E-1 + 50mm - ideal portrait combo

[Paul Shields]

On our recent jaunt around the Netherlands (see http://www.photocamel.com/forum/phot...ay-2007-a.html for details), I took my E-1 + 50mm as well as a Canon 5D + assorted lenses.

One thing I love about the E-1/50mm is how nicely it works as a portrait lens even wide open. As a comparison, here are a couple of shots taken within the same time period (the subject is Cedric - our esteemed landscape photographer on the camel).

Image 1 taken with a Canon 20D



Image 2 taken with the Olympus E-1 + 50mm @ f/2


I guess there will be a mix of preferences for one shot or the other, but for me the E-1 shot has the quintessential qualities that I like about this camera. Lovely colours, detail, nice DoF but not too shallow.

[Malakor]

It is a very narrow DOF - can't be more a few inches. Can't make up my mind about the colours though as the exposure seems different - did you use flash in both of them?

[jan56]

guess you shot with pure window-light?
The shots looking very good for me. Yes you are right, the E1 + the 50mm is very good. I like the smooth grip of the E1 and the 50mm ofcourse is a perfect lens. I also used it a lot when intentionally shooting portrait.
Thanks for sharing Paul.
Jan

[Rense]

yep,
pure window light on both the Canon one (my version) and the Olympus one. Paul had a custom white balance dialled in.

[Paul Shields]

Originally Posted by Malakor

It is a very narrow DOF - can't be more a few inches. Can't make up my mind about the colours though as the exposure seems different - did you use flash in both of them?

They were in natural light. I'm not really attempting to compare one against the other here though. They both have their good and bad points. i guess the point I'm making is that the E-1 has a particular look and tonality, and this shot to me sort of sums that up. Anyone still using an E-1 will know what I mean. I use a Canon 5D as much as the Olympus and they're like chalk and cheese - very easy to spot the different 'look' from each camera. Both are great, but both are very different.

[Raist3d]

Paul, where these two converted from RAW? If so which RAW converters for each?

- Raist

[Mr. Pickles]

Originally Posted by Paul Shields

Both are great, but both are very different.

Wish more people would understand that sentence. Make the photo forum world a nicer place all around

As for the images shown here. I can tell the differences in each, having owned a Canon and an Olympus. Anyway, to me, they both are fine images, but both aren't perfect.

Nothing to due with the subject matter

The Canon one (top) is a nice image, but seems to lack some contrast or a bit of color. It seems typical in this regard. Not hard to tweak in post. The Olympus one (bottom) seems like it has too much saturation or color. Pretty typical of the Olympus too, and a lot of people prefer this colorful type image.

I'd say for this image, a combo right in between would be great. But this is one type of image. Others makes the results change. And neither is "better" because every bodies tastes are different. Some think eating herrings is a joke, and others swallow them with no issues.

[Paul Shields]

Originally Posted by Raist3d

Paul, where these two converted from RAW? If so which RAW converters for each?

- Raist

Can't say for the Canon shot - I think I was using Photoshop for this one (though it could have been Silkypix - I'd just renewed the license around that time).

[Paul Shields]

I think Mr. Pickles described the differences better than I could. There is a bit of boost in warmth on the E-1 by default (of course, this can all be reduced/increased afterwards). There is something else different too, and that is what I always have difficulty describing. It's a sense of depth that I feel I get from the E-1 - though nothing to do with DoF. Hard to display really - it could all be in my head after all . It is the one reason why I like to hold on to the E-1 though.

[craftysnapper]

Originally Posted by Paul Shields

It's a sense of depth that I feel I get from the E-1 - though nothing to do with DoF. Hard to display really - it could all be in my head after all . It is the one reason why I like to hold on to the E-1 though.

Paul has someone who has used both my impression is that the E-1 has a film like quality as opposed to a digital look, whenever I am asked was that took on film or digital it's nearly always a E-1 image. Whether thats a good or bad thing depends on you point of view , but it is what I like about it .

[Paul Shields]

Yes 'film like' is what I've also always thought - but never like to mention the f-word as it usually draws in arguments about digital being different (and better) than film.

I've read in various places that the E-1 was designed to be a drop in replacement for 35mm film photographers, and in that sense they got it right. It has many of the plus points of film and pretty much none of the negatives of digital.

[Rense]

that's correct. I always have my camera on neutral.
It was converted with Bibble Pro, no real postprocessing.