When I said I used the Kiron 70-150/4 on the E-M5 for the first time
yesterday it was shot in the house at a box inside a closet at f/4 and
ISO 6400. The shot looks pretty good after passing through Camera Raw's
noise reduction... better than ISO 3200 on the Canon 5D. What I've
discovered is that I rarely need shallow depth of field these days. In
fact, quite the opposite when shooting very near or very far. If I
really need shallow depth of field I'll go grab the 5D. It has such
little value now that it doesn't make any sense to part with it.
I'm not one who underestimates the m.Zuiko 14-150. It's my standard
walk-around lens. In all my years of shooting film or even digital on
my Canon 5D I've never regularly carried a lens of more than 200mm
because of size and weight. It's wonderful to have 28-300 equivalent in
a single, very small and lightweight lens. That said, I do love my
12-50 and it's "macro" capability.
Chuck Norcutt
On 9/5/2014 8:40 PM, Moose wrote:
I think you may be over estimating the importance of lens speed with
these cameras. F2.8 constant aperture just isn't necessary for the use
you propose. The high ISO performance of more recent µ4/3 bodies is
amazing, if you haven't used such beasties. Fast is only for getting
shallower DOF or existing darkness.
The E-M10 does look like a good
inexpensive travel camera. Depending on how you pack and carry, the
under appreciated 14-150 is a good one lens solution. 14-42 and 40-150
is a good, inexpensive combo. I prefer the 12-50 to the 14-42, as I
don't have to extend it, it goes wider and includes good macro without
carrying an additional lens/tube.
Travelin' Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|