Results of E-M1 mk1 at football game :-(

Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
425
Location
Kansas
Real Name
Mel
Ken wrote to get a Nikon d500. I have only a few lenses and a well used and loved Nikon D2x and a D750 left since I changed to Olympus. The change was necessitated because of the weight of the Nikon gear. I used to shoot with the D750 or D800 with a 300mm 2.8 or 70-200 2.8 and quite frankly, my broken but mended wrist would not let me carry that much weight . The Olympus EM-1 with 40-150mm 2.8 is much lighter even with the battery pack. That is not a option for me now.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
686
Location
Melbourne, Florida
Real Name
Ken
Ken wrote to get a Nikon d500. I have only a few lenses and a well used and loved Nikon D2x and a D750 left since I changed to Olympus. The change was necessitated because of the weight of the Nikon gear. I used to shoot with the D750 or D800 with a 300mm 2.8 or 70-200 2.8 and quite frankly, my broken but mended wrist would not let me carry that much weight . The Olympus EM-1 with 40-150mm 2.8 is much lighter even with the battery pack. That is not a option for me now.
Mel---I love my Oly equipment----but when it comes to BIF are fast moving subjects I grab my d500.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
686
Location
Melbourne, Florida
Real Name
Ken
Get better soon----I see Trump is building a wall in Kansas. Dorothy find Toto quick!!!!
couple BIF with my d500
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,202
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
I finally MADE the decision. Nikon D7200 + 70-200/4 for the field.
The way I shoot, I can't use a lens with significant drag on the zoom ring. So I will be staying with the D7200 + 70-200/4.
In case you are wondering, I free-hand hold the camera+lens, and I hold the camera like a shotgun; with the tripod foot reversed and resting on the heel of my hand, with my fingers forward and on the zoom ring. That position makes for very easy tracking and follow zooming.

I do use the monopod for the JV game, so my arm muscles are not worn out for the Varsity game, which I free-hand.

At the point where I HAVE TO use the monopod all the time, I might switch to the faster but heavier 70-200/2.8.

I wish the zoom ring on the Olympus Pro zooms (12-40 and 12-100) had less drag than they do.
But then someone else would probably say the zoom moves too easily.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
425
Location
Kansas
Real Name
Mel
I do very little zooming during the football game. The 40-150 2.8 is almost always on 150mm and the 50-200 2.8/3.5 is almost always on 200 @3.5. I want close ups of the hand offs, of the runners hitting the holes or the tackles. Do I miss some close action? Yes but not often since I use my manual zoom--my feet!
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,202
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
I do very little zooming during the football game. The 40-150 2.8 is almost always on 150mm and the 50-200 2.8/3.5 is almost always on 200 @3.5. I want close ups of the hand offs, of the runners hitting the holes or the tackles. Do I miss some close action? Yes but not often since I use my manual zoom--my feet!
Interesting. I don't usually zoom in close, except when they are lining up on the scrimmage line.
You can obviously track better than I can with a tight zoom.
To follow a player, I have to zoom wide, to get extra space around the runner.
Then when I see something developing, or a longer shot, I will zoom tighter.

Agree about the short lens/second camera.
I've been caught with nothing but the 70-200, and unable to get the close shots.
And last night, even the normal lens 35mm on APS-C, was too tight for some shots. But I used it because of the REALLY POOR lighting on the band. ISO 6400, f/2, 1/60 sec.
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,202
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Well I broke down and got the 40-150/2.8.
I've been eyeing that lens for MONTHS.
A little more reach and a stop faster than the 12-100/4.
But as Ian said, about the same as the Nikon 70-200/4 on my D7200.

Timing turned out to be good.
The 70-200/4 has to go into the shop. The VR is mis-behaving, even when OFF. So it is out of commission, until repaired.

The zoom ring on the 40-150 is going to take some getting used to.
It is not as light at the Nikon 70-200 :(

Soccer next Wednesday, to give it a try.
 
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
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom