Flowers

Walter

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
2,451
Location
Germany
Real Name
Walter
P7307923.1.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Walter

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
2,451
Location
Germany
Real Name
Walter
P8108215.1.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Keeth101

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
819
Location
North West U.K.
Yellow Carpenter Bee (and visitor) on Ban Karela flower

46766979091_31575683b3_b.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

EM1ii + 75-300ii. Goa.
 

Walter

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
2,451
Location
Germany
Real Name
Walter
P9078625.1.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Walter

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
2,451
Location
Germany
Real Name
Walter
P9078526.1.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Walter

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
2,451
Location
Germany
Real Name
Walter
P9078528.1.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Panolyman

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
2,447
Location
Wild West Wales
Real Name
Brian
One of the gardening experts on TV the other day said that these are one of the first indicators that autumn has arrived.
2109-01 EM5:2-60.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Judging by the fact that the sycamore leaves are falling around them, it looks like he might be right.
 

Panolyman

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
2,447
Location
Wild West Wales
Real Name
Brian
Eupatorum macrolatum & Eriocapitella hupehensis,
more commonly known as Joe Pye Weed and Japanese Anemone.
2109-09 EM5:2-60.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Can anyone enlighten me of who Joe Pye was please?
 

L0n3Gr3yW0lf

Dad Pun Joke Master Over Nine Thousand Meme Lord
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
1,323
Location
UK
Real Name
Ovidiu
I have been testing the Tamron FE 28-200mm f 2.8-5.6 Di III RXD a couple of days ago and flowers grabbed my attention because it was raining and made the colors really pop:

WOF00270.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I was quite presently surprised at how close I can get.

WOF00276.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

While it doesn't get as close as Olympus 12-100mm f 2.8 Pro but the DoF is so much less for a very beautiful blurry background.

WOF00279.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Very beautiful sharpness for a non-Pro (well as in being advertised) super zoom lens, even wide open.
WOF00282.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The bokeh balls can look distinct and nervous but it hasn't bothered me at all, to be honest, it's not like shooting at f 2.8 or f 1.8.

WOF00283.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Where, in the past, I have found many cameras and lenses struggle so hard with shades of red, this combo seems to do very well and they reproduce all the different shadings in the petals, brilliant contrast.

WOF00286.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

This one is not close to minimum focus distance but I do love the rendition of the colors and the background. I've seen and heard a lot of people complain about Sony's disgusting rendition of green (and I would agree that those greens look awful in the samples they showed) but I haven't seen those kinds of shades in my style of post-processing, so it makes me think it's either people being lazy in JPEGs and not liking the SooC or they are not White Balancing very well to their scene (outdoors I generally prefer the Lightoom's Daylight WB and change the temperature to 6.000 as I love warmer tint to images).

WOF00294.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Another example of greens being very present to my eyes (though I admit that these greens are quite "fresh" as it was still English raining at that time, aka getting wet in places that the sun doesn't shine). Also for f 5.6 that house is quite a background blurred, being at ~75 meters away from the subject.
 

BruceRH

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jul 1, 2020
Messages
131
Location
FT Worth, TX
I have been testing the Tamron FE 28-200mm f 2.8-5.6 Di III RXD a couple of days ago and flowers grabbed my attention because it was raining and made the colors really pop:

View attachment 907213
I was quite presently surprised at how close I can get.

View attachment 907214
While it doesn't get as close as Olympus 12-100mm f 2.8 Pro but the DoF is so much less for a very beautiful blurry background.

View attachment 907215
Very beautiful sharpness for a non-Pro (well as in being advertised) super zoom lens, even wide open.
View attachment 907216
The bokeh balls can look distinct and nervous but it hasn't bothered me at all, to be honest, it's not like shooting at f 2.8 or f 1.8.

View attachment 907217
Where, in the past, I have found many cameras and lenses struggle so hard with shades of red, this combo seems to do very well and they reproduce all the different shadings in the petals, brilliant contrast.

View attachment 907219
This one is not close to minimum focus distance but I do love the rendition of the colors and the background. I've seen and heard a lot of people complain about Sony's disgusting rendition of green (and I would agree that those greens look awful in the samples they showed) but I haven't seen those kinds of shades in my style of post-processing, so it makes me think it's either people being lazy in JPEGs and not liking the SooC or they are not White Balancing very well to their scene (outdoors I generally prefer the Lightoom's Daylight WB and change the temperature to 6.000 as I love warmer tint to images).

View attachment 907223
Another example of greens being very present to my eyes (though I admit that these greens are quite "fresh" as it was still English raining at that time, aka getting wet in places that the sun doesn't shine). Also for f 5.6 that house is quite a background blurred, being at ~75 meters away from the subject.
Very nice images! The Tamron 28-200 lens is, IMHO, one of the best lenses in the Sony system. It is very tough to beat for the image quality/price/size.
 

L0n3Gr3yW0lf

Dad Pun Joke Master Over Nine Thousand Meme Lord
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
1,323
Location
UK
Real Name
Ovidiu
Very nice images! The Tamron 28-200 lens is, IMHO, one of the best lenses in the Sony system. It is very tough to beat for the image quality/price/size.
I have to say that is very very very close to Olympus 12-100mm f 4 Pro (but from memory and experience and not a direct comparison as I don't have Olympus gear anymore), the minimum focus distance the f 4 past 75mm (of the Sony) and Sync IS is where the Olympus has the advantage, but Tamron has the f 2.8 advantage (at 28mm to 31mm, f 3.2 at 32mm to 44mm, f 3.5 from 45 to 58mm, roughly). They are roughly the same size, shape, weight, the Tamron may feel a bit less in build quality because of the use of industrial plastic and rubber rings but that doesn't mean much for me personally. The filter thread is different though, 72mm on Olympus and 67mm on Tamron. In terms of image quality, I can't give too much information as I am still getting used to the lens, BUT there is one huge difference I have noticed right off the bat: Tamron has significantly less Chromatic Aberration compared to Olympus, both in normal usage and in high contrast and backlight usage. On Tamron, there is some that are literally 3-4 pixel width and it's easily removable, on most of the Olympus and Panasonic lenses it was beyond 10-pixel width and quite often correction would be at notable image quality drop because desaturating that many pixels it would give a very noticeable gray halo of missing information or in some situations with some Olympus lenses the purple fringing was so deep in intensity that the Lightroom dropper could not recognize it and fixing it would have to be done my -100 Saturation or +100 Green Tint with a brush on it.
One note is that I do believe that Olympus has better bokeh rendition on the 12-100mm when you can get close enough to the subject or zoom to 100mm, the shapes are rounder at the edges of the fame, smoother in the center, and less hallowing around the balls. But at 12mm f 4 Olympus can not compete with Tamron at 28mm f 2.8 (which is where my main interest for Tamron was originally for indoors with my little girl).
 

Mountain_Man_79

Brannigan’s Law is like Brannigan’s love
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
2,501
Location
Land of 10,000 Lakes
Real Name
Chris
I can’t say I’ve ever noticed even the slightest amount of chromatic aberration on my 12-100 Olympus. Everything you’ve described @L0n3Gr3yW0lf sounds pretty extreme...you must’ve surely had a bad copy? I’ve never even heard a single reviewer fault this lens for anything, much less what you’ve described. Interesting. Anyway, lovely images with the Tamron!
 

BruceRH

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jul 1, 2020
Messages
131
Location
FT Worth, TX
I can’t say I’ve ever noticed even the slightest amount of chromatic aberration on my 12-100 Olympus. Everything you’ve described @L0n3Gr3yW0lf sounds pretty extreme...you must’ve surely had a bad copy? I’ve never even heard a single reviewer fault this lens for anything, much less what you’ve described. Interesting. Anyway, lovely images with the Tamron!
I have not had any CA on my 12-100 either.
 

L0n3Gr3yW0lf

Dad Pun Joke Master Over Nine Thousand Meme Lord
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
1,323
Location
UK
Real Name
Ovidiu
I can’t say I’ve ever noticed even the slightest amount of chromatic aberration on my 12-100 Olympus. Everything you’ve described @L0n3Gr3yW0lf sounds pretty extreme...you must’ve surely had a bad copy? I’ve never even heard a single reviewer fault this lens for anything, much less what you’ve described. Interesting. Anyway, lovely images with the Tamron!
I can look up some examples, I don't want to give any false information or bad reputation. It could be that I may judge it too severely.
 

Mountain_Man_79

Brannigan’s Law is like Brannigan’s love
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
2,501
Location
Land of 10,000 Lakes
Real Name
Chris
I can look up some examples, I don't want to give any false information or bad reputation. It could be that I may judge it too severely.
I suppose I believe that lens is capable of standing up to a severe judging, so I’d love to see some of your examples.
Nice to see you posting some pictures btw!
 

L0n3Gr3yW0lf

Dad Pun Joke Master Over Nine Thousand Meme Lord
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
1,323
Location
UK
Real Name
Ovidiu
I suppose I believe that lens is capable of standing up to a severe judging, so I’d love to see some of your examples.
Nice to see you posting some pictures btw!
I had a look through a few images and it is less than I originally said or believed (I could blame it on a bad experience with a bad copy of Olympus 14-150mm Mark II and Panasonic primes like 15mm f 1.7, 20mm f 1.7, 42.5mm f 1.7) though I was reminded of another issue I had this one is a bit more complicated: moire.

If requested I can upload some sample files (I'm not that stingy about image thieves, my work is not that valuable :p ). I believe that this is a credit to:
1) Incredible sharpness of Olympus lenses
2) No Low-Pass filter on E-M cameras
I have noticed the pretty frequent occurrence of Moire (which sometimes can feel/look like purple fringing/chromatic aberrations in some cases) in landscape foliage (most often dense trees), fur (wildlife and pets), and the usual (and completely expected) repeating patterns of man-made stuff like buildings and clothes.
1631325338940.png
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

This is a screenshot of an unedited RAW 20 MP file.

1631325477772.png
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

This is an uneditied RAW 50MP HHHR file, it is underexposed to protect the very strong highlights of a very sunny and fast moving clouds that day. The purple fringing is not very bad, I would say about 5 pixel width and correctable without any IQ loss.

1631325714088.png
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

And this is about the most I can get on average out of the Oly 12-100mm Pro, I tended to use that lens with HHHR most of the time which would push the design of that lens to it's limit at such pixel density.
As the above all these situations are in backlight situations and that would be the most common place such issues would rise up so it wouldn't affect everyone the same way or as much.

Now I would like to appoligize because I just realised I made a critical error which I will explain myself in my next reply.
 

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom