OM-D and Fuji XE1 go live

Discussion in 'Micro Four Thirds Forum' started by Wolf, Feb 3, 2013.

  1. Wolf

    Wolf SC Veteran

    374
    Mar 4, 2012
    Yesterday I was at a local gig with my omd + 45mm and xe1 35mm

    Gotta some nice photos despite the small venue.
    Working with the OMD was a joy , with the XE-1 not so much...
    struggled so much with the AF
    Though ofc the XE1 high iso is better, but the omd can keep iso much lower...

    all photos can be seen at

    B Brothers XL - a set on Flickr

    OM-D


    XE1


    OMD


    XE1
     
    • Like Like x 4
  2. ajramirez

    ajramirez SC All-Pro

    Jul 9, 2010
    Caguas, Puerto Rico
    Antonio
    Nice set!
     
  3. tdp

    tdp Guest

    Oh next time shoot a vid or two of the guys playing, that would be awesome to add to the stills.
     
  4. Wolf

    Wolf SC Veteran

    374
    Mar 4, 2012
    Yes but the problem was the space was too limited for that :(
    just had to get in front for a few snaps and then leave again
     
  5. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Very nice. I have and love the Fuji X-Pro, but this is the kind of thing that keeps m43 more of a primary go-to system. It can do almost anything well, including low light performances like this. The Fuji is a great quality walk around type of camera and the lenses are nice, but m43 just never lets me down...

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Wolf

    Wolf SC Veteran

    374
    Mar 4, 2012
    You know, ray that's my main problem

    I have the XE1 with the 18-55, which is a great lens

    But i'm always doubting "should I take it ? because I often don't know how fast i'll need to AF or how much people / place there will be and how much time will i have to fiddle with the settings
    And OMD can easly be used in P mode and it's will almost always nail the focus (and damn fast) .. Add the fact that it is weatherproof and the splendin touch focus which makes for a system that you'll take with you a lot easier
     
  7. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    My rule of thumb is if I'm just going out to take photos of nothing terribly specific (usually a combination of scenics, abstract, and street) I'll generally grab the Fuji (or sometimes just the LX7 if I really want to travel light). Which at this point means the 18mm and sometimes the 35 in low light - I may or may not grow that lens collection or even stick with the X-Pro, possibly moving to the X100s if I decide not to really grow it as a system. I use zone focus for street work and AF speed isn't an issue for the other stuff I do. But if I go out with a specific task in mind, I almost always take the OMD and a specific lens or set of lenses. For family stuff, it's the 45 and 75. For a parade, it's the 14-150, for mostly street shooting I'll generally take the 12, and now that could also be the body cap and/or 17 f1.8. For a concert I'll take the 75mm and maybe something wider for context. For a graduation or baseball game or something, I'll take the 75-300. As a great all around travel kit I'll take two bodies, one with the 14-150 and the other with the 9-18, and a couple of fast primes in the bag for street and low light situations.

    The Fuji is an enjoyable camera to use and it's got it's own signature look that I like, so it gets a lot of use. But if I have something I've just gotta nail, I take the Olympus.

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 4
  8. Gary

    Gary SC All-Pro

    Aug 19, 2012
    Southern California
    Gary Ayala
    When I first acquired the OM-D, I hard similar reservations but between my 1D's and OM-D's. Now I have gained so much confidence in the OM-D performance that my FF's are collecting dust. (I recently gave one away to my daughter.)

    After reading Ray's comments I realized how differently Ray and I shoot. For Ray, physical action(s) of capturing an image is equally as importnat/enjoyable to Ray as the presentation of his images. Different cameras bring different working elements to the actual physical capture, hence, different enjoyments. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, horses for courses, but it does explain why so many people have some my different camera systems but shoot essentially the same subjects and style. I now sorta get it.

    For me, nothing matters but the final image. When I arrive at a venu, I size it up, mentally I find the story I desire to tell/capture ... then I figure out my camera position(s), lens(es), settings and I pre-visualize in my little pea-brain the final image I desire. There, I'm done ... the actual physical part of shooting that image is redundant, almost boring because I've already mentally captured the exceptional image, the defining moment. Back in post, comparing what I captured to my mental pre-visualization is when I find my rewards and satisfaction. The closer my captured image is to my pre-visualized imaged the greater my personal satisfaction.

    Of course with any evolving story, (a non-sedentary subject is an evolving story), the defining moment ... the exceptional image will also evolve heightening the challenge.

    Gary

    PS- Disclaimer for any who may interpret my comments as an attack against Ray: I love Ray's images. Ray knows I love his stuff. We just see the world differently. This world of photography, that we all enjoy, is so vast that there is plenty of room for different perspectives.
    G
     
    • Like Like x 4
  9. Landshark

    Landshark PhotoDog

    Jul 15, 2010
    SoCal
    Bob
    Nice images but it is interesting that I still have the opposite impression, I do not find the omd much better at locking on af but instead much better with slow shutter speeds because of the image stabilization system.
    As of this weekend
    I have already sold off over half of my OMD stuff, keeping one body 3 or 4 lens as I shoot more with the Fuji
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Hikari

    Hikari SC Veteran

    292
    Jan 5, 2013
    Maine, USA
    The camera does not make the image. Any "shortcoming" a camera is perceived to have, the photographer learns to compensate for--AF, shutter lag, AE lag, the button you keep pressing with your nose, whatever it is. I have been doing that all my career. The camera does set the tone of how you work and will either add or subtract from that. It does not mean that the camera is effortless--I shot a series of portraits with a Linhof view camera and MFD back where I had to guess framing and focus because you cannot keep using the ground glass (I did have an DSLR at the time which would have been "easier."

    Personally, the one quality I have found that kills photography in a camera is convenience. If a camera is simply convenient and easy, I simply get lazy. It is the best way to make boring pictures.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Wolf

    Wolf SC Veteran

    374
    Mar 4, 2012
    Luckily every photographer is different ! ;)

    And you are right Hikari, hence why I try to avoid zoomlenses as much as possible
     
  12. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    I think if I'd spent a lifetime as a pro like Gary did, particularly shooting in war zones and doing other journalistic type shooting where getting the shot RIGHT NOW is absolutely critical to making a living, I'd probably view the process much more like he does. I would only shoot with the most reliable stuff I could find, would know it like the back of my hand, and would have the number of variables I had to think about down to a bare minimum, with muscle memory being able to take over 99% of the process, leaving the mind for just the visualization and creative part. So I fully get why he or others would bring what they bring to the process of shooting. As a rank amateur who's never ever ever HAD to get any particular shot, I view it very differently, as he's pointed out. I use whichever camera will allow me to get the shots I'm after and also in the most enjoyable way possible. Often that means the Fuji, except for the kinds of shooting where it would frustrate me, at which point its way more fun to shoot with something that just WORKS, which the OMD does for anything I ever want or need to do. But when I'm shooting, particularly on the street where my keeper rate is VERY low, I don't worry about missing the shot - I miss more than I nail and SOME of the ones I nail I don't realize until well after the shot was taken. Most I pre-visualize pretty well and have a good idea of what I got, or what I almost got. But some of my better shots are those I never really saw well until they came up on the computer screen and I was able to see that, hey there's an image in there, with just a little cropping and post processing I can pull it out.

    And part of it is that I'm a gear junkie as much as a photographer. I've always loved cool gadgets, and digital cameras are remarkably cool gadgets! So I enjoy playing with and interacting with the different ways the different manufacturers approach the photographic process. I'm sure that being less that completely familiar with a given piece of gear and not having it down to muscle memory has cost me a few shots along the way, as I play with different gear. But for a hobby-est like me, that's OK. I'm gonna miss any number of shots for SOME reason - having fun playing with gear is as good as any. But I would clearly not feel that way if missing that shot was taking food off of my table or braces off my kid's teeth!

    And Gary, not to worry. I didn't take it as a dis at all. I'm kind of honored you thought about it enough to better understand my perspective - I can understand how foreign it could be for someone with your professional background!

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Somewhat depends on the lens for me. The 18 seems pretty quick and reliable in any circumstance - it takes VERY low light with a distinct lack of contrast to really make it hunt. Even the OMD will hunt somewhat in those situations. The 35 is almost as fast in good light, but seems a good deal slower in low light and it's caused me more frustration with hunting for focus than just about anything I've used. Its mostly pretty good, but sometimes pretty bad. I always assumed it was a matter of focal length (since I've heard the 60mm is the slowest of the bunch) but now I'm not sure. My initial perception is that the 14mm is a bit slower than the 18, and as with the others, I'm distinctly aware of the portion of a second when I hear the AF motor working and it seems closer to the 35 than the 18. Which suggests some of it could be the physical size of the lens and the distance the elements have to move???

    But in contrast, the OMD is just mind-blowingly fast and automatic with any of the moderns lenses. The 20mm and the old 17mm and some of the early kit lenses are quite slow. But anything released from about the middle of 2010 forward by either Oly or Pany seems to be absolutely lightning fast. To the point where I basically don't even have to think about it. And even some of its "aid" features like face detection and near-eye priority, which I used to think were beneath me, are just so damned effective and immediate that I let the camera do that for me. Now that I know how consistently effective they are. Particularly with longer lenses like the 45 and 75 - jeez, shooting candid portraits with those lenses with the newer bodies is just an amazing exercise in almost never missing a shot, even in quite low light. Those types of shots used to be a real challenge to nail with earlier m43 gear and now the hit-rate is just astounding. An amazing percentage of technically good photos to pick out the creatively decent from. THAT's the kind of stuff I'd rather do with the OMD than the Fuji. But that's the kind of stuff YOU probably do at work all day with your pro-level DSLR gear and lighting and whatnot, so I can see where the Fuji might be more fun to use for your non-work stuff...

    -Ray
     
  14. Wolf

    Wolf SC Veteran

    374
    Mar 4, 2012
    I really like my XE1 despite it's "problems", indeed as people say i wouldn't take it if "every shot is important"

    I think I might end up selling the 35mm (since it's not that good AF wise in low light and i got some 1.8 vintage lenses i can use on it anyway then for those situation).
    Second reason to sell the 35mm is that the 18-55 is just so bloody great...
    Nearly as good as the primes and it has IS and faster AF.

    I might get the panasonic 25mm for my omd, but not sure about that yet
    Or the 17mm 1.8... or the 75mm :)
     
  15. Gary

    Gary SC All-Pro

    Aug 19, 2012
    Southern California
    Gary Ayala
    Back when I started with photography (film), I did experiment with all different types and sizes of film. The only way to do that digitally is by acquiring a new/different camera. Much more expensive way to experiment and a neophyte with different systems slows, dilutes and fragments the learning process.

    Sorta of an epiphany for me to realize that for many, it isn't just the final image. (Being terribly competitive, I found it hard to fathom not caring if they missed capturing The Defining Moment, The Shot, every time they touched a camera.) Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the crap out of photography. I love looking at images and taking pictures. But I like the challenge even more, the challenge is to capture the exceptional image.

    Gary
     
  16. EasyEd

    EasyEd SC Regular

    143
    Dec 22, 2010
    Hey All,

    I think the only correct answer to a what camera did you use question is this:

    My eyes

    followed by:

    I'm a photographer - what is a camera?

    -Ed-
     
  17. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Don't get me wrong - enjoying the process of making the photograph is all in the service of getting to the best image I can get to as often as possible. But in the service of getting to, say, 100 really good to maybe great images in the course of a lifetime, I'm not really concerned with whether I also MISSED 1000 or 10000 or 100000. So I'm still after the best possible image and as many good ones as possible when I shoot. But I'm not in a situation where I have to (or do) sweat the missed opportunities. I just move on to the next one. I learned this really early in street shooting, BTW - the number of times I'd JUST miss a shot and then go back and try to get it again and never even come CLOSE. Which led to an understanding that its a very fleeting moment and if you miss it you miss it and you just keep moving forward because its not there any more. You're not gonna get THAT image, but if you just toss it aside you'll be in a better position to get the NEXT one.... And, so, if indulging my passion for cameras causes me to slightly lower my percentage of keepers as I seek the best images I can make, that doesn't bother me. Of course I'll mourn the ones I almost got but just missed. But I'm an optimist - I figure another opportunity will present itself soon enough if I stay receptive to it. And sometimes its partly the joy of a new piece of gear that really chases my ass out onto the street to PLAY and see what I can do with it, so it probably leads to as many enthusiasm driven good images as it causes me to miss...

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    That's the ART part, but good and great photography is a melding of artistic vision and the craftsmanship needed to get the vision across. The camera comes under the craft side of the equation and it doesn't need to be the best camera, but it needs to be one you connect with somehow. Similarly with music - a great musician will make great music with a cheap instrument, but may make more beautiful and subtle music with a great instrument. Partly because it helps he or she get their music out, and partly because it inspires them to do so...

    -Ray
     
  19. Hikari

    Hikari SC Veteran

    292
    Jan 5, 2013
    Maine, USA
    There is no "right" answer. The camera is not irrelevant, but not in the way they are marketed. I think it is very illuminating to see how photographers work.

    American Photographer did a wonderful piece on Richard Avadon a long time ago. They opened his closet and took a picture of it. There were three cameras: one 8x10 view camera with a 300mm lens and two Rolleiflex TLRs. This man sustained his entire career with three cameras all with normal lenses.

    American Photographer also did a monograph of the work of William Albert Allard called the Photographic Essay. Unusually for this type of book, they document the photographer's thoughts on camera types, his equipment, and mark how much he uses certain focal lengths. While he certainly carries/carried more than I do, he still could break the majority of his work down into a very simple setup.

    And the equipment choice does impact the aesthetic of the photographer's work. Look at the career of Mary Ellen Mark. You can see the shifts in her style as she goes from 35mm, to 6x6 medium format, to 4x5, to 6x7. You can see how artificial lighting impacts the work.

    Now, the thing is, you don't copy the gear list of Mark Ellen Mark and become Mary Ellen. But the look she gets cannot simply be broken down into equivalent focal lengths and taken with any kind of camera.

    Cameras are sold based on features. A camera with 100 functions must be twice as good as a camera with only 50. AF speed, frames per second, megapixels, ISO, and a host of specs that are really marginal are all used to sell cameras. Folks like to say they like all the automation because they can focus on making the picture. Well, all the automation in the world does not make you an Avadon. Pick up a copy of the World History of Photography and with all the changes in camera technology, the one thing that is constant is the high-level of the imagery, regardless of style. Technology is not making better images, just different ones.

    Photography has not become effortless because of the automation. Photography is effortless because I understand and control the process without having to think that hard--just as a writer does not have to worry about technical issues like grammar and spelling (spell checkers don't make you a better writer, they just make you appear like a less poor one).
     
  20. Hikari

    Hikari SC Veteran

    292
    Jan 5, 2013
    Maine, USA
    Who the hell needs vision when we live in such an interesting world. Unless you are doing commercial work, 99.99% of vision comes after the fact the image is made. The only vision I need is to be able to see. I think this idea of the "photographer's vision" has been one of the biggest blocks to creativity. It gives something for writers to wax poetic over, but photography is just a lot of hard work resulting in many more failures in order to get something that works.