deep7

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a writer/photographer/ecologist
Has a website at deeppics.com
Joined on May 10, 2008
About me:

God makes it, I see it and photograph it. Sometimes that works well!

Comments

Total: 764, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Damián B: RIP shallow DOF, you will be missed

Well, this lens possibly doesn't have immaculate bokeh (it's not terrible though) but it does allow decent subject isolation, with a modicum of good techique. If you are looking for extremes, you aren't going to be looking at a wide-range zoom anyway, are you? Maybe the 35-100/2 if you insist on a compatible zoom, or you could go to a vastly heavier and more expensive set up from another manufacturer (but really, a fast/long prime is better for those special effects. We surely all know that?).

This is more a general purpose lens that simply offers more than most general purpose lenses. With all due respect, it's absolutely ridiculous to compare it to a one-trick-pony f1.2 lens on a 35mm format. Completely different purposes.

Anyway, you don't need a 35mm system to get that isolation with quality bokeh. Look at Robin Wong's samples with the Oly 25/1.2. It is truly excellent.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 10:05 UTC
In reply to:

Damián B: RIP shallow DOF, you will be missed

Isolation and good bokeh are not the same thing!

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 09:27 UTC
In reply to:

Damián B: RIP shallow DOF, you will be missed

I can't wait for the day when it stops being trendy to bleat about "shallow depth of field". For years and years we wanted to get decent depth of field without sacrificing shutter speed and film speed and now we can.

It's not like you can't get really nice subject isolation with this sort of gear. Proper photographers are really good at it (as opposed to band-wagon jumping armchair photographers).

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 09:15 UTC
In reply to:

ekaton: This one or the 12-35 & 35-100 f2.8 Pana duo is the question.

Or the Olympus 12-40 & 40-150 duo. Brilliant to have so much choice!

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 09:12 UTC
In reply to:

Everythingis1: I would love to see the comparison between something like this and the travel zooms like the RX10 III

RX10II would be a more direct comparison but yes, there is some merging of concept here for sure!

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 09:09 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Hully: The most expensive f/4 standard zoom currently available?

Err ... no, it really is f4. Says so right on the lens. Please don't stir.

And Jim Hully, what other f4 lens covers that range in that quality???? You may be right (?) but you'd also need two lenses to cover that range in most systems, as ozturert pointed out above.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 09:07 UTC

Well done for producing a gallery with such a decent range of scenarios, given a short time frame. With time, it would be nice to see some carefully taken portraits and out-of-town landscapes but I'm sure they are coming.

The lens looks pretty decent. Mostly quite sharp except odd situations (looks like your duck moved during the 1/250 exposure, for example) and decent enough background, despite the onion-ring bokeh in the first shot and some business elsewhere. Vastly better than the 12-50 though!

Thanks for being so quick with the samples.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2016 at 21:18 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

mb shaffer: I calculate a 12.5% improvement in resolution...not 25%. That is, resolution (detail) is a linear metric and is not based on megapixels (area). Shame on Olympus for converting this term from a common and standard metric of sampling into a marketing ploy...

No need to be nasty. It should have been obvious I used the "=" symbol to save some writing effort and I apologise if it wasn't.

If you knew my school record for mathematics you'd be pretty embarrassed by your childish statement, especially in light of your first post. Anyhow, I offered reasonable information to explain something you couldn't or didn't want to understand and you chose not to take it. Your choice and I wasted my time. I'll remember not to do that again if I see the moniker "thx1138".

mb shaffer: Read my earlier comment about the difference between measuring lens resolving power and providing the resolution of the sensor based on area. NO manufacturer gives the sensor resolution as a linear figure (long side, short side or diagonal). They ALL provide the total number of pixels used for image capture across the whole sensor. Therefore, when they compare sensor resolution that is the figure they use.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 11:00 UTC
In reply to:

Jylppy: Olympus tries to use "trademark inflation" against Canon's "Dual Pixel AF".... "Dual Fast AF"...

For goodness sake, "slow" is a speed thing!! You didn't mention depth of field which is a completely different thing.

m4/3 probably has more fast primes than any other system too. FAST, as in an aperture that allows a faster shutter speed. If you want to sidetrack that, I'll stifle a yawn and leave you to your Phase One/Hasselblad. I'm out of here.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 07:10 UTC
In reply to:

Boris F: I am very pleasured to use both OMD EM-5 and EM-5 MkII. I am sure EM-1 is great product, even more. Look: most of the market started to use 5 axis sensor IS, OMD style appearance, removing mirror VFs. All these pioneered by Olympus. Don't be fooled by all the trolls below, Oly cameras are a great products.
Congrats to a very creative Olympus team, keep breaking old stereotypes!
...just a bit wondered with 19 elements, 25 f1.2, may be I don't understand something, but, is 19 elements justified and not "overkill" solution?

My guess is they wanted to make a "showcase" lens to show how close to perfection they could get and there was no room at all for compromise. Other manufacturers have been doing similar things lately and I wonder if they even care if they make money on them? It's priceless to be able to show top quality images made with your gear. Nuts, yet enticing!

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 06:54 UTC
In reply to:

Jylppy: Olympus tries to use "trademark inflation" against Canon's "Dual Pixel AF".... "Dual Fast AF"...

Always your choice. Absolutely! However, there are two stunning Olympus f2 zooms you can use on an EM1, several f2.8 zooms and a handful of f2.8-3.5 and f2.8-4 zooms. Plenty of fast zooms. Of course, you can use them wide open much more easily than you can with larger formats.

Plus, I use a simple preset as a starting point in Lightroom which gives very clean and detailed images. Whatever presets they use on this site are appalling! The differences to APSC cameras of the same generation are absolutely negligible in real-world use and few of those systems can truly match the lens quality/price, even though many people will dispute that because they haven't properly used the best m4/3 glass.

That's all pretty irrelevant if you have loyalties elsewhere. The enthusiast camera world is slow to move from contemporary ideologies! If you do want super-clean files, try a Sony A7S and bypass everything else. But then you have way bigger problems getting near-perfect lenses...

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 06:48 UTC
In reply to:

mb shaffer: I calculate a 12.5% improvement in resolution...not 25%. That is, resolution (detail) is a linear metric and is not based on megapixels (area). Shame on Olympus for converting this term from a common and standard metric of sampling into a marketing ploy...

111.8x111.8=125% as much detail resolved (or 25% more, a wording the writers on this site struggle with..). You are confusing two different things. Resolving power of a lens is measured by its ability to differentiate pairs of lines (1 dimensions). Resolution of a sensor is directly related to number of points capturing detail (2 dimensions). Olympus are absolutely right and it's mischievous of you to suggest the truth is a marketing ploy (not helped by your poor maths, sorry!).

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 02:08 UTC
In reply to:

Jylppy: Olympus tries to use "trademark inflation" against Canon's "Dual Pixel AF".... "Dual Fast AF"...

"Dual Fast AF" is a three year old term. When did "Dual Pixel AF come out?

Further, you should try a new m4/3 camera and one of the better lenses. You'd see your negative comments are out of date by some way.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

mb shaffer: I calculate a 12.5% improvement in resolution...not 25%. That is, resolution (detail) is a linear metric and is not based on megapixels (area). Shame on Olympus for converting this term from a common and standard metric of sampling into a marketing ploy...

20/16=1.25. There are 25% more points of resolution, so it's an accurate statement. Don't forget, if you are resolving more line pairs in one direction, you can also resolve more in the other at the same time! In any case, I don't think your maths is right as you have to compare the square root of both figures to get the linear difference. It seems closer to 11.8%.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 21:14 UTC
In reply to:

blackcoffee17: Don't have much experience with micro 43 but can be this good enough for night landscapes with milky way?
I am thinking 30 sec exposures at 3200/6400 ISO. How is the noise on the Pen F in these situations?

I can't fully answer but I've used my EM1 with a 12/1.6 at 1600"ISO" and 25 seconds and the results were very nice. 3200? Might lose some fine detail - try a faster lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 21:08 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: Absolutely epic release. I'll be getting one in addition to my first-gen E-M1. New lenses aren't that interesting to the core Oly audience: too bulky. I don't mind the cost as long as the quality is there, but I do mind the bulk and weight very much, hence my choice of the system.

I used to shoot Canon with a 24-70/2.8 and, later, a 100-400. Solid built lenses designed to last and perform well are not light weight, nor small. By comparison, Oly "Pro" lenses are tiny. The advantage of a small format. My 12-40 always feels miniscule.

However, if you don't want lenses like that, no worry, Olympus (and others) will be happy to oblige.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 09:35 UTC
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: Read the title carefully.

"Olympus announces development of E-M1 Mark II ".

Keyword - "development". It could be next July before any camera is available for preview.

There seems to be so much division over which screen type is best that it might pay Olympus to offer two options. Seriously!

Personally, I've had both types and can't stand the extra articulating type. They drive me nuts. The one on my EM1 is fine though. As is no articulation at all....

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 07:45 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: Absolutely epic release. I'll be getting one in addition to my first-gen E-M1. New lenses aren't that interesting to the core Oly audience: too bulky. I don't mind the cost as long as the quality is there, but I do mind the bulk and weight very much, hence my choice of the system.

But but but but but.... the new lenses are tiny for what they are! I agree it's an epic release though.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 07:39 UTC
On article Miser's Macro: Olympus 30mm F3.5 Macro sample gallery (38 comments in total)

The results look remarkably like the Olympus 4/3 35/3.5 macro (an absolute bargain in the Olympus range but you really need an EM1 to use it with m4/3). That's actually quite a compliment!

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 01:30 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Cheezr: The company says dynamic range is improved, with noise performance improved by 1EV (though we're somewhat sceptical about this).

That comment is unworthy of you Richard. I have seen no snarky staff comments on any other Mfgrs announcement articles. Sad.

That statement annoyed me too. The Nikon D810 is touted as having excellent high dynamic range but that figure is only achieved at "ISO" 64. As Olympus seem to have moved their base down a bit, why shouldn't they have achieved something similar (and I know 64 isn't base, before anyone jumps)?

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 00:39 UTC
Total: 764, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »