I like the first one just as it is. The second is very nice too but the
busy background is a bit distracting.
Hold on to those fast, single focal length OM mount lenses for shallow DOF.
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/2/2012 8:34 PM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> I know nothing of the m.4/3 lenses and how they perform, though I
> thought the samples looked very good.
>
> The battle for bokeh is somewhat of a lost cause with 4/3 anyway. I can
> occasionally get somewhat decent blur from close-focusing the DZ 50-200,
> or even the DZ 40-150 (except that it doesn't focus very close).
>
> I think this is decent blur (though the background could be a little
> more interesting):
>
> http://jfwilcox.jalbum.net/Wallace%20Garden%20Center%20Orchid%20Show/#_3106589w.jpg
>
> This has a busier background, but I think the lens does OK:
>
> http://jfwilcox.jalbum.net/Wallace%20Garden%20Center%20Orchid%20Show/#_3106603w.jpg
>
> (DZ 40-150 in both cases at f5.6 -- essentially wide open or close to.)
>
> I am mainly content if the result is not simply awful. :\
>
> Joel W.
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012, at 08:24 PM, Wiliam Wagenaar wrote:
>> I think I would like the camera too, but I'm not so fond of the lenses.
>> F3.5-6.3 for the 12-50mm does not leave much room for shallow DOF on 4/3.
>> Mounting the E-system lenses does not do justice to the small body of the
>> OM-D.
>>
>> Just my 2 cents though.
>>
>> Wiliam
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
