Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Hi, Re + E-1 obsession

Subject: [OM] Re: Hi, Re + E-1 obsession
From: Skip Williams <om2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:55:36 -0400
An f/2.0 lens produces the same depth of field, regardless of the sensor or 
film size,

If you mount a 90/2 Zuiko Macro on an E-1, it functions at the equivilant 
magnification of a 180mm lens, but still retains all the depth-of-field, 
perspective, and working distance characteristics of a 90mm lens.  

You could get the same result by cropping a 4/3-sized rectangle out of a piece 
of 35mm film.

Oh, and the 14-54 is very nice.  It's not as good as the other two lenses 
though.  Just be aware that the 11-22 isn't very long.  I've got the three 
zooms, which are all very good, with the 11-22 and 50-200 a notch above their 
brother.

Skip


----- Original Message ---------------

Subject: [OM] Hi, Re + E-1 obsession
   From: Peter Leyssens <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
   Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 21:55:31 +0200
     To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx

>
>
>Hi & Re,
>
>I'm Peter Leyssens, I've resubscribed myself for the upteenth time to 
>this warm list of congeniality and wretched peer pressure that has 
>already cost me a fortune.  I see Jez&Iwert are still around, I remember 
>our Oly nice day out in Tongeren, maybe we should do this sort of OM 
>meet again, it was fun.
>
>I'm in this phase in my life where I don't make too many photographs, 
>and obviously, more hardware is the solution.  I mean, even a retired 
>photographer friend of mine has switched to digital !  He frequented a 
>local pub for 2 years to nag about the state of affairs in photography 
>until a friend told him he should switch to digital, because he already 
>has the experience and he is lightyears ahead of all teenies who dance 
>akwardly on the tips of their toes while squinting to make sense of the 
>LCD that shows more reflections of what's behind them than the snapshot 
>horror they're trying to admire.  So he switched, and he's not looking 
>back.  I can't stay behind !  Aside from sheer lens envy and recurring 
>Zuikoholism, being a computer techie since the age of 12, I'm looking 
>forward to taking photos I can show to the world right away.
>
>Here's my master plan:
>
>1) Get myself a E-1 + 14-54 kit.  I don't care for the 14-54 lens, as 
>I'm not a fan of standard lenses.  Additionally, I didn't like the bokeh 
>I've seen in pictures online.  But AFAIK only this kit is eligible for 
>50% educational discount in Europe.  Anybody has experience with this ? 
>  I'd buy the camera in the Netherlands, while I'm in Belgium.  Any 
>problem with that ?
>
>2) 11-22, say no more.  Maybe a 50-200 in the long term.
>
>3) OM adapter.  I'm hoping the dealer will throw in one he gets free 
>with the educational discount :)  I have a RealZuik(tm) 28/2.8, 50/1.4, 
>90/2.0, 75-150/4 and 200/4 that would look nice in front of the new 
>body.  My B-300 1.7x teleconverter would turn that 200/4 into a 680/4+, 
>which sounds sufficiently outrageous to brag about :)  I read John 
>Foster's overview of the OM adapter on the E-1 body, and it would seem 
>that most of these lenses would be okay.  But I have a question.  Is 
>diaphragm automatic, or does it need to be click-stopped before 
>exposure, or does the DOF preview need to be pressed while taking the 
>picture ?  How does this work ?  Any other weird things in use ? 
>(except for the overexposure when wide open, I read about that)
>
>Then another question.  It's all very nice to have a 50mm/2.0 digital 
>macro, or a 90/2 RealZuik(tm), which are then 50mm resp. 180mm 
>equivalents with an effective light input of f2.0.  But the DOF 
>increases by 2 stops, giving an effective DOF equivalent of an f4.0 on 
>OM bodies.  I mean, there's no way to get the nose tip of the nice lady 
>at 
>http://www.millennics.com/olympus/tope/tope_show_entry.php?event=5&pic=2 
>out of focus with f4.0 !  Imagine the horror !
>
>How do others feel about this ?  I haven't seen it mentioned in the 
>archives.  But then I only skimmed through April and May, which already 
>took me several hours :)  I don't remember where I read about this 
>first, but I have a DOF calculation spreadsheet that confirms my 
>findings.  It's of course nice for certain photographs to have wide DOF 
>while still getting lots of light in, but sometimes I just want that 
>micrometer DOF.
>
>Do most of you use PhotoShop ?  Any PaintShop Pro users ?  I've been 
>experimenting with a scan to turn it into B&W using color curves or 
>Carr's method, with varying results, but then I'm fairly n00b at that.
>
>
>
>Peter.
>
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz