More questions about the OMD and M43.

Keith,

There is no advantage except the OMD is quieter and lighter. Have your clients complained about the noise? Is the D700 becoming too much to haul around for a gig. I found the 70-200/2.8 to be too much to lug around for events. With primes I don't have a problem. But I would rather carry the X100 or XP1 around instead!

DOF wide open would be similar to the D700 with a f2 lens. Do you shoot at f2?

You loose about 1 1/2 stops of shutter speed (your estimate) or signal to noise ratio. I'm not sure about dynamic range... so let's assume the OMD has the same as the D700. How important are the shadow areas for your gig?

The stabilization could work to your advantage though. I believe your subjects do move a bit. What is the minimum shutterspeed required by your subjects?

Is manual focus faster and more efficient than the D700? I ask because I don't remember you discussing using MF on the D700, so why would you use it on the OMD?

The D700, in my experience, has very little sesnor-induced purple fringing or other artifacts when you blow out highlights. However if this is an issue, it's not hard to fix it in post. Interior photographers do this all the time.
 
I have shot both the D700 and OM-D in the same situation...see my restaurant thread in this subforum for more on that. The D700 was the king of low light semi-action/candid photography...the AF was really amazing to boot. But it hurt my arm! I had an achy shoulder for several days after a several-hour shoot. The noise was not such an issue...restaurants are pretty chaotic, but there was no subtlety to the camera either. In general I loved that camera, but sold it to get something smaller that didn't hurt!

It was a longish road to the OM-D from there but that camera is the first one that I think fits the bill--my first shoot was very promising. AF is not D700 uncanny, but it's acceptable, at least as good if not better than my Sony DSLRs. High ISO is fine, not amazing but not terribly far behind the Sony 16mp sensor that's been wowing people since the A580, K5 and D7000. Close enough that I wouldn't trade the camera's other attributes for the slight improvement--and get the weight, size, noise (sound). (By the way the Pentax are non-starters for me because the AF system has issues with different color temps and is creaky slow in low light--worst of the bunch in that respect, and too bad. Nice little primes and pretty small for what it is.)

I can't say for sure the Om-d would work for you, Keith, but I think there's some very good reasons to believe it will. Anyway it's a comparison I'd love to read about!

Wish I had experience with the .95 lenses...I keep looking at them thinking, yeah, that's what I need, one superfastbokehmonster...
 
willie_901 said:
Keith,

There is no advantage except the OMD is quieter and lighter. Have your clients complained about the noise? Is the D700 becoming too much to haul around for a gig. I found the 70-200/2.8 to be too much to lug around for events. With primes I don't have a problem. But I would rather carry the X100 or XP1 around instead!

DOF wide open would be similar to the D700 with a f2 lens. Do you shoot at f2?

You loose about 1 1/2 stops of shutter speed (your estimate) or signal to noise ratio. I'm not sure about dynamic range... so let's assume the OMD has the same as the D700. How important are the shadow areas for your gig?


The stabilization could work to your advantage though. I believe your subjects do move a bit. What is the minimum shutterspeed required by your subjects?

Is manual focus faster and more efficient than the D700? I ask because I don't remember you discussing using MF on the D700, so why would you use it on the OMD?

The D700, in my experience, has very little sesnor-induced purple fringing or other artifacts when you blow out highlights. However if this is an issue, it's not hard to fix it in post. Interior photographers do this all the time.
Click to expand...


Thanks Willie ... informative post.

I do use manual focus on the D700 and shoot almost exclusively with a 35mm ZF Zeiss prime. I realised that as good as the AF is on the Nikon it was still very hit and miss in a dark gallery.

As for shutter speed and motion blur of subjects etc I'm lucky that I have license to provide images that allow this provided the art work is defined ... the patrons are not so important in the scheme of things.
 
I heard back from Scott at Mainline today ... the 17.5s are about four weeks away and I will need to pre-order now to secure one.

I was thinking about the price of this lens and it made me flinch somewhat I have to say! This must be a micro four thirds thing though and the mind set of lens shopping for a smaller sensored camera because paying a similar amount for a 35mm prime for my Nikon seemed like just another day of consumerism ... big deal!

The test I read on the lens in the link someone posted ^ (thanks Jim) was interesting ... a bit soft towards the edges wide open and considerably sharper at f2 ... sounds like my Canon 50mm f1.2 RF lens ... and I love that!
 
Keith said:
I heard back from Scott at Mainline today ... the 17.5s are about four weeks away and I will need to pre-order now to secure one.

I was thinking about the price of this lens and it made me flinch somewhat I have to say! This must be a micro four thirds thing though and the mind set of lens shopping for a smaller sensored camera because paying a similar amount for a 35mm prime for my Nikon seemed like just another day of consumerism ... big deal!

The test I read on the lens in the link someone posted ^ was interesting ... a bit soft towards the edges wide open and considerably sharper at f2 ... sounds like my Canon 50mm f1.2 RF lens ... and I love that!
Click to expand...

...dont forget, you get a free B&W filter as well :)
 
kbg32 said:
Keith, that 17.5 is huge!
Click to expand...


Yes ... it's the same size as the M mount 35mm f1.2 Nokton! :eek:

Like I said it's a not a lens you'd carry around for general 35mm field of view shooting but if you want f0.95 there are compromises ... and you have to make the decision based on what you really want from a lens in a specialised environment.

I am a super lowlight shooting junkie so it will be interesting to see what can be done with f0.95 and a camera that's happy at ISO 3200!

And a Noctilux is ten grand+ for the same speed and you can only use it on a digital camera that has pretty average high ISO performance. (how about that for justification?) :p
 
I always wanted a Noctilux, but I have my son's college education to look forward to......in 15 years!
 
Keith said:
And a Noctilux is ten grand+ for the same speed and you can only use it on a digital camera that has pretty average high ISO performance. (how about that for justification?) :p
Click to expand...

you're dangerous, keith, you almost have me buying it! :eek::D

if i can, i'm going to wait to see what oly/panny come up with to replace the 17/2.8, i have enough manual focus lenses that i'm incompetent with, lol.
 
I just placed my order for the 17.5mm F0.95! :eek:

The good news is it appears to be $150.00 cheaper in Oz than anywhere else! :)

Someone currently has one for sale on eBay for around $2500.00 or best offer ... ? :rolleyes:
 
kbg32 said:
I always wanted a Noctilux, but I have my son's college education to look forward to......in 15 years!
Click to expand...

Keith,

Our children's college tuition in 15 years will make the price of a Noctilux looks like a drop of water in a lake.
:bang:
 
Or maybe buy the Noctilx now assuming that in fifteen years you can sell it on eBay to cover the cost of the college education. Judging by what happened to the original F1 Noct you may have change!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom