Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Check out Travel Photography - Tips and More section of our forum.
Posts for: jackpinoh
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 61 next>>
Mar 21, 2024 14:32:11   #
ricardo00 wrote:
Okay, some corrections on your corrections. First the reach on a cropped camera (like the OPs) is actually 1.5 times the focal length. So their 600mm is actually 900 mm. Putting a lens on a cropped sensor does not change a 600mm lens into a 1200mm lens. To me, one can always crop. The high density of pixels in the OM system means less light per pixel so the aperture equivalent also changes. And as you mention, the distribution of weight is important, and not having an internal zoom means that the center of the weight is going to change when you zoom. Having used the Nikon 200-500mm, it is quite annoying, especially when used on a gimbal. So I strongly prefer internal zooms (like the 150-400mm).
Did you buy this lens? I haven't felt one in the hand and tried to zoom out and see how that feels. Have you?
I know that OM system can be used to get great photos. I can even imagine buying one in the future. Hopefully when they make a lens I like. This new lens is not going to convince me to switch. Reach is important for me (as well as image stabilization) but so is weight, ability to shoot in low light and cost. My current Z8 allows me to hand hold my 400mm f/4.5 lens on a rocking boat and do video, so at this point the image stabilization is sufficient.
I would love to do a comparison at some point, too bad the 100-400mm IS doesn't work with that of the OM-1 camera (love the weight of this lens) so only 3 stops of IS.
PS. Example of a video shot handheld on a rocking boat with "only" 5.5 stops of IS:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/60519499@N00/53080006403/in/album-72177720310122074/
Okay, some corrections on your corrections. First... (show quote)

1. Putting a 600mm lens on a crop sensor camera vs a full frame camera changes the field of view. On an 20 megapixel OM camera, the 600mm lens has the same field of view as a 1200mm lens on on a full frame camera. If you crop the image of the Z8 frame camera with a 600mm lens the field of view of a 1200mm lens, you will have a 23 megapixel image.
2. The aperture equivalent? What does that mean? Aperture is a function of the lens, not the camera sensor. Both the OM 150-600mm lens and the Nikon 180-600mm lens have a 95mm filter ring--both lenses allow the same amount of light to enter. Since that light is focused over a smaller area on a crop sensor, each pixel in the crop sensor camera receives more light on each pixel in the full frame sensor receives.

I am not knocking full frame cameras. Any camera available today will capture beautiful images. I own a Sony A7R5 and a Sony A1 camera. I switched from Nikon to Sony before Nikon offered a mirrorless camera. My first OM System camera was the Olympus OM-D E-M1x. I now own two OM Systems OM-1 Mk2 cameras. I just sold my Sony 200-600mm lens. I own the OM Systems 150-400mm lens with the built-in 1.25x teleconverter. I don't plan to buy the 200-600mm OM lens. I will probably sell my Sony gear this year. The OM cameras and lenses are easier to use for both landscapes and birds in flight because of a wide variety of built-in computational features (hand held high resolution, Live Composite, Live ND, focus stacking, and and ProCapture) and superior image stabilization, dust reduction, and waterproofing.

I know I could crop images from a full frame camera. I've done that. I just find it more satisfying to fill the frame.
Go to
Mar 20, 2024 15:06:27   #
ricardo00 wrote:
Not sure why you are asking the question, if you mostly use your D500, why ask about the D7200 versus the OM1? The D7200 (and D500) is a completely different camera than the OM1, which is a micro 4/3 mirrorless. Assuming that you have only Nikon lenses, you will need to get an OM systems lens? Have you picked out which? I have heard good things about the OM-1 camera but my personal view is that I wasn't thrilled at the lens choice for wildlife photography. Micro 4/3 users always are going on about how lightweight their system is, but the "replacement" for the 100-400mm lens (the 180-600mm) is much heavier than many Nikon lenses and even heavier than their 100-400mm TC f/4.5 lens. Some day I may switch to the OM system (I have both the D7200 and D500 and happily used both for many years but mostly use a Z8 these days) but would want an updated light weight "long" lens before switching for my wildlife photography. That is purely my view as a Nikon user.
I am sure there will be many OM users who will be offended by my comments, but are you really excited about their new lens, the 180-600mm? It is $1,000 more than the Nikon 180-600mm, doesn't have internal zoom and weighs more than the Nikon lens.
Not sure why you are asking the question, if you m... (show quote)

You make some good points. Allow me to suggest one correction and add some context.

1. The new OM Systems lens is 150-600mm, not 180-600mm.
2. The focal length of 150-600mm f/5-6.3 lens on a micro 4/3 camera is equivalent to a 300-1200mm lens on a full frame camera.
3. The Nikon 180-600 mm lens without the tripod collar is four ounces lighter than the OM 150-600mm lens, but if you add a teleconverter to the Nikon lens to get a focal length greater than 600mm, it will exceed the OM lens weight by four to six ounces.
4. To achieve the 1200mm field of view on the Nikon 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 lens, you would need to add a 2x teleconverter which would give you 360-1200mm f/11-13, and you would need to raise your ISO two stops higher than the OM system, and the 2x teleconverter would result in a softer image.
5. Regarding lens weight: Two lenses can weigh the same, but the distribution of the weight in the lens is very important. If the lens center of mass is closer to the camera, the lens will be much easier to hand-hold than if the center of mass is further away from the camera. Unfortunately, data to assess this factor is not available for either lens.
6. The Nikon lens has a minimum focus distance of 4.5 feet; the OM lens has a minimum focus distance of 1.8 feet which, with its 1200 mm reach, gives it a macro capability.
7. The OM lens has sync-IS, which means the lens IS and the camera IBIS work together to provide 7 stops of image stabilization. The Nikon lens provides 5.5 stops of image stabilization.
8. The OM lens does not have internal zoom, but it does have an IPX1 certified water sealing and a fluorine coating on the front element. I don't think the Nikon lens has a weather certification, but I expect it to perform just as well in wet weather.
9. The OM lens also accepts teleconverters, but I recommend a tripod if you intend to use it at its 2400mm limit.
Go to
Mar 20, 2024 14:02:46   #
Sidwalkastronomy wrote:
As for full frame I figured if upgrading go with larger sensor. 16 x 20 is as large as I'll print.

Full frame will let me crop more too.
Granted my logic can be faulty
I also do astrophotography through a 10 inch scope

I have a crop 20 megapixel camera and have no difficulty printing sharp 16x20 inch. When I use the correct lens, I don't need to crop. Why do you need to crop?
Go to
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Mar 19, 2024 10:48:24   #
Rongnongno wrote:
The progress is in the sensor, nowhere else.

The idea of using a display instead of through the lens is reverting to old time when folks were looking from above to focus...

Issues with the display...
- LIGHT!!! If too bright, good luck using the display.
- Eyes issue If one needs glasses all bets are off, there is no way to adjust for that but use the tiny in camera display in the 'view finder'. Go check for accuracy on that since the display is made of tiny pixels vs 'a normal light' (analog)
- Weight unbalance. (Light body, heavy lens)

That is one of the few reasons why I will not upgrade to mirrorless, even if I do appreciate the new sensors.
The progress is in the sensor, nowhere else. br b... (show quote)

Yeah! Who doesn't love pre-focus and back-focus that changes with each prime lens and zoom lens focal length. And who doesn't love chimping after each image to make sure everything is in focus and nothing is blown out in the highlights or underexposed.
Go to
Mar 6, 2024 13:21:42   #
robd wrote:
Hi fellow photographers. I am a sony user.. and have all the lens(some high quality) so I am stuck..sort of with staying with sony(dont feel like starting from scratch). any whoo will keep it brief..
I have a 2 sony a7r iii cameras (one really backup) and usually upgrade every 3-4 years. I sort of want to get a newer sony but after over info reading.. not sure if I should. One concern is that if I wait.. the value of the camera will be not even worth selling..so upgrading will be more costly(count on the money I get from older camera to assist with newer on. was looking at a7r v .. but seems like the a7r iii is better with low light/less noise w higher iso. there are numerous other better aspects to the a7r v but looking at less expensive models (a7 iv .. ) as the a7r iv is an option.. I would just jump to a7r v if I would go that route. I sort of have the money but feeling that "Do I really need it?" I am content with the a7r iii and agree with most reviews (the auto focus would be a better keeper rate with portraits with a7r v but also a heavy national park lover ((not professional..yet!)) but a7 iv has same I believe but having an issue downgrading mp.

bottom line is do I take the loss and know that I will get very little for a7r iii when i do sell it(will eventually) or eat the higher cost of 7rv or take the mp loss as I do really know its not going to effect the way i take pictures.
add'l issue with the a7r v is the extra space I will need to store(again not really needed but i only shoot in uncompressed raw..because with digital .. this is the negative of the picture and want the highest available saved image. Fell free to attack me as I want advice.. and looking for criticism even if its rough

will still have one a7r iii a as back up (or can use for low light ....) and use a7r v or iv for flash / regular iso levels.

thank you for any input... this is mainly for a trip to mt rainier in july fyi
Hi fellow photographers. I am a sony user.. and ha... (show quote)


Sometimes you just have to scratch the itch. I'v owned the Riii, Riv and Rv. The only advantages I have found of the Rv over the Riv is focus stacking, motion correction in high resolution mode (doesn't work well for plant wind motion), and shutter protection for the sensor when changing lenses. The only advantages of the Riv over the Riii is more megapixels. In retrospect, I wish I had not upgraded from the Riii, but I had this itch.
Go to
Feb 26, 2024 07:49:07   #
Basil wrote:
@JVada posted about an issue he has involving a stuck filter that he can’t seem to break loose to remove. I didn’t want to hijack his topic, but it got me thinking, “is there anything that could be put on filter threads to minimise the potential for a filter getting stuck?

I’ve had some difficult filters in the past but I was always eventually able to get them off.

Just curious if anyone has any home remedies for treating filter threads or is that just not a good idea?


I pack a large rubber band (the kind grocery stores put around bunches of vegetables). It always works to loosen my stuck filters.
Go to
Feb 10, 2024 16:10:53   #
streetmarty wrote:
Hello all, I’ve been a photographer for 60 years. I have never owned a tripod. I always lived in the city and spent most of my time walking the streets. Recent health issues require I walk with a cane so I’m going to try my hand at landscape photography. I’ve watched a number of tripod shootouts on YouTube and I like the Sirui ST124 ST-Series Carbon Fiber Tripod with K-10X Arca-Type Ball Head. My question for anyone that has owned this is it worth $350? If not what would you suggest under $400? I’m six foot tall and my main camera is a Nikon D750. Thank you for the help. Marty
Hello all, I’ve been a photographer for 60 years. ... (show quote)

You did not say what type of lenses you use. Heavy gear and long lenses requires better tripods and tripod heads. My experience with inexpensive tripod heads is that with a heavy camera and lens, they allow the camera/lens to droop slowly, making it impossible to maintain the subject correctly in the frame of view. With your budget, I think you might be better off buying good used equipment rather than inexpensive new equipment. If you decide to go with new gear, test it before buying or make sure you can return it.
Go to
Check out Street Photography section of our forum.
Feb 9, 2024 16:43:03   #
a6k wrote:
I have a SIRUI P-326 monopod and I'm quite happy with it. However, I'm thinking about adding a 3-feet attachment to the bottom end. Amazon has several at reasonable prices.

Does anyone have actual experience with:
A. adding feet to existing monopod?
B. a particular brand or model that was either notably good or notably bad?
C. experience with a monopod that has feet, even if it came with them, to suggest that this is a good or bad idea?
D. any "gotchas" to consider that are not immediately obvious?

No, I don't want to use a tripod.

Thanks in advance.
I have a SIRUI P-326 monopod and I'm quite happy w... (show quote)

A monopod plus your two legs and feet is a type of tripod. If the monopod has feet, your effective tripod feels more stable. I use a length-adjustable monopod with feet connected by a gimbal. The stiffness of the gimbal can be adjusted. It provides more stability than a monopod without feet. It provides more firm contact with the ground, and I can step on one of the feet and get great stability at lower monopod angles (photographing flowers for example). But even with the monopod vertical and gimbal locked, I would never trust it to hold a camera and lens without me holding it.
Go to
Feb 9, 2024 16:22:30   #
Gabyto wrote:
I am wondering if this camera is still worth buying since Sony had already introduced so many new cameras. Any information from the hard-core Sony members will be greatly appreciated. I am thinking of moving to the Sony eco system since the lens offerings is unlimited. I used to shoot with Canon 5Div BIF, but I know the RF lenses are extremely expensive. I am aware of the R cameras, but the main issue is the lenses is very limited. Any information will be greatly appreciated. Thank you all that share their knowledge.
I am wondering if this camera is still worth buyin... (show quote)

Many professional and amateur wildlife and bird photographers have moved to OM Systems. The OM-1 Mark 2 is very good and the lens selection for long lens is outstanding. Pre-capture, up to 60 fps with AF and exposure for each frame blackout free.
Go to
Jan 31, 2024 08:19:54   #
gwilliams6 wrote:
From Andrea Pizzini Photography:

"Is this the end of OM Digital? Or is there more exciting stuff is coming down the road?" Your thoughts on the "updates"

Main topics include:

A mostly firmware updated new OM-1, ver. 2. Why not just give firmware updates for OM-1 users.

A reissue of a wide zoom with just a name change to OM-system from Olympus name.

An issue of a 150-600mm lens that is the same as the Sigma 150-600mm fullframe E-mount/L-mount lens, but charging $2700 USD for it, which is $1200 USD MORE than the Sigma 150-600mm fullframe lens $1499 USD price.

What do OM-system users think of all this?

Cheers
From Andrea Pizzini Photography: br br "Is t... (show quote)

The OM-1 does not have enough memory or processor power to handle the algorithms that are in the OM-1 Mod 2. Processor power and processor, support electronics, and memory costs drop 50% every couple of years. I suspect the OM-1 Mod 2 has improved A-D converters that speed up the data pipelines. I understand that you can now review images and change settings while data is written from the buffer to the memory card. If you haven't noticed. Sensor design hasn't changed in Nikon, Sony, Fuji, or Canon cameras in the last few updates either (Sony's global shutter won't be introduced in anything except the A9 because it is too expensive and has significant limitation other than shutter speed. Fuji has increased the number of megapixels, but the sensor technology is the same.) All of the changes from all of the camera manufacturers are based on faster processors, better algorithms, and additional memory. This will be a problem for them, because cameras are already so good that the changes aren't relevant to most photographers. (If you can capture 50+ frames per second with 95% in focus, is it really worth $2,500 to $6,000 to get to 99% or 100%? If you can already focus in 8 milliseconds on an animal's eye instead of the grass in front of it, do you need a better AF system? Image stabilization is already so good that a tripod is no longer necessary with most of the newer camera systems.)
Go to
Jan 25, 2024 07:46:49   #
cahale wrote:
While I choke to admit it, Mac is the best for most display and image work. It just stinks at everything else.

I used Windows PCs from 1986 to 2000. I've used Macs since and find them superior in all respects. I never have software problems. My wife used a PC until last year and had software problems constantly. Since switching to a Mac; no problems. These are facts. Your unsupported opinion is based on what?
Go to
Check out Commercial and Industrial Photography section of our forum.
Jan 20, 2024 10:08:11   #
Wow!
Go to
Jan 15, 2024 21:11:45   #
SportQue wrote:
I'm having issues in LrC processing files particularly with the Denoise AI feature. I have a Sony a7rv 61mp camera. Current PC is a 16gb ram, 8th generation i7, and Nvidia GPU. So the question is what computer system do I need to upgrade to? It's been recommended by some to switch to an M3 Mac Pro such as a MRW23LL/A but I'd like to stick with a pc format. Just looking for more feedback as I'm trying to manage the expense.
TIA.

AI applications need multiple fast core processors. Even the fastest machines need a long time to handle AI software. Check out “Art is Right” on YouTube to see Mac comparisons.
Go to
Jan 15, 2024 21:02:06   #
No.
Go to
Jan 10, 2024 14:25:28   #
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 61 next>>
Check out Professional and Advanced Portraiture section of our forum.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.