So I tried Shooting a Halloween Party

[blatalllic]

I am not sure either thats why I asked lol......

 

[jon_k]

1) 50mm f/3.5 isn't all that fast (max aperture) for a prime
2) Isn't that for a manual Olympus? Can a manual Olympus mount to a E-500? I don't think so but I"m not sure.

They make a couple of versions of the OM 50mm lens. They come in f/1.3, f/1.8 and f/1.2. They're all sharp and fast lenses. They /are/ manual focus (all OM lenses were) but manual focus isn't an issue with a split prism focus screen installed. Some folks have no trouble with it stopped down.

OM lenses do not fit on Olympus 4/3 bodies natively. You have to purchase a converter ring to conver OM mount to 4/3 mount. You can buy a converter ring for $125 from Olympus, or you can get a cheap one from hong kong on ebay for $25. Since it's a hunk of metal, I'd suggest eBay.

nope....

This is the core reason why someone would pick a DSLR camera with better high ISO performance over just a faster lens. (or just use a flash).

During the film days... film manufacturers were fighting hard to improve high ISO films... especially for B&W negatives.

The Olympus system has enough high ISO performance for my tastes. Please refer to these images taken with a lower end "prosumer" level E-510.

Customers don't care that much about noise. Do you think people would not buy pictures in the film days when someone shot with high iso film?

The noise in these pictures are minimal and well within acceptable ranges, unless your printing a poster. If you want crystal clear performance at 640000 ISO, I guess Canon and Nikon full frame are your only option. For everything else, there's smaller sensors.


ISO 400 on e-510
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1334/749539232_740c25e702_o.jpg

ISO 1600 on e-510
http://i20.tinypic.com/2rd9av4.jpg

ISO 400 on e-510
http://photos.imageevent.com/jonas_b/dprolyslrkvartal/0708/066_joakim_stampe.jpg

ISO 800 on e-510 (Noise filtering turned off.)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2270/1662071348_03db430ce8_b.jpg

ISO 1600 on e-510 (noise filtering turned off)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1279/1368632059_7bf539c484_b.jpg

The picture made by OP is fine too. His problem was focusing in dark conditions with a fairly slow lens. The tiny viewfinder in the E-500 doesn't help either. The E-500 has the smallest viewfinder in the Olympus lineup I've noticed. Quite annoying. The e-510 is better. One of the reasons I'll upgrade eventually. I don't know if usayit's intentions were to specifically be a troll the 4/3 format, or what. Maybe I've spent too much time on dpreview. If so, apologizes. High ISO performance just isn't one of my buying factors for a camera, as long as pictures up to iso 400 are ok, I'm happy.

 

[chris_arnet]

Canon gear isn't cheap either...but at least it's a little more plentiful and easy to find.

agreed, and you can find 3rd party lenses (sigma for example) easier. See, if i were you, i would of pulled out my nifty fifty.

 

[usayit]

Customers don't care that much about noise. Do you think people would not buy pictures in the film days when someone shot with high iso film?

Consumers don't but photographers do! Believe me... I can't tell you how many pixel peepers I've come across in my dealings that concern noise. This is the same case back with in the film days. My comment was an extension on another thread which discussed faster lenses versus the nice trend towards cleaner photos at higher digital ISOs.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=97900

Yes.. you want to have a faster lens for low light shoots but people don't realize how much the shallow DOF really comes into play. This is apparent in the OP's photo. For me... I'll take the easier handling f/4 + high ISO performing camera over the f/2.8 + normal ISO performing camera. It just fits my style of shooting.... definitely not a general recommendation

My comment had nothing to do with the Olympus DSLRs... so no pissing contests and keep your photos... I could care less.

The picture made by OP is fine too. His problem was focusing in dark conditions with a fairly slow lens. The tiny viewfinder in the E-500 doesn't help either.

I don't believe this is to be the case.... As mike said, the girl's shoulder on the right is in focus and behind that plane everything is out of focus. The issue is shooting with a shallow DOF.... shooting at a wider aperture (w/ faster lens) won't improve much but decrease the DOF. Shooting in low light has many variables... not just aperture. In this case, you can increase the light (more powerful flash for example) or you can increase your ISO.

I shoot with a manual rangefinder.. I will shoot either with 28mm or 35mm, push the ISO, set my shutter to a reasonable speed (1/focal length +/- depending on steadiness and subject movements), and under-expose a bit but maintaining control via aperture. I can adjust later.... either wet or digital darkroom. If one subject or shallow, I'll open up.

In any case... shooting in that type of environment is very difficult. Flash is definitly a solution but I find that it destroys the "ambiance".

I don't know if usayit's intentions were to specifically be a troll the 4/3 format

stfu

, or what. Maybe I've spent too much time on dpreview. If so, apologizes.

my guess is yes... I've been posting in this forum a whole lot longer than you and I've yet to make one troll posting... I've yet to even be defensive about any particular camera(s)/Equipment I own. They are all tools... thats it... some are good at certain things.. and the same suck others... Even Nikon is great even though I prefer Canon for SLRs.

There is a reason why I don't post my equipment listing on my sig.

Do you think people would not buy pictures in the film days when someone shot with high iso film?

Huh? I guess you'll tell me that Tmax 3200 was completely pointless and a waste for Kodak to market.

 

[elsaspet]

When you go low light, get that ap up and shoot in manual as stated above.
Also, with most cameras, you should be able to shoot 1600 without much noise issues.

 

[blatalllic]

This was my first experience at this type of photography....Kinda fustrating when lil $100 digital cameras were focusing and not mine BUT the pics that I was able to get were a whole lot better quality...

I just need practice thats all.....Have to find what works for me right? Thanks guys for all the input...This helps me improve in my hobby as a photo guru!!!

 

[Flash Harry]

It wasn't noise with film, hi iso film had larger grain but wasn't unattractive, a friend of mine used it for portraiture and pushed it a stop for what he called, "Golf ball grain", printed on seagull oriental the work was beautiful and he is still in great demand for this type of work. Digital noise however is usually associated with an underexposed shot, hi iso is not the answer, if the situation requires it use flash. H

 

[usayit]

I'll take fllm grain over digital noise anyday.......

but I have to say digital cameras are improving.