Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/01/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have not used the E3 on a tripod. With all the normal lenses I get good results. With the 150mm f2, particularly with 2x matched convertor (which makes a super 600mm f4 equivalent relatively tiny kit) it is only sharp very infrequently when near infinity. Closer it is not as bad. I got more sharp shots using manual focus actually. Very disappointing. A friend, and respected pro, who was hired by Olympus to do some work for them was supplied with 2 E3s and some lenses, he had the same problem, great with normal lenses and close distances, poor with long lenses near infinity. When the biggest size benefit of 4/3 over others is with the long lenses we thought it an opportunity lost by Olympus, sadly. IIRC he ended up doing the long lens stuff with a Nikon... Frank On 12 Jan, 2010, at 17:55, Matthew B. Filippini wrote: > > Maybe Oly's IS has improved since the E3. My E520 IS works very very well > (lots of keepers) with legacy manual-focus long lenses, both handheld and > on a monopod. For tripod shots, the manual recommended that the IS be > off, if I recall correctly. > > > > Matt > >> From: Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com >> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 17:45:16 +0000 >> To: lug at leica-users.org >> Subject: Re: [Leica] GF-1 v. EP-2 >> >> I can not speak for the EP 2 but I have tried the E3 with a panaleica >> 14-150 lens, which is excellent BTW, which has stabilisation. The manuals >> strongly advise against leaving both stabilisations on together, it does >> not work. I preferred body stabilisation off, lens on in this combination. >> The EP1 I tried had pitifully slow AF compared to the Panasonic G1, so I >> bet the GF1 will be better than the EP2. >> I actually think IS is over-rated. It does not compensate for rotary >> shake very well, if at all, so in general I think it is a snapshot or get >> you out the sh*t solution. The E3 was very poor with long lenses and IS >> on, -very- few keepers. The E3 and normal lenses are not really much >> smaller than 35mm stuff, the teles are much smaller so I thought it would >> be a great camera for nature pix when walking my dogs but I got very few >> sharp shots, either AF or IS not working well :-( Better with MF and no >> IS. >> Not worth carrying at all. >> cheers, >> Frank >> >> On 12 Jan, 2010, at 17:24, Roger Rubin wrote: >> >>> Hi all: >>> Has anyone compared the GF-1 with the EP-2?? The latter has the >>> stabilization in the body. At last nites' LUG meeting in NY we were >>> wondering- what happens if you put a micro 4/3 lens with stabilization >>> on a >>> body with stabilization? Do you get double stabilization?? I have heard >>> that the EP-2 finder is better than that of the GF-1. Any comparisons?? >>> vroger >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390708/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information