photohounds

photohounds

Lives in Australia ACT, Australia
Works as a z/OS IT, freelance
Joined on Jun 28, 2009
About me:

Was gifted a second hand Minolta rangefinder at 11yo. No manual, no Google, no money. I learned DOF, shutter speed, motion, flare, sharpness and film speeds at a time when you had to WAIT a week for your photos. Colour was too expensive!
.
Since then, I've always had trouble putting a camera down especially a FULL frame Mamiya RB-67 outfit :)
.
Semi-pro since the '80s. 6x7 and 35mm then, Micro four thirds now: A good compromise.
Pro results without bulk and weight to lug around.
.
Years ago, I recovered from "Equivalence Phobia" that so many suffer from, and find that people react better to a smaller setup and love the results.
.
Customers want results, not "format psychobabble".
.
Enjoy photography - not silly format arguments!

Comments

Total: 363, showing: 341 – 360
« First‹ Previous16171819Next ›Last »
In reply to:

berni29: Hi

On my E-M5 I have had the banding once with the 20mm at iso 6400. I have not seen it at iso 3200 and I do shoot a fair bit at that sensitivity.

These are complex electronic devices, not the simple mechanical ones of old. The occasional glitch is hardly surprising.

Berni

and WHO else makes their IBIS work with other lenses - AT ALL????

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2012 at 13:55 UTC
In reply to:

fooddudeone: Banding? 20mm? ONE lens??? Who cares!!!!

Let's try the hundreds, thousands, of old & new, vintage & modern, adapted non-native MF lenses that don't have IBIS in Video-Mode!

Hmmm.... ONE Pana 20mm???

...Or, the myriad of lenses by Leica, Canon, Nikon, Voigtlander, Zeiss, Contax, Olympus Legacy, SLR and RF lenses, M39, M49, LTM, old Russian primes like the Helios, Yaschica, Minolta, and the list goes on and on............

Spot on - a troll's storm in a teacup ..

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2012 at 13:54 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: What a strange problem to be lens specific!

The "banding" I've seen in postings is really pretty straightforward-looking single-pixel lines with consistently wrong color -- easy to recognize and fix. Actually, much easier to fix than the Fuji X10 "white orbs" problem that my free DeOrbIt tool fixed... but I didn't get all that positive a response to doing that work for the community, so I'm not rushing to put a post-processing fix up for this technically less challenging (and less publishable as research) defect.

Olympus should be able to fix this pretty easily as a post-processing step when the 20mm Panasonic lens is detected, but I'd guess they're trying to fix it at the cause, and that's probably some lens-induced electrical glitch disturbing sensor readout. Really impressive that Olympus cares at all about a problem that happens only with another company's lens.... :)

Yes, can you imagine CaNikSon caring ONE iota about a Tokina lens' performance on their bodies?

Their answer will be "get a CaNikSon lens, sonny".

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2012 at 13:49 UTC
In reply to:

makeitworst: The days of responsible engineering at Olympus that produced wonderful top of the industry film cameras in the OM series is long over. I still cherish my early 70's OM-1 and OM-1MD, and my other OM-1N and OM-2N.

But since entering the Digital market, Olympus has repeatedly stumbled, often big time, with cameras that were seriously flawed by Engineering. I had (have but it's dead) an Oly E-10 DSLR, which for the time was a wonderful camera even though it had a fixed lens, because that lens was tremendously versatile and accurate. BUT it had a flawed Battery Circuit board designed that failed every two years like clock-work (Oly paid to fix it once, I paid the second time), then the AF circuit kicked the bucket at age 5. That's BS, even a DSLR should last as long as a Film SLR. ONLY recent Oly I loved is the C-7000. Spot on colors, a range-finder, great video recording, fast lens and it still works .. so far.

Sorry Oly, no buyer here till you get your Engineering chit together.

Better TRY an EM-5. I think you'll find Oly has its Mojo again.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2012 at 13:46 UTC
On article Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Preview (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

photohounds: I read the nonsense about 85mm being 'perfect' below
I always used a 100 or 135 in the 35mm days to produce quality, saleable work.

So I just had to have a play with a zoom, set to 75mm.

One metre for face shots, and about 2 metres for a waist up.

Wide open to f2,5 it looks like there will be sufficient DOF to make a saleable portrait, with nice OOF bokeh.

Those 85mm/f1,2 face shots with the disappearing ears and only one eyelash in focus? Good luck selling them to your customers - most of mine prefer NOT to look idiotic.

If bragging to me that you can have less DOF than me is important to you, or you have some real need for that wafer thin DOF so be it.

Gear should be about balance and photographically this lens focal length looks about right. Brightening up a dark image or a stopped down preview? Even Exposure compensation can be seen. Priceless!

I'll bet the E-7 will have an EVF too.

No problem with a 1.2 lens but a face portrait taken with such a lens is rarely liked by the subject.

This type of lens, wide open (or nearly so) will work well with what looks like very smooth bokeh, in spite of the negative comments posted about it by people who have never tried it and will never try it.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 08:01 UTC
On article Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Preview (216 comments in total)

I read the nonsense about 85mm being 'perfect' below
I always used a 100 or 135 in the 35mm days to produce quality, saleable work.

So I just had to have a play with a zoom, set to 75mm.

One metre for face shots, and about 2 metres for a waist up.

Wide open to f2,5 it looks like there will be sufficient DOF to make a saleable portrait, with nice OOF bokeh.

Those 85mm/f1,2 face shots with the disappearing ears and only one eyelash in focus? Good luck selling them to your customers - most of mine prefer NOT to look idiotic.

If bragging to me that you can have less DOF than me is important to you, or you have some real need for that wafer thin DOF so be it.

Gear should be about balance and photographically this lens focal length looks about right. Brightening up a dark image or a stopped down preview? Even Exposure compensation can be seen. Priceless!

I'll bet the E-7 will have an EVF too.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 04:53 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies
On article Just Posted: Olympus OM-D E-M5 review (572 comments in total)

Works brilliantly ... Grip is fantastic - adds just the right weight, 'holdability' and tripod mech clearance, even for pano heads.

Tried a couple of OM lenses - 50 and 135 - IS works perfectly.

I also want to try the $25 focus confirm adapters ....

The EVF is just great. See what you are shooting in VERY dim light, IS is excellent - one you learn that the fan-sound is OK. 100% coverage too.

I got the 2 dinky lenses as walk-arounds. The wider one is better than it has any right to be for the price.

My 50/2 is still a cantankerous focusser (surprise).
However, grab the focus dial and it instantly magnifies for EXTREMELY quick and easy manual focus.

This is a picture-making tool par excellance.

If it doesn't pay for itself faster than any previous camera, I'll eat my hat.

Scared? http://blog.giuliosciorio.com/?p=550

Link | Posted on May 27, 2012 at 05:05 UTC as 7th comment
On article Just Posted: Olympus OM-D E-M5 review (572 comments in total)
In reply to:

Spectacle99: Another great review, and all kinds of great responses here. I still have two questions, though. First one in this post, second to follow:

1) Buffer size/continuous performance: how precisely does the camera perform in continuous shooting mode? I understand the details about max 9 fps, and only up to 4 fps for continuous autofocus. But HOW MANY shots can you take in these modes before the camera slows down? And this is crucial: does it just SLOW DOWN, or does it STOP altogether and then you have to wait for all of the photos to save on the card before you can resume shooting?

Get a 95 MB/x card like a Sandisk extreme pro. Problem solved (for me) :-)

Link | Posted on May 23, 2012 at 15:01 UTC
On article Just Posted: Olympus OM-D E-M5 review (572 comments in total)
In reply to:

Spectacle99: My second question:

2) Bokeh and shallow depth of field: I am considering getting this camera instead of an enthusiast DSLR, given its small size. But the one thing that concerns me is the sensor size here. I've seen all of the details and examples above, and it is clear that the OM-D does just as well as or better than its mirrorless and APS-C rivals all the way up through high ISOs. But what about depth of field? Amongst many other things, I want to be able to shoot nice flower and insect macros with a very shallow DOF, and a smooth, creamy bokeh background. Same thing, but less extreme, with portraits. How possible is this with this camera? And do you have any lens suggestions?

This lens DOES AF on the EM-5 (well mine does), but hunts a bit. For macro MF and move the cam is the common way of operating. Bokeh is creamy smooth ...

Link | Posted on May 23, 2012 at 14:59 UTC
In reply to:

rjajr: Just downloaded and tried it for about two minutes... I'll be sticking with Lightroom.

Two minutes - MORE than enough to evaluate a piece of software. The image processing speed will save you a thousand times that over a year if you are more than a dabbler.

Used it on Win/Lin and sometimes mac since long before adobe even had a workflow tool. Bibble's maturity shows in the hands of someone with a little skill, but some might have to spend ANOTHER two minutes reading the manual ....

I hope Corel don't bollox up a good thing.

I use an E3 among other things - no moire here - are you sure it isn't a video card artifact? I can see it non full size screen images sometimes - but NEVER in full size or in file output - or in any print.

a moire "issue" is Non sequitur - check your video drivers or card and the output.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2012 at 01:21 UTC
On article First impressions shooting with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

harley13: Lens shade not, camera retro hmmm...otherwise cool

You can buy a lens hood for $5 ..

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2012 at 04:04 UTC
On article First impressions shooting with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (264 comments in total)

I used OMs for weddings for decades. Often (where flash was off) the people were not even aware I had shot ANY photos - even in a church!

They were used to the loud "click-clack" from the other 'big 4' makers products. That velvety smoothness also made better hand-held shots in low light due to less camera shake.

Other photogs at the, time used to argue that a quieter and smoother shutter made no difference. They were just defending 'their' brand against the available evidence.

40 years later, nothing's changed. I loved the quietness of the E-1 and it is still in the family.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2012 at 20:40 UTC as 14th comment

The EP-1 (et al.) are not dissimilar in size/weight to an OM-1.

Interesting to see what mechanicals they can cram into the available space ... loved my OM cameras ... 1,2,4,2000,10,20,30 and 40 at various times. Some were known as OM-F and OM-G etc in US.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2012 at 09:05 UTC as 25th comment
In reply to:

munchmeister: Call me when they put this into a Photoshop filter. Other than that, it seems pure gimmickry. Go ahead, try it out on their site. Once you've "refocused" then what? Flip on through to the next one and the next? It would get old in a big hurry and offer nothing that photographers want. Kinda like the gazillion iPhone photo apps that offer the funky effects but not much more. This is even more gimmicky. I don't see Apple falling for this either.

See focus stacking software :)

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2012 at 02:15 UTC

Yikes!

. Another company to rip off blind?

. Mash the process/software to alter any STANDARD enough to make it LOOK proprietary, even though invented elsewhere - neatly making it unavailable to anyone not 'in the fold'?

. Imply 'invention' of it to user-fans - like:
SCSI, DVI, Thunderbolt, Touch Screens

. Patent some trivial aspect of its operation and use that non-patent to try to enforce something far more wide-ranging?

Etc. Etc. etc.

Can't think of a worse company to get in bed with unless a little short term cash is the objective. Well maybe one :)

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2012 at 02:14 UTC as 27th comment | 2 replies

Following Fuji's lead?
http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/slrs/oly_ep1 - 2009

Even the newer models look retro to my eye.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2012 at 01:52 UTC as 33rd comment
In reply to:

PicOne: "Meanwhile, Japanese financial newspaper Nekkei is reporting that Sony is considering investing in Olympus and forming a business alliance. Fujifilm which, like Olympus, has extensive medical interests is also rumored to be interested."

Translation: business alliance = bail out and get the brand name for a steal.

Olympus is not GM or Ford.

NO bailout needed as they are not hopelessly in debt.

Olympus already has a bix alliances with many, incl Panasonic.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2012 at 06:56 UTC
In reply to:

Detail Man: Photog23 wrote:

"But this fraud was great marketing. When I go out to the web and look for the "correction," to their fraudulent presentation, I get very few links." ...

I guess that "money talks", thus enabling "bullcrap to walk" ?

... "But I get raftloads of links to pages about the wonders of Adobe's new deblur technology. The Adobe marketeers work is done."

Indeed. If you can only manage to hook "some of the people all of the time", that is (monetarily) more than enough to live off the "fat of the land" (so to speak). The triumph of "form" over actual function ...

Annual re-licensing of Photoshop will constitute the final enslavement of the soul to "The Monolith". "The first time is free" - but the withdrawal symptoms can be deadly. You *know* that you need it to be real ...

Rogue gangs of moribund and toothless zombies will soon stalk the earth in legions, "fencing" municipal infra-structure common metals to smelting plants - all just for that next Adobe "fix" ... ;-)

People who don't research will be disappointed - too bad for them.

Still ... they cam always start a class action if they choose to.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2011 at 10:39 UTC
In reply to:

ccr294: If Adobe had the integrity that I thought they had (yes I'm naive) they would have done what a previous poster indicated - took one clear image & one blurred image of the same subject. Then posted the images with indisputable documentation.

I do feel deceived and it will be a long time before I forget.

If this process really works, Adobe has a chance to redeem themselves if they feel it warranted and take a "do-over" (pun intended)

And as the poster commenting on the 'slow computer' - really! that was some weak-assed crap.

Indeed, Joseph.

People forget only too quickly - the "next big thing" covers all past transgressions it seems.

I use Bibble (purchased) for workflow and GIMP for the more detailed work.

Bonus: they run on multiple platforms so I'm not tied ....

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2011 at 10:31 UTC
In reply to:

Detail Man: Photog23 wrote:

"But this fraud was great marketing. When I go out to the web and look for the "correction," to their fraudulent presentation, I get very few links." ...

I guess that "money talks", thus enabling "bullcrap to walk" ?

... "But I get raftloads of links to pages about the wonders of Adobe's new deblur technology. The Adobe marketeers work is done."

Indeed. If you can only manage to hook "some of the people all of the time", that is (monetarily) more than enough to live off the "fat of the land" (so to speak). The triumph of "form" over actual function ...

Annual re-licensing of Photoshop will constitute the final enslavement of the soul to "The Monolith". "The first time is free" - but the withdrawal symptoms can be deadly. You *know* that you need it to be real ...

Rogue gangs of moribund and toothless zombies will soon stalk the earth in legions, "fencing" municipal infra-structure common metals to smelting plants - all just for that next Adobe "fix" ... ;-)

A bit like the Japanese marketing assault on Chromium Dioxide tape in the 1970's.

Patented by BASF, (i think) the Japanese electronics giants didn't want to pay royalties ...

BS - but it planted the seeds of excessive head wear when the REVERSE was actually true.

I read in some IBM publication in the late 1980s, that they used Chrome tape in their mainframe backup drives - BECAUSE of low head wear.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2011 at 08:15 UTC
Total: 363, showing: 341 – 360
« First‹ Previous16171819Next ›Last »