Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] hike yesterday

Subject: Re: [OM] hike yesterday
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 22:22:47 -0700
On 9/20/2017 3:20 PM, Mike Lazzari wrote:
Navigating your images is not easy but the landscapes they depict  > are so 
stunning that it is 100% worth the effort.
Thanks! I know it isn't user friendly. I use the web space as parking for images and other docs. I prefer to just email a link. I always plan on creating a slideshow...but stuff happens :)

Singapore gallery is so totally simple. Just FTP images into an existing folder or create a new one. And there they are, in your Gallery. MUCH quicker and easier than Zone-10.

I think I may create a yearly album.

For me, the problem with that is it gets to be a BIG project, and thus not done. Incremental entries, just like parking them as you do now, make it little, easy, quick steps.



Lovely! I'm starting to recognize some mountain profiles.
Yes, There are only so many choice places that I can reach in a day so they get visited frequently. Upper Anderson Lakes is one of my favorite destinations. It is relatively close but requires off-trail bushwacking so isn't much frequented. However I notice more of a "trail" each time we visit. Total hike was only 12-14km but half was cross country.

Ten miles with what sounds like fairly difficult parts is out of our league, at least now. Our usual is no more than about 6 mi. of relatively easy trail.

We're hoping the 4 mi round trip with 1,700' gain/loss on a wide dirt path works well for us next week. No question a year ago. Now, Carol's ankle is healed, but not all the muscle is back to normal. And in the year of hanging out with her at home much more than usual, I think I've lost some condition.

We did the 'swack up the the upper lakes which consist of two plus a seldom visited tarn way above the main lakes. Above the tarn we traversed across a steep rocky slope which used to be Watson Glacier 30 years ago, RIP. Then down and CC around Watson Lakes (first link) which you may remember and back to the truck via the trail.

<http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/UpAndersonLks2017/Anderson-Watson_09-14_0035.jpg>

steaming...

<http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/UpAndersonLks2017/Anderson-Watson_09-14_0124.jpg>

GusGus

<http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/UpAndersonLks2017/Anderson-Watson_09-14_0078.jpg>

Delicious!

Just not long enough, or close enough without help
Well, the 75-300 is just too bulky to carry

I can understand that, for that kind of hike.

and really should be tripod mounted.

Nah. I'll bet less than 1% of all my long FL shots with it have been hand held. When I first got the E-M5, and headed right out into the wilds of New England, I came back with a puzzling bunch of 300 mm shots. Many were great, some were just slightly blurry, and some had full double images @ 100%. Then I heard about Shutter Shock. Set Anti-Shock on and to 1/8 sec. and it all got well. I've posted a lot of hand-held 300 mm images here. All from "Warbling Vireo?" on are that. <http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=21401>

The IBIS is well up to long shots without tripod. I even did a little "Look, Ma, No Tripod <http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=8184&g2_highlightId=8210>" gallery a few years ago. Some 300 mm.

And I did have the 9-18 which is tiny and the perfect companion to the 14-150.

I still carry it around a lot, but seldom use it for landscapes. I prefer 
panoramas.

I have considered the MCON-P01 (which I believe that you have Moose?)

No, I have the MCON-P02, which is quite a different animal. The Although many of Oly's C-U lenses over the years have been achromats, the description for the P01 says "Lens Construction: 1 lenses/1 groups ". So, like any single element C-U lens, IQ isn't going to be good. I recently tried a B+W +0.5, hoping it was weak enough to beat IQ price - Nope.

The P02 is a great little achromat, but probably too small for your lens. It's designed for 37 & 46 mm threads. I've traded my 14-150 for Panny 14-140, for the in-lens IS on my IBIS-less GM5. I tried the P02 on a step ring. It wasn't very good. Not bad in the center, but fuzzing out badly toward the edges. <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Close-Up_Lens_Tube/C-U_on_14-140.htm>

I think it's just too physically small. For the old B-Macro, the lens itself if larger than the filter thread size, and it's a great performer on many lenses. But it's rather large and heavy for your needs.

I've had good luck with extension tubes. I believe I took some shots with that combo, but apparently didn't post them, so who knows where. The aren't always as good as achromat C-U lenses on complex contemporary zooms, but are small and v. light, and the 14-150 shouldn't put too much strain on one. Very cheap. I'm sure that 's going to give you better results than the P01.

Pup and I are off again soon, Fresh snow in the mountains and fall color really getting going. Berries are ripe. You might recognize some of the scenery from previous years.

We're off to some mountains, too. Might even show some pictures.

Travelin' Moose

--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz