Anyone into Photography?

[nobbie48]

What bike are you looking at picking up?

There’s a switch. A camera thread going to motorcycles.

FWIW I got my first decent 35 mm SLR when everyone else was doing Kodak. I got to talk to a lot of interesting people at events by taking pics of their toys.

Now decent cameras aren’t rare but people usually like a bit of attention and emailing a picture is free

I was in Fergus and saw a guy from New York on a Vincent. It resulted in a Vincent conversation. He had a lot more than one.

I’m far from a pro but the picture I sent him was a lot better than a selfie

 

[Rob MacLennan]

There’s a switch. A camera thread going to motorcycles.

FWIW I got my first decent 35 mm SLR when everyone else was doing Kodak. I got to talk to a lot of interesting people at events by taking pics of their toys.

Now decent cameras aren’t rare but people usually like a bit of attention and emailing a picture is free

I was in Fergus and saw a guy from New York on a Vincent. It resulted in a Vincent conversation. He had a lot more than one.

I’m far from a pro but the picture I sent him was a lot better than a selfie

The pic that I took of the person on the paddle board, during the eclipse, is being passed around by a friend in the Seattle area. I spoke to her and showed her the pic on the camera, when she came in, but forgot to give my contact info. Hoping that she and her friends get to see the result.

 

[MacDoc]

came across this black cockatoo shot and loved the quirky look I was getting. Photo Lemur really brought out the plumage and eyes.

original

 

[MacDoc]

Found this and put it through PhotoLemur and a bit of sharpening.
Like the way it shows that massive weapon it walks on.

 

[jc100]

It’s been a while since I upgraded my camera (8 year old camera) and tech has come a long way so….

Olympus changed over to new ownership recently (OM systems) and people were worried they would not function like the old Olympus photography division. They brought out a new camera several years back, the OM-1, at a pretty high price but it was their flagship camera. It was way too expensive for me at the time but they just brought out version II with some small improvements. However, this means the OM1 (version 1) got a discount so I got one.

Improvements over my old camera:

Much improved autofocus. AI focus on moving objects such as birds/autos/pets/animals etc. Better behaviour in low light (cropped sensor Achilles heel).
Super fast burst rate and a pro capture setting so collect and buffer shots on shutter half press and then afterwards to ensure you don’t miss a shot.
Hand held 50MP high res shots. Tripod 80MP shots. Effectively means you can crop away to your hearts content without a big loss in quality.
Super big ISO numbers possible. Many useable ones.
Improved stabilization. 5-7 stops or something silly. Lots of shots that would normally require a tripod can be hand held.
Improved digital viewfinder with night view mode.
Star focus mode for astrophotography.
Hand held focus stacking- means you can take a pic with different focus points and combine them all so there’s no effective loss of focus/adds depth of focus increase. All done in camera V quickly.
Built in digital ND filters (this is really nice…no more screwing filters onto the front element etc).
And a lot more.

If it was just a small change over what I already had (an EM1 mk II). I wouldn’t bother but a lot of these changes are things I wish I had and will use so this is a good thing. The image quality isn’t likely to be that much greater than what I have BUT the number of keepers will improve because of the tech. Also things like night photography will be a lot more simplified.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

It’s been a while since I upgraded my camera (8 year old camera) and tech has come a long way so….

Olympus changed over to new ownership recently (OM systems) and people were worried they would not function like the old Olympus photography division. They brought out a new camera several years back, the OM-1, at a pretty high price but it was their flagship camera. It was way too expensive for me at the time but they just brought out version II with some small improvements. However, this means the OM1 (version 1) got a discount so I got one.

Improvements over my old camera:

Much improved autofocus. AI focus on moving objects such as birds/autos/pets/animals etc. Better behaviour in low light (cropped sensor Achilles heel).
Super fast burst rate and a pro capture setting so collect and buffer shots on shutter half press and then afterwards to ensure you don’t miss a shot.
Hand held 50MP high res shots. Tripod 80MP shots. Effectively means you can crop away to your hearts content without a big loss in quality.
Super big ISO numbers possible. Many useable ones.
Improved stabilization. 5-7 stops or something silly. Lots of shots that would normally require a tripod can be hand held.
Improved digital viewfinder with night view mode.
Star focus mode for astrophotography.
Hand held focus stacking- means you can take a pic with different focus points and combine them all so there’s no effective loss of focus/adds depth of focus increase. All done in camera V quickly.
Built in digital ND filters (this is really nice…no more screwing filters onto the front element etc).
And a lot more.

If it was just a small change over what I already had (an EM1 mk II). I wouldn’t bother but a lot of these changes are things I wish I had and will use so this is a good thing. The image quality isn’t likely to be that much greater than what I have BUT the number of keepers will improve because of the tech. Also things like night photography will be a lot more simplified.

The OM-D E-M1 Mk II is already capable of something like 60 frames a second, in e-shutter mode, so there likely isn't a huge difference there. Improvements in autofocus are always welcome especially in lower light, as that has an effect on autofocus at tighter apertures, in my experience. High Res, multi-shot stills were available as well, though I don't recall the resolution. Birding mode was a thing, after firmware updates. I considered buying the OM-D E-M1x and 150-400mm F4.5 Pro lens but then I thought, "Do I really need IS that will adjust for the rotation of the Earth?" (Seriously, that was a selling point for the combination.)

As far as I know I was the only pro shooter who was actively using an Olympus camera at motorcycle events, in Canada, but I have since "retired." I might consider an OM-1 Mk II or E-M5 Mk IV some time in the future but, given that I don't go to the track anymore, the need isn't there.

 

[jc100]

The OM-D E-M1 Mk II is already capable of something like 60 frames a second, in e-shutter mode, so there likely isn't a huge difference there. Improvements in autofocus are always welcome especially in lower light, as that has an effect on autofocus at tighter apertures, in my experience. High Res, multi-shot stills were available as well, though I don't recall the resolution. Birding mode was a thing, after firmware updates. I considered buying the OM-D E-M1x and 150-400mm F4.5 Pro lens but then I thought, "Do I really need IS that will adjust for the rotation of the Earth?" (Seriously, that was a selling point for the combination.)

As far as I know I was the only pro shooter who was actively using an Olympus camera at motorcycle events, in Canada, but I have since "retired." I might consider an OM-1 Mk II or E-M5 Mk IV some time in the future but, given that I don't go to the track anymore, the need isn't there.

The MkII is a great camera. I had issues setting up for astrophotography with the low res viewfinder on the MkII and playing with ND filters was a pain for various shots. Just those things in the new camera are worth a lot to me. Valuable additions are the extra computational modes for focus stacking (I like macro photography) and quicker processing overall. I also shoot wildlife a lot so the advances in AF will help a lot. The MkII was still fairly capable but got a little lost with distant subjects in mixed light.

Most pros say “buy glass” rather than upgrade the camera but I have all the lenses I need. I’d like the 300mm F4 but not at $3.5K. The 100-400mm I have is more than capable.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

The MkII is a great camera. I had issues setting up for astrophotography with the low res viewfinder on the MkII and playing with ND filters was a pain for various shots. Just those things in the new camera are worth a lot to me. Valuable additions are the extra computational modes for focus stacking (I like macro photography) and quicker processing overall. I also shoot wildlife a lot so the advances in AF will help a lot. The MkII was still fairly capable but got a little lost with distant subjects in mixed light.

Most pros say “buy glass” rather than upgrade the camera but I have all the lenses I need. I’d like the 300mm F4 but not at $3.5K. The 100-400mm I have is more than capable.

Maybe consider using OM Capture and a laptop as your viewfinder? That way you could also be using something like Cartes du Ciel to orient yourself. you would also have the zoom focus mode immediately available to refine focus.

I spoke at some length with an amateur at Shannonville, who had the 300mm F4 and wasn't happy with the focus, but that was before they had released any firmware updates for it. I haven't heard anything really bad about it since then, but maybe I should take a quick trip to the DPReview OM forums? I haven't posted there in almost a decade.

I also have the 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 (not the F4.5) and am happy with it though a friend who does birding sent his back, as he had focus issues. He got the Panasonic equivalent and is quite happy with it.

 

[jc100]

Maybe consider using OM Capture and a laptop as your viewfinder? That way you could also be using something like Cartes du Ciel to orient yourself. you would also have the zoom focus mode immediately available to refine focus.

I spoke at some length with an amateur at Shannonville, who had the 300mm F4 and wasn't happy with the focus, but that was before they had released any firmware updates for it. I haven't heard anything really bad about it since then, but maybe I should take a quick trip to the DPReview OM forums? I haven't posted there in almost a decade.

I also have the 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 (not the F4.5) and am happy with it though a friend who does birding sent his back, as he had focus issues. He got the Panasonic equivalent and is quite happy with it.

I used an iPad Pro with the capture software and I did get some pics but it wasn’t ideal. I fully understand that it’s probably 90% due to my technique. I often use the app as a remote shutter too. I really like the Olympus ecosystem. The lenses are fantastic.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

I used an iPad Pro with the capture software and I did get some pics but it wasn’t ideal. I fully understand that it’s probably 90% due to my technique. I often use the app as a remote shutter too. I really like the Olympus ecosystem. The lenses are fantastic.

When you get to stellar distances and long shutters, the rotation of the Earth starts to result in obvious blurring. The really good shots are stacked from dozens, at the least, and use tracking telescopes. For this reason I've not shot anything other than the Moon, to this point.

 

[MacDoc]

JC - if you are serious about wildlife treat yourself to a Leica 400.

Panasonic Lumix Leica 100-400mm f4-6.3

The new Panasonic Leica 100-400mm zoom lens is an exciting announcement for any wildlife and sports photographer using the micro four thirds system. As you would expect of a lens with Leica branding, this lens creates stunning images free from aberrations, while the Power OIS system allows you...

www.teds.com.au

https://www.photoreview.com.au/reviews/mirrorless-lenses/mirrorless-lenses-m43/panasonic-leica-dg-vario-elmar-100-400mm-f40-63-asph-power-ois-lens/

Jabiru ( black stork) nest at 1/2 km.


The other fav lens is the Lumix 45/175 X series.
Very light lens 210 gms !!! with superb detail.

https://www.photoreview.com.au/reviews/mirrorless-lenses/mirrorless-lenses-m43/panasonic-lumix-g-x-vario-pz-45-175mm-f4-56-asphpower-ois-lens/

 

[Rob MacLennan]

The Panasonic 100-400mm F4-6.3 is essentially the same lens as the Olympus 100-400mm F4.5-6.3, as I understand it, but Olympus/OM Systems are more conservative about the apertures.

 

[MacDoc]

Now I'm confused ...the lens I have is a Leica branded 100-400 bought a few years back.

• Panasonic LUMIX Leica 100-400mm f/4-6.3 Asph. Power O.I.S. – Buy now
• Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS – Buy now
• Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO – Buy now

I guess has become this mouthful. Panasonic LUMIX Leica
Then there is a couple of Olympus versions.

The mouthful is a Mark II version. So that seems clear now.
The Olympus and the Lumix have differences tho maybe not critical.

The Leica is smaller and lighter tho not a huge margin.

I recall first day out with the Leica struggling with it ...one handed not a good option....it's just under a KG.

One reason the feather weight 45-175 is my go to for the mcycle.
Camera AND lens just a hair over 0.5 kg and so easy with one hand
Power zoom makes it all so easy.

••••
in my browsing I came across this which seems very good value.

Olympus om-d e-m1 mark 3 and Panasonic 100-400mm​

$1,890 Negotiable
Tuart Hill, WA

Olympus om-d e-m1 mark 3 shutter count 5900.
Panasonic 100-400mm f4 - 6.3 with lens hood.
Two batteries and charger.
Brand new unused HLD-9 battery grip.
sony nikon fuji fujifilm x100v canon olympus tripod 600mm lens tripod

I paid more than that for my lens

 

[jc100]

Now I'm confused ...the lens I have is a Leica branded 100-400 bought a few years back.

I guess has become this mouthful. Panasonic LUMIX Leica
Then there is a couple of Olympus versions.

The mouthful is a Mark II version. So that seems clear now.
The Olympus and the Lumix have differences tho maybe not critical.

The Leica is smaller and lighter tho not a huge margin.

I recall first day out with the Leica struggling with it ...one handed not a good option....it's just under a KG.

One reason the feather weight 45-175 is my go to for the mcycle.
Camera AND lens just a hair over 0.5 kg and so easy with one hand
Power zoom makes it all so easy.

••••
in my browsing I came across this which seems very good value.

I paid more than that for my lens

That second listed Olympus lens is mucho dinero. It has a built in optical lens magnifier. The first one is the one I (and I think Rob) has. It plays nicely with the built in IS of the Olympus camera body and has it’s own lens IS too and both can work in concert with each other. Not a PRO brand lens but it has many of the features of one and is built very well indeed.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

That second listed Olympus lens is mucho dinero. It has a built in optical lens magnifier. The first one is the one I (and I think Rob) has. It plays nicely with the built in IS of the Olympus camera body and has it’s own lens IS too and both can work in concert with each other. Not a PRO brand lens but it has many of the features of one and is built very well indeed.

Yes, we have the same lens. The 100-400mm F4.5 a built in 1.4 TC and is ruinously expensive.

 

[jc100]

Anyone print their own photos or do you just mail order ones you like?

Looking at finally getting round to printing some out and it looks like $20+ is the going rate for around A3 size. I saw an Epson 15000 photo printer for $389 (not pigment dyes) that has very good reviews that will also print on canvas for canvas wraps (usually pretty pricey for ann online order) etc. The ink doesn’t look super cheap but per print looks like around $1 or so depending on paper used though.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Anyone print their own photos or do you just mail order ones you like?

Looking at finally getting round to printing some out and it looks like $20+ is the going rate for around A3 size. I saw an Epson 15000 photo printer for $389 (not pigment dyes) that has very good reviews that will also print on canvas for canvas wraps (usually pretty pricey for ann online order) etc. The ink doesn’t look super cheap but per print looks like around $1 or so depending on paper used though.

Years ago I had one of the Epson wide format (Super B, 13"x19" capable) photo printers and the quality was excellent. It used two slightly different cartridges for each colour and it was very sensitive to the paper used. I never did manage to dial in archive grade paper and all the prints with it came out very light. I suspect it needed far more ink that I was using but I ended up wasting so much on trying to get it right, that I just gave up. I never really used it very much, as clients typically wanted files rather than prints, so the ink dried out and I tossed it, several years back. Can't remember the model number, but it was one of the "R" series.

 

[sburns]

Anyone print their own photos or do you just mail order ones you like?

Looking at finally getting round to printing some out and it looks like $20+ is the going rate for around A3 size. I saw an Epson 15000 photo printer for $389 (not pigment dyes) that has very good reviews that will also print on canvas for canvas wraps (usually pretty pricey for ann online order) etc. The ink doesn’t look super cheap but per print looks like around $1 or so depending on paper used though.

Nah, unless you have some level of consistent volume it is a waste of money. The printer is usually the least expensive part, its the constant buying of inks which will do you in, and you have to keep in running in order for the inks not to dry up in the printer.

Just take it to a lab (walmart or costco) or some online service to get things printed.

I have an Epson Artisan printer sitting at my desk. It was ok, used it for CD labels, tells you the vintage. The problem with these, or at least then, if one of the inks are low it will stop printing anything. Even if I want to print a B&W document, and say the light blue is low, but the black is ok, it won't allow you to proceed. PITA.

 

[jc100]

Nah, unless you have some level of consistent volume it is a waste of money. The printer is usually the least expensive part, its the constant buying of inks which will do you in, and you have to keep in running in order for the inks not to dry up in the printer.

Just take it to a lab (walmart or costco) or some online service to get things printed.

I have an Epson Artisan printer sitting at my desk. It was ok, used it for CD labels, tells you the vintage. The problem with these, or at least then, if one of the inks are low it will stop printing anything. Even if I want to print a B&W document, and say the light blue is low, but the black is ok, it won't allow you to proceed. PITA.

With Costco it’s $20 as a starting point for a 18x12 print I think. I don’t know if there’s shipping on top as it’s through Shutterfly now because they stopped their in house stuff.

20 large prints on normal paper and I’d be even and I think the ink that’s supplied will do that. A canvas wrap is $100 ish online. I’m interested in canvas wraps as I have a few in the house and the ones I sent off for online were good but very pricey.

Years and years ago I had an inkjet printer and it was a complete PITA. I was hoping that things had come a long way since then.

Ink looks to be around $200 for the Epson Claria ink in XL cartridges. $40 for 50 sheets of good 13x19 photo paper. Not sure how much canvas costs but the wooden stretchers are pretty cheap at Michaels.

These are just for me and the wife for the house and maybe presents at Xmas too.

 

[MacDoc]

With very few exceptions I prefer the vibrancy of photos on screen - especially HDR and the never ending variety of thousands of photos in random juxaposition.
With 50" TVs getting down to $299 US.....you can't even buy a decent frame for that.

and getting framed prints properly lit is also a challenge.

Where There's Water There's Life - Peter Jarver Fine Art Photography

You can get prints like this...but $$$

We have that on the wall to inspere me.