User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 17 of 18
  1. #1
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,222
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Any OM-D users in the house?

    Thinking about getting into photography and am eyeing off the Olympus OM-D.

    Anyone had any luck shooting sports with it?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    201
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I heard the om-d is fairly noise free with higher isos, for a micro 4/3. My GF3 isn't usable beyond iso-800 so no point even trying badminton shots. And you wont be taken any good pics with the kit lens for sure.

    So in short you want a decent sensor for low light and decent auto focus which isn't really possible for micro 4/3 atm.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,222
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bazzaman View Post
    I heard the om-d is fairly noise free with higher isos, for a micro 4/3. My GF3 isn't usable beyond iso-800 so no point even trying badminton shots. And you wont be taken any good pics with the kit lens for sure.

    So in short you want a decent sensor for low light and decent auto focus which isn't really possible for micro 4/3 atm.
    The sensor isn't a problem. From everything I've seen and read, it really gives a similar priced SLR a run for it's money, and generally from reviews I don't think I'd come up wanting in picture quality. Even if I do lose out slightly I make up for in versatility anyway, so it's a compromise I can live with for now as I think about a full DSLR sometime in the future.

    In terms of low light performance, I thought that was more of a lens factor? I know recently my friend had his 7D with him at a party with an f0.95 lens and it could basically shoot in the dark. What you could capture with your eye he could capture with that lens, so he was saying that shooting in lower light needs a better lens. He didn't know anything about M43 though, and I don't play badminton in the dark so I wasn't too worried

    Auto focus.....I hear mixed messages about the OM-D. It's auto focus seems ridiculously fast, but I don't understand how the two different focussing systems on cameras work, and why I couldn't make the OM-D's work for me. I know it can only manage 3fps with each frame individually focussed, and 8 frames using the focal point of the first frame, but aside form that I don't understand what the deal is.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    201
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Low light performance is mostly limited by the sensor with micro 4/3 < APS-C < full frame. Best ask the pros on this board what ISOs they use. If they say 3200 then they're using full frame and you'll have no chance with the smaller sensors to get similar shots. Unless you are standing in their faces when you take the shots.

    I wouldn't gamble on a micro 4/3 taking decent indoor actions shots. In the right hands, maybe but far from optimal.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,222
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's a comparo regarding the OM-D at higher ISO's. While it's not as good as a full framer, it certainly punches above it's weight, and that's something I'm constantly reading online.

    http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/05/31/crazy-comparison-the-olympus-om-d-e-m5-vs-nikon-d800-for-high-iso/

    I agree it's not the best choice, but if you could only have one camera, it seems like a good choice. Although I can get a 650D with a reasonable lens for a similar price, so that's the real issue that I have I guess.
    Last edited by Maklike Tier; 11-21-2012 at 03:46 AM.

  6. #6
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,989
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    badminton indoor photos?

    ISO3200 if not ISO6400 is not uncommon in local gyms.

    in well lit competition halls (like China Open, HK Open), then maybe ISO1600->ISO3200.

  7. #7
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,713
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's not the ISO performance you should be worrying about.

    It's the AF performance at low light that is important and which is never mentioned. Fast focus is all very well out in the daylight but indoors, with low light and lower contrast, is rarely commented upon. I would rate this feature above the ISO performance. An out of focus shot with low grain (with high ISO) is useless. Whereas an in focus shot with high grain can be used.

    HK Open this year is ISO 2000. The centre courts have brighter lighting; end courts are slightly dimmer. The old venue was dimmer by 1 stop. Looking back, I don't know how I managed to get the shots at ISO1600 and 1/320th of a second at the old venue.
    Last edited by Cheung; 11-24-2012 at 08:01 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,222
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, the contrast detection in good light seems to be good, but struggles in less than perfect conditions. I'm looking at the new Sony Nex6 now because it has a hybrid AF system with both contrast and phase detection.

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,713
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    What I would say is anything less than DSLR is inadequate but it depends on your requirements. You hope the smaller systems can take badminton photos but you need to define what is acceptable for you. I.e. the compromise in quality. Don't be fooled by the marketing hype of the camera adverts. Badminton photos are very demanding of the equipment - fast moving subjects, low light conditions.

    I have found it better to stratify equipment to the functions. Have a small, light camera for casual use and a separate system for events. I'd rather have a small, light camera that can do all but it doesn't exist.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,222
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheung View Post
    What I would say is anything less than DSLR is inadequate but it depends on your requirements. You hope the smaller systems can take badminton photos but you need to define what is acceptable for you. I.e. the compromise in quality. Don't be fooled by the marketing hype of the camera adverts. Badminton photos are very demanding of the equipment - fast moving subjects, low light conditions.
    I haven't read any marketing - only the online review sites. I know sport is the most demanding thing you can photograph, but I'm on a budget and love a challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheung View Post
    I have found it better to stratify equipment to the functions. Have a small, light camera for casual use and a separate system for events. I'd rather have a small, light camera that can do all but it doesn't exist.
    Well, don't get me wrong, if I had 10 grand I'd have probably three cameras and pick whatever body/lens combo was best suited for the job - an upper middle range DSLR with a 200mm lens for sport, an OMD for travel, and maybe an E-PM3 for pulling out at parties and events for informal shooting....but I don't have 10 grand.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    201
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Canon EOS 6D is supposed to be a good low light performer. Downside is only 11 auto focus points and no joystick like the 5D mk iii. Need some reviews to roll out first

  12. #12
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,222
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's megabucks mate, well out of my price range. Models I'm looking at are the Nikon D300, Canon 550D, and Pentax K-5 and K-30. I'd love a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX HSM to stick on any of those, but I'm dreaming, really.

  13. #13
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,713
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklike Tier View Post
    I haven't read any marketing - only the online review sites. I know sport is the most demanding thing you can photograph, but I'm on a budget and love a challenge
    as I mentioned, it goes back to what you think is acceptable quality.

    OM-D is pretty expensive as well for something that isn't going to get you good baddy photos. but if your primary aim is for general photo taking and travel photos first, then it is fine.

  14. #14
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,713
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklike Tier View Post
    That's megabucks mate, well out of my price range. Models I'm looking at are the Nikon D300, Canon 550D, and Pentax K-5 and K-30. I'd love a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX HSM to stick on any of those, but I'm dreaming, really.
    Badminton on a budget I would say a second hand Canon 40D/50D and a 85/1.8 USM. I don't know what the Nikon equivalent is.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheung View Post
    It's not the ISO performance you should be worrying about.

    It's the AF performance at low light that is important and which is never mentioned. Fast focus is all very well out in the daylight but indoors, with low light and lower contrast, is rarely commented upon. I would rate this feature above the ISO performance. An out of focus shot with low grain (with high ISO) is useless. Whereas an in focus shot with high grain can be used.
    Totally agree with this, especially when shooting with a wide open aperture for the shallow depth-of-field blurred backgroung effect! It is a tough balancing act between auto focus tracking, depth of field, amount of motion freeze, and noise! I think this is why I love doing this, the tougher the challenge, the more the satisfaction when some of the shots turn out good!
    Last edited by jyeung; 12-02-2012 at 01:08 AM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,222
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheung View Post
    Badminton on a budget I would say a second hand Canon 40D/50D and a 85/1.8 USM. I don't know what the Nikon equivalent is.
    I'd rather get a 60D or a 550D. Whats the deal with that lens? 85mm prime?

    I think the 70-200 f2.8 USM would be the ultimate, yeah?
    Last edited by Maklike Tier; 12-02-2012 at 02:01 AM.

  17. #17
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,713
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quite by coincidence, I had a conversation with a badminton person today talking about OM-D.

    As well as the above points, I explained for badminton, the size (i.e. area) of the AF focus point is important. Entry level DLSRs have a larger area for the focus point. When using a 350D, there were so many times when I got the focus point on the player, but on the computer, the subject was out of focus and on a higher contrast point (such as the top of the net or the Yonex board behind). The focus point area is actuallyarter than that shown in the camera viewfinder. That's why I don't advise entry level DSLR for badminton.
    Last edited by Cheung; 12-02-2012 at 08:45 AM.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •