Getting a new lens for my Olympus camera today

[Robert]

My Olympus E-410 is now a year old. It's a really small SLR and it has worked great. I have come to realize I would really make use of a good telephoto zoom lens, and after doing some research, I have come to the conclusion this lens will do me mucho good.

I will use it for running shots, family portraits and guitar family shots. I am picking it up today.

Olympus ED 70-300mm F4.0-5.6

Covering field of view to 600mm (35mm equivalent), this high mobility super-telephoto zoom lens weighs only 620 grams. Also, this lens incorporates three ED (Extra-low Dispersion) lens elements to offer sharper, higher-contrast imaging performance.
Furthermore, 1x magnification (35mm equivalent) tele-macro photography is capable. Thanks to Four-Thirds system, the lens offers a lot of the footwork out of both super-telephoto and macro photography world.

 

[Spudman]

Is that a digital slr or film?

 

[Robert]

Digital SLR. I will take some good photos for you guys with this new baby and post them for ya.

 

[Gutmann]

Hey Robert, so you are happy with the Olympus? I'm thinking of getting the E520 which would be my first DSLR. There's a good deal on german ebay with two lenses, but don't ask me which ones exactly:whatever:
The Olympus feels really solid compared to others in the same pricerange.

But I also want the diezel schmidt:drool: :thwap:

 

[Robert]

Yes, I am happy with it. It was my first DSLR and it has worked really well. My camera takes really good photos for such a cheap camera.

Keep in mind though, that there would be more lenses to choose from if yoiu go with Nikon and Canon. Quality-wise, I think Olympus stuff is just as good as any other brand.

 

[SuperSwede]

Nice one, I bet your veins will look lovely up close with that lens

We have a Konica Minolta digital system camera with a Tamron 18-200 mm lens, its really good but I dont know much about it and its functions.. I would really like to learn more about digital photography, got any good (basic stuff) sites worth checking out?

 

[Gutmann]

Keep in mind though, that there would be more lenses to choose from if yoiu go with Nikon and Canon. Quality-wise, I think Olympus stuff is just as good as any other brand.

That's true, but I think I wouldn't buy any other lense if I had two to cover most of the needs - so it would be enough for years.
Nikon-lenses are way more expensive as you need lenses with a stabilizer (which is included in the E520).

And yes, quality- and feature-wise, all those cameras in this pricerange do not differ very much.

 

[Robert]

Got the lens, and I was lucky too! They had marked it wrong, so instead of 479 dolares I got it for 429 pesetas! Ok, CDN dollar, but you get the point... Lucky me!

It is awesome, man, I'm like a kid in a candy store right now... grinning big as I'm typing!

I can get real close up on stuff now, with this zoom buddy. I'll get some nice shots for you and post laterz, ok?

SS - looky here - http://fotonord.se/fotokurs.html

 

[MichaelE]

Your tripple lens arrangement is commonly called an APO in the telescope hobby. An apochromatic lens eliminates the blue or blue-green halo commonly seen in doublet lenses in cheaper optics by aligning the blue spectrum with the other wavelengths. Mostly seen in high magnification, high contrast viewing, and large lens optics.

It's a science all to its own and subject of hot debate among telescope enthusiasts and cork sniffers around the world.

Enjoy your new toys!:bravo:

 

[Robert]

Thanks Michael, sounds like you know a lot about this stuff. Tell us more! What's your stance?

 

[just strum]

Robert, as you know I am looking to buy my daughter a camera and I checked out the prices on yours and that might be a good way to go. Warren has also made some recommendations and I need to look into them also.

I will PM you later with some questions.

Have fun with the new lens. I have an number of different lenses here for my old Minolta SLR that are of no use unless I want to spend the money on film.

 

[MichaelE]

That's a decent lens. f/5.6 isn't bad for 300mm at all. f/4 would be great, but cost increases dramatically for each increased f/stop or half stop for a given focal length. 70mm is good for portraiture.

A lot of long-focal length refractors are f/11 so you can imagine how slow those are with a focal length of 1300mm or more. If you can find (and afford) a tube with that focal length at a speed of f/8 or so it would cost thousands. Actually, a couple of tens of thousands with a tripplet APO lens.

And you thought guitars were expensive. I nearly took a second morgage out on my home several years ago for a 6" APO refractor with a focal length of 900mm at f/9 for just under $26,000 with the mount.

The telescopes I've had were all chromatic since I couldn't afford the high-end glass. Much like a comparison of Epiphone and Gibson. A chromatic lens (a doublet)will let you see the exact same things as an APO, but the APO does it better, clearer and with no halo. When comparing the two types of lens arrangements, the results are not subject to interpretation, they are a scientific fact. Unlike what two people may hear from an Epiphone and a Gibson from the same amp with the same settings.

I am just making an analogy, not comparing the two brands.

 

[Robert]

Whoa, twenty-six large ones! Are you nuts?! Wow, that is some serious hobbies you have.

Thanks for that info, that was great.

Here are a few test photos I took tonight as I was testing out the camera. Nothing special, but the lens sure does a good job for my needs.

http://picasaweb.google.com/DolphinstreetGuitar/Olympus70300mm

No interesting birds out tonight...

 

[just strum]

Well Robert, my daughter just informed me "It must be Canon" and since she is paying for half, I will let her have her wish. Maybe an Olympus in my future.


$26K!!!! Robert, think of the picks, think of all those picks.

 

[MichaelE]

Whoa, twenty-six large ones! Are you nuts?! Wow, that is some serious hobbies you have.

Thanks for that info, that was great.

Here are a few test photos I took tonight as I was testing out the camera. Nothing special, but the lens sure does a good job for my needs.

http://picasaweb.google.com/DolphinstreetGuitar/Olympus70300mm

No interesting birds out tonight...

Very nice, but you can see the depth of field suffers with a slower lens at higher magnifications. Color looks very nice but a bit underexposed.

Still a decent lens.

I did not take out the second morgage for that scope. I'd have been paying that off for fifteen years and I didn't want the load.

 

[MichaelE]

Well Robert, my daughter just informed me "It must be Canon" and since she is paying for half, I will let her have her wish. Maybe an Olympus in my future.


$26K!!!! Robert, think of the picks, think of all those picks.

Canon and Nikon are two of the best. You couldn't go wrong with either choice.

I've had Canon's since I was 14 starting with a Tlb 35mm, through the Canon F1, A1, and AE1 and AE1P. I still have the A1. One of Canon's best, if not the best 35mm film camera they ever made.

 

[Robert]

I think they look a bit underexposed because it was getting dark. Plus, the pictures are resized as lower quality jpegs, which tends to dulls and darken the pictures a bit. I will post more as I get to know the lens better. It's a very capable lens for only $400!

Yeah, Canon and Nikon are great and there are more lenses to choose from. I think the lenses from Olympus are just as good though.

If I were to buy today, I would get a Nikon D60X I think.

Michael, what makes those lenses you mentioned so freaky expensive? Is it so hard to make them or what?

 

[MichaelE]

The quality of the glass, the coatings used, and the polishing for the particular lens. There are a lot of different quality lens manufacturers, most of the best are in Germany or Austria.

 

[SuperSwede]

Thanks for the link Robert!