Aerosmith Concert Photos

Discussion in 'Other Genres' started by absolutic, Dec 4, 2012.

  1. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    • Like Like x 10
  2. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    USA
    Looks good! Did you consider using 75mm /1.8 instead and crop?

    did you do something with the shadows in post? some of the photos have darker regions with pixelated spots.
     
  3. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    I considered but 1) I was sitting too far for 75 in my opinion and 2) I was afraid that my wife would not be able to sneak in a shiny fat 75 1.8 lens, while it is easier to sneak in a slim black 14-150.

    here is how far I was sitting: ffGXDA=

    I did very little with these last night as I came from the concert late, very little effort, some were cropped. The lighting was changing constantly of course. My main interest in this exercise was to see how soft is 14-150 at the tele end, and can it keep up in challenging light conditions, and I felt the results were acceptable
     
  4. yekimrd

    yekimrd Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 14, 2012
    Cincinnati, OH
    Mikey
    The results are more than acceptable. #1 and #2 are great IMO. We all know that this lens is softer compared to even it's 40-150 counterpart. So I would say kudos to the photographer for making the best of the tools you had with you. Isn't the OM-D just one heckuva killer camera in low light situations? :smile:
     
  5. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    Thank you for kind words.

    What are my other choices there?

    Two years ago I took Panasonic GF1 with 45-200 to a similar concert (but I was sitting much closer). But 45-200 is known to be soft at 200, right?

    My other choice is buying 100-300. now, is 100-300 small enough to be able to sneak it to a concert like 14-150? I am not sure. I know that 14-150 is very compact and light and stealthy. Not sure about 100-300. Plus I heard that 100-300 is soft at tele end as well.
     
  6. 0dBm

    0dBm Mu-43 Top Veteran

    859
    Jun 30, 2011
    Western United States
    I bet Steven Victor Tallarico (Steven Tyler) can still scream and belt like he did in 1975 when I first saw them in DC. I remember he and Todd Rundgren almost getting into fisticuffs in a New York subway over whom was Liv's real bio dad.
     
  7. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    He did good. Both my wife and her friend told me that he was 'hot' and they would have 'dated' him even though he is 64.
     
  8. yekimrd

    yekimrd Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 14, 2012
    Cincinnati, OH
    Mikey
    the oly 75-300 would've worked except you're losing about 1/2 stop of speed. or just the 40-150 -- better IQ than the 14-150.
     
  9. xdayv

    xdayv Color Blind

    Aug 26, 2011
    Tacloban City, Philippines
    Dave
    the last shot can be put into their album! :thumbup:
     
  10. Spuff

    Spuff Mu-43 Top Veteran

    652
    Dec 5, 2010
    Berkshire, UK.
    I don't think the 100-300 is badly soft at 300.
    300:
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/safetytrousers/8175353915/" title="swan feathers (on the swan) by Safetytrousers, on Flickr"> 8175353915_ac1fa6d1e8. "500" height="260" alt="swan feathers (on the swan)"></a>

    The 100-300 is obviously bigger than the 14-150 and must therefore increase your chance of being noticed or stopped. When fully extended it's enough for people to look and I think it's big and chunky enough for people to think you are more than a casual shooter although I think with the small body it does not look the same as the image people would have of a Pap type, it's a whole lot smaller than lenses of equivalent reach for an SLR. I think you have a reasonable chance of smuggling it in, and if you got away with the 14-150 extended I think you have a chance with the 100-300 plus it's black and may be ninja-like in the dark (it's not as if it's one of those white enormo-lenses). If there are a lot of other people taking shots on their small things and not being stopped I would guess you wouldn't be stopped.

    I like your shots.
     
  11. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    SoCal
    The 100-300 is slightly larger than the 45-200. If you can sneak in a 45-200 odds are you can sneak in a 100-300. Nice shots BTW, hope you had a good time.

    The 100-300 is good at 300mm:
    GRAA0409.
    Brea Jazz Festival
    OM-D w/P100-300 @ 300mm, 1/350, f/5.6, ISO 1600

    Gary
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Hyubie

    Hyubie Unique like everyone else

    Oct 15, 2010
    Massachusetts
    Herbert
    I love Steven Tyler. Loved him even more when he said something to the effect of "people don't realize how expensive it is to look as cheap as we do." :smile:
     
  13. Djarum

    Djarum Super Moderator

    Dec 15, 2009
    Huntsville, AL, USA
    Jason
    Very cool images.
     
  14. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    WOW, that looks much better wide open at tele end that I thought it would be. However I don't know if i could sneak this thing in. It looks large, but I personally have not handled it. Also I don't think I need the 300mm (600mm equivalent) there for these events. What I truly need is 150mm (300mm equivalent) which is sharp on a fast lens. That is why I got excited when I heard about 40-150 F/2.8 Oly rumor (which turned out to be false).

    While we are at that, I have a question, does Olympus/Panasonic make m43 2X TC, Like Canon and Nikon guys??? Because I can envision putting 2X TC on my 75 1.8 which would make it a 150mm 3.5 and I am sure still reasonably sharp because you get an insanely sharp lens first and degrade it a little bit, and 3.5 is better than 5.6. That might work and be a compact solution
     
  15. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    SoCal
    No on the TC's ... lack of TC's a a daily harp here. TC's will be coming, probably in 2013 if we get past this Mayan thing.

    From where you were sitting ... I'd say yeah, a 300mm would be nice, better to have and not want than to ....

    Gary
     
  16. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    any rumors re: TCs?
     
  17. limpeh09

    limpeh09 Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Sep 21, 2012
    Singapore
    • Like Like x 1
  18. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    SoCal
    Not that I am aware.

    G
     
  19. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    Right, no teleconverters yet (now that we have f/2.8 zooms and the 75mm f/1.8 I'm hoping a TC will be in the near future).

    However, Panasonic did already announce a 43.5 f/1.2 and 150mm f/2.8, both stabilized. Those are coming next year so your wish may yet be answered there. I imagine the 150mm will be pricey but very high quality much like the recent fast zooms from Panasonic.
     
  20. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    I just hope 150/2.8 won't be huge. As several Panasonic lenses for some reason turn out to be much larger than comparable Olympus lenses (14-140 vs 14-150 comes to mind immediately). I guess they have to make them larger to include the IS in, which is unnecessary with Oly lenses. 2X TC on 75/1.8 I believe would be more compact than 150/2.8, and I imagine the price of 75 and 2X TC (should m43 choose to make one) would be less than that of 150/2.8

    but, lets wait and see re: 150/2.8. Knowing that the price of 300/2.8 lenses from Canon and Nikon is obscene, I won't be surprised if Panasonic prices theirs not far off.