Inspired by the 17mm thread.....

Djarum

All-Pro
Location
Huntsville, AL
Name
Jason
Took these yesterday with the 17mm and E-PL2. CC always welcomed.

PA020331.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)





PA020321.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)




At first, I had no idea what this was until closer inspection. 17mm with ND8 at f2.8.



PA020336.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)




And last night:


PA020358.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Shooter, I'll have to look up tonal seperation. As far as high priced, the 2 c notes I paid seemed to be a bargain.

Andy, the lens is sharp enough for me. I also like the close focus abilities of the lens. No, its not as fast as the 20m, but I love the 17mm fov.

Pdh, I just didn't want to hijack your thread.:)

Thanks all for the comments. All of them are ooc jpegs.
 
Pdh, I just didn't want to hijack your thread.:)

Funnily enough, I never started it to be a share thread, but it turned into one ... maybe the two could be merged? (unless you want to keep this one for your images , which is perfectly understandable)
 
pdh,

Personally, I don't care either way. The thread was started for two reasons. First, I sometimes don't use the 17mm as much as I like, so I thought I'd take it for a spin. Secondly, I'm still fumbling around with the E-PL2 (I know the E-P1 like the back of my hand). The thread was a cullmination of both those objectives in mind. Funny thing is, the 17mm I think is a better match on the E-P1 in terms of style, but I think I like the images from the E-PL2 better with it. Might have to do with that weaker AA filter. Not sure yet.
 
While my E-P1 offers a superior set of controls, the E-PL1 I got recently also shows a subtle but noticeable bump in IQ in comparison. The handling also works better for me as well, although the lack of a control wheel can be an issue at times. With that in mind I think the E-PL2 would be the best featured compact m4/3 body for me to go with my GH1.
 
Nic,

This is slightly off topic, but just a few pennies. The one thing I'm having to come to terms with is that I always felt the LCD and images on the E-P1 were reasonably close to how the images look on my home and work monitor. The E-PL2 is a different case. While the increased resolution is nice, the LCD seems to give the pictures a cooler tone than they actually have and the screen doesn't seem to have the dynamic range that the E-P1 screen had. The other positive about the E-PL2 Screen is that it does get brigther than the E-P1 which makes framing easier in strong sunlight.
 
Hey Jason, thanks for the info. It sounds like the similar issue I had with my GH1 compared to the E-P1, only in reverse. As you say the E-P1 LCD is remarkably accurate for colour, but the GH1 screen shows colours that are more saturated than is actually the case. The E-PL1 on the other hand seems to show colours accurately but is not as nice to look at as the E-P1.
 
Interesting discussion. I have both the E-PL1 and E-PL2. In regards to the LCD the bigger, sharper screen is wonderful on the 2. However at default the screen on the first PL more accurately depicts the brightness than does the second gen. Image looks perfect on the screen of the 2 but has to be raised in exp comp to look the same on the PC. On the PL2 one needs to watch that histogram!
However that brightness make it much easier to use in sunlight. The dial versus button UI is a bit easier to use but is more vulnerable to being accidentally disturbed.
For me what the PL2 brings most to the table is that it fit my hand far better, more secure.
I actually consider getting a black 17mm to match my black E-PL2.
I know, I iz fashun victum ;)
 
This discussion has gone onto a tangent, oh well.

Lili,

Your experiences seem similar to those over at mu-43. When I first started using it, I "thought" I needed to underexpose more than I normally would, like I do on the E-P1 to protect highlights. What I figured out was that the E-PL2 screen brightness is higher by default. I also think the dynamic range of the screen is also lower, even though the overall brightness is actually higher of the PL2 screen, in comparsion to the E-P1. Other's have commented on this over at mu-43. I think what would be nice is for a contrast adjustment on the screen as well. I also don't care for that real strong blue tinge the E-PL2 screen has, either. I think it is an AR coating type thing, and works good in sunlight, but in normal indoor light, it really isn't that nice.
 
This discussion has gone onto a tangent, oh well.

Lili,

Your experiences seem similar to those over at mu-43. When I first started using it, I "thought" I needed to underexpose more than I normally would, like I do on the E-P1 to protect highlights. What I figured out was that the E-PL2 screen brightness is higher by default. I also think the dynamic range of the screen is also lower, even though the overall brightness is actually higher of the PL2 screen, in comparsion to the E-P1. Other's have commented on this over at mu-43. I think what would be nice is for a contrast adjustment on the screen as well. I also don't care for that real strong blue tinge the E-PL2 screen has, either. I think it is an AR coating type thing, and works good in sunlight, but in normal indoor light, it really isn't that nice.


D'oh sorry to go off topic! I had not noted the coolness you speak of BTW. Not at least compared to the E-PL1...
 
Lili,

Thats fine being off topic. It's my topic, so I say its fine ;)

The E-P1 LCD screen has a bluish AR coating on it as well, but it is much stronger on the E-PL2. I may need to get a screen protector for the E-PL2 which might eliminate some of that.
 
Back
Top