Yeah - this lens really SUCKS!

Steven Wandy

Veteran Member
Messages
5,688
Solutions
4
Reaction score
605
Location
Monroe Township, NJ, US
All taken to day with EP1 and kit 14-42. JPEGs OOC - resized (and one slightly cropped) in LR.
All comments welcome,
Thanks for looking,
Steve











 
All taken to day with EP1 and kit 14-42. JPEGs OOC - resized (and one slightly cropped) in LR.
All comments welcome,
Thanks for looking,
Steve











Agree, they suck. Way too much DOF makes the images look like they were taken with a $100 p&s.

Is there a way you can have less DOF to make the flowers stand out from the background?

Thanks for posting.
 
Even my D-Lux 4 can take much sharper pics than that with pretty good bokeh if using macro mode. Lens issue or user error?



--
Ricoh GX100
Nikon D700 & D200 | 70-200mm VR | 50mm 1.8 | Nikon 14-24 | Tamron 90 | 35mm f2
 
This lens may not be appropriate for what you are doing. I've never used that lens for closeups of flowers, so I can't say what might be wrong here. The flowers look out of focus...depth of field appears to be too shallow.

Can you tell us what settings you used? Have you tried taking pictures with that lens of other things? How does it perform at taking pictures of things further away?
 
What focal length and aperture did you use for these shots?

The great thing about the 14-42 kit lens, is that you can zoom to 42mm and focus very close to create a very narrow depth of field.

This was a tiny flower.

E-P1 + mZD 14-42
1/100s f/5.6 at 42.0mm iso500



Kind Regards

Brian
--
Join our free worldwide support network here :
http://www.ukphotosafari.org/join-the-ukpsg/
UK, Peak District Local Olympus Safari Group : http://snipurl.com/bqtd7-ukpsg
Keep up with me here : http://twitter.com/alert_bri
 
I have the kit lenses that came with my Olympus E-510, and also a standard telephoto lens, and they have all been excellent. I have no idea why people can't get better pictures from them. If any of your pictures are less than this in terms of image quality and sharpness, it's not acceptable.

Olympus E-510, Zuiko 70-300mm lens



Olympus E-510, Zuiko 70-300mm lens



Olympus E-500, Zuiko 40-150mm lens

 
OK, I also saw your images on the 4/3rds Forum. This lens does not suck; it sucks with these flower pictures. Now why? I don't know without you giving us some settings. Have you tried standing further away and zooming in some...setting the F-stop higher for greater depth of field? Try higher ISO and higher F-stop and see what happens. I hope that helps. :)
 
Hi Guys,
Most were taken with the lens fully open or close to it.
Various different focal lengths.

Was not looking for a lot of DOF, so except for one shot (that was not in this grouping) I tried to limit the DOF.

All were hand-held - generally don't schlepp around a tripod, even though I know that is the proper way to take closeups of flowers.
Thanks for commenting,
Steve
 
And I don't have a dedicated Macro lens or my extension tube with me at the time. So making comparisons to a P&S that has a dedicated Macro mode is not entirely accurate.
Steve
 
post one.
Steve
 
User may be the problem here :)
--
Julio
Thanks - I really needed that.

Seriously - It's alot easier to take a picture of a radio or a watch that are sitting still in a house with no breezes and get pretty sharp results.
Steve
 
Point is, you should be able to get a much better pic than those with that nice sensor in the EP-1. As long as you are in the correct distance range, you should be able to get tack sharp pic. Maybe it was windy? Or you were too shaky? But I would think the lens/camera is capable of much better.

I sure hope so! Now where is my darn 17mm/viewfinder kit?!

--
Ricoh GX100
Nikon D700 & D200 | 70-200mm VR | 50mm 1.8 | Nikon 14-24 | Tamron 90 | 35mm f2
 
Yes, taking pictures of flowers is harder than what one might think. I'd climb mountains, or hike miles around the seashore trying to get some nice landscape photos. I would get some good ones, and then see these flowers from other people and I would think how easy it must have been for them. But it's not. Yes, they probably didn't walk for miles, but there's techniques to taking them.

First isolate the flower you want...try getting one that is separate from the others. Make sure that you have good lighting conditions...focus on them and have enough depth of field to keep the entire flower in focus. Some people don't do that, and then their flower looks kind of washed out...soft...fuzzy...blurry...just not good at all.

Have you tried the 40-150mm kit lens for the flowers? I use that one and the Zuiko 70-300mm lens for best results. Also, since I live in rainy and cloudy Oregon, I've gotten real good at keeping the camera steady (because of low-light conditions and subsequently low shutter speeds). I don't carry a tripod either, but if I can, I'll lean on something or sit down and rest my elbows on my legs...things like that. If you have a chance, take a look at the last photo I submitted here, the one of a weed. I took that at 1/40 of a second, hand-held...and it came out as sharp as a tack at 114mm FL. To me it's a challenge to get good photos with less than desirable conditions. It was sunny that day, but my weed (actually the teasel) was in the shade...the shade created by some nearby trees.

I hope I've helped so you can get those great looking flowers. :)
 
Point is, you should be able to get a much better pic than those with that nice sensor in the EP-1. As long as you are in the correct distance range, you should be able to get tack sharp pic. Maybe it was windy? Or you were too shaky? But I would think the lens/camera is capable of much better.
Definitely a slight breeze but I don't think that had much effect. No tripod but my hands are pretty steady (even having th hold the camera away from my face).

I was basically shooting with the lens either fully open, or perhaps stopped down one stop in all but one of the shots, so DOF would be pretty limited - perhaps that is what everyone is "perceiving" as softness in the lens. Also, did not bump up the ISO to get higher shutter speeds (I believe even though it was on AUTO ISO , they are all taken at ISO 200.) I am sure that the camera could get "tack sharp" results, but that is not always my major concern (like it seems to be among others here). I was just trying to point out that this kit lens is NO WHERE as bad as some have reported.
I sure hope so! Now where is my darn 17mm/viewfinder kit?!
I have been waiting some-what patiently to get my grubby little hands on that lens also.
Steve
 
Have you tried the 40-150mm kit lens for the flowers?
Like this one?



Yes I realize that the 40-150 (especially with the EX25 added) is a better choice for flowers, but (1) I was only walking around with the one lens and (2) I was trying to show that this kit lens is no where as bad as has been written about it.
Thanks for commenting,
Steve
 
That's a good example, of something we would try to change. The flower is OK in this one, but the background is not complimentary. What I've done through the viewfinder, is focus on the flower, and then bend down or move around some, looking for a better background.

A recent example of a picture I posted here...I saw a dragonfly. It stayed still for me. When I first looked at it, the background was some rocks, dirt or parts of the reservoir...not that good. I then bent down enough, so that the sky was the new background. It turned out great, because the blue sky was a pretty contrast for the insect. With flowers it's the same; it's the whole picture that's important, finding that combination that just fits.

Have fun next time experimenting with this. It's climbing the hill that's fun, learning as you go. At the top of the hill...well...we're now looking for another hill. :)
 
Hi Steve,

I have a different slant on things here. Many are saying it is YOU that is causing your own problem! Then others are sending you some really lovely images from their camera's of flowers etc. NOT one here that I have seen has even hinted that your actual lens may NOT be up to snuff. Is any digital camera manufacturer PERFECT? The answer is NO. Am I a great photographer? NO! IMO you could actually have a defective lens. Saying that it is you or your lens issue would be a supposition on my part that certainly could be very wrong! Let alone most of us do not know what your actual photographic experience is and your skill level.

Honestly I have seen some nice images in here but I have not seen many GREAT images from many so-called experts in here. And I would be the first to admit mine are certainly not perfect or GREAT either. For me I feel some of my image are nice and adequate. Others in this forum will try to tear them to pieces. It bothers me not one iota.

On the other hand Steve maybe you do need to try a different lens for the flower shots or maybe even better weather conditions not knowing how things actually were when you were taking these captures. Could be winds for that matter.

I feel this is usually a hyper-critical crowd in this forum to be perfectly honest. Some are genuinely trying to help though. If I were YOU I would follow your own hunches and do what is best for you.

My opinion which I am sure will draw some flack but that is what I think.

Good Luck in whatever you decide,

Gary N W
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top