more than 300 mm so thats one reason.
Maybe so if you knew you'd get great quality at that ISO. I moved from an E-10 to the 10D and, right away, the difference between noise in images from both cameras was staggering. With the E-10, I was loathe to move it off ISO 80 (ISO 160 was OK) but now, it's just another setting I make when the circumstances arise. Here's an example, I shot this tiger on a rather overcast day so I used ISO 800 to get a fast enough shutter speed to stop the action as it was pacing. Then, to my surprise, it walked out into the moat and started coming towards me. Well, I had nothing to prefocus on so I hastily switched the camera into AI SERVO mode, which focus tracks moving subjects, and bingo, I got this shot before it veered off...
Consider that the Oly 300mm f2.8 is 1.6 pounds heavier than an equivelant Nikon (as well as longer and wider). It's also longer, heavier, and wider than a 300mm f2.8 Canon, and the Canon has image stabilization. Both the Nikon and Canon have ultrasonic ring motors, while the Oly has gear motors.
I have a Nikon D100 that went bouncing a long way down a hillside. The case took some ugly damage, but the camera is totally sound.
No. They're a few thousand dollars overpriced (looking at that 300mm you said you needed).
Percisely why I use a DLSR that has hundreds of availiable lenses, from four manufacturers. Not 4 lenses from one manufacturer.
