Surfing Shots with the E-PL3 - YES? NO?

[Robert Watcher]

SURFING : Yesterday at the beach, I had my Olympus E-PL3 with me - and when the waves began to thunder in and a few surfers hit the waves - - - I thought I'd give the E-PL3 a try with that type of content, while not really expecting too much success.

From using my 70-300mm (140-600 FF equivalent) lens for the same type of shooting with my full 4/3 camera bodies and still having to crop the images, I knew that the 300mm equivalent on the long end of my 40-150 micro 4/3 lens was not going to get me very close. But that was what I had and so that is what I used.

I have never really used the motor drive on my E-PL3 before and soon found that while it supposedly shoots at around 6fps - it was pretty useless as the buffer quickly filled and the advance slowed down to a crawl after on a few shots. And that was using S-AF. Trying to use C-AF or C-AF with Tracking, gave me a very slow frame advance from the get go.

Speaking of AF - the only mode that worked was S-AF. All the shots came out blurry with the C-AF and/or Tracking modes. But to be truthful, it was very difficult determining where the surfers were by looking into the LCD on the back of the camera. Between the brightness around me and the slow refresh rate of the screen - - - I just guessed at it.

And so I did get several images from my position on the beach. I shot with Auto ISO and Shutter Speed Priority set to 1/1250'th second and plus (+) 0.7 exposure compensation. Some images were actually reasonably focused on the surfers. I saved as JPEG as always, and the extreme contrast was handled not too badly with the water not being as blown out as it does with my 4/3 gear. All processing was done in Photoshop Lightroom 4.

But hey - I was really not intending on much for results and so was in reality "testing" different modes and camera abilities more than anything. I have printed a few 4x6's that look just fine, to take out the surfers next time I am that way.

A few more are on my Google + Community : https://plus.google.com/communities/115077889027350388861/stream/333203d2-ca5b-451c-84fa-8cd2e9d63873

 

[Jerome Marot]

The pictures are fine as to composition and light, but your experience with the camera is really priceless. In a nutshell: the motor drive is much slower than advertised, the AF does not work and the viewfinder (screen...) is not usable outside in the sun. A tribute to a modern marketing, really.

(In truth, I have an EP-1. It is not a bad camera at all, but the drawbacks you noted are real).

A question: the pictures you posted have a peculiar look, in particular on the water. It is as if too much amount of noise reduction was used. Is that the camera as well or the effect of compression for the web?

 

[Asher Kelman]

The pictures are fine........

A question: the pictures you posted have a peculiar look, in particular on the water. It is as if too much amount of noise reduction was used. Is that the camera as well or the effect of compression for the web?

Jerome,

You make an interesting point. It could be that these exceptional image will be even more wonderful processed differently.

Asher

 

[Robert Watcher]

The pictures are fine as to composition and light, but your experience with the camera is really priceless. In a nutshell: the motor drive is much slower than advertised, the AF does not work and the viewfinder (screen...) is not usable outside in the sun. A tribute to a modern marketing, really.

(In truth, I have an EP-1. It is not a bad camera at all, but the drawbacks you noted are real).

A question: the pictures you posted have a peculiar look, in particular on the water. It is as if too much amount of noise reduction was used. Is that the camera as well or the effect of compression for the web?

Thanks Jerome.

OK - the Auto Focus is pretty fast and very accurate on the E-PL3. Much faster than your EP-1 for sure. I have no problems with that part of the camera. It's just that the Pen cameras do not work well in situations such as sports - - - like attempting surfing shots.

My mention of the AF was more that the continuous auto focus C-AF and when used with Tracking, were of no use and did not provide me with any shots that were in focus. When I say that I got a few shots where quite sharp on the surfer, the difficulty with the AF providing those kind of results I'm sure had as much to do with the long distance that I was away from the subject - how small they were in the frame - the large size of the AF sensor - all kinds of interference in between such as other surfers and levels of waves.

As much as anything, I just didn't find the camera a good match for this style of shooting. Do I love my E-PL3 and E-PL1 setups. Absolutely! and use them every day for great results.

----

The look you mention - - - I have no idea. Probably the way that I dodge, burn, intensify, colorize, and who knows what else - my images in post processing. Oh - I almost always add a bit of "Clarity" to intensify the contrast on the edges - - - it is a taste that I like in my images.

The in-camera Noise Reduction is set on Low, so that may be a part of it. These were shot at 400ISO and 800ISO and so NR would have been applied. The distance I am away with the severe cropping to only a small part of the frame, could have something to do with what you are seeing. As well, the Pacific Ocean down in Central America has a look that I have never seen before - beautiful, fluid, aqua, and see-through.

 

[Robert Watcher]

Here is the first shot straight from camera without cropping or processing (resized to 950px)

and processed close for comparison

----

Here is the second shot straight from camera without cropping or processing (resized to 950px)

and processed close for comparison

​

I virtually never show my unprocessed work - straight from the camera. In this case I am making an exception. All images were hand held from a hill on the beach near the edge of the water - - - with the motor drive on, viewing through the rear LCD screen with it tipped out so I could view down into it, Exposure compensation was +0.7 to +1.0 stop. Shot at a 300mm FF equivalent focal length. You can tell how far away I was by the compressions. The surfers were nowhere close to the rocks that look to be directly behind them.


Rob

 

[Jerome Marot]

I don't know the reason, but the wavelets and the foam do not look quite natural to me. They are better in the unprocessed version.

 

[Robert Watcher]

I don't know the reason, but the wavelets and the foam do not look quite natural to me. They are better in the unprocessed version.

It could be that what you don't think looks natural, is a result of my pulling back the highlights and opening the shadows in post processing. The unprocessed image looks natural I suppose - like a snapshot would - what people would see if they were taking this same shot at this location and time of day. I would never use it or display it that way though. But that is my subjective choice and decision. I've never really been one for "natural" in my work - I personally am drawn to contrast, saturation and vibrance. It could well be that your computer screen displays differently than what I am seeing, as well. I appreciate your thoughts.

Rob

 

[Jerome Marot]

To me, the form of the wavelets and the smoothness of water between the wavelets looks unnatural, even in the unprocessed image.

 

[Robert Watcher]

To me, the form of the wavelets and the smoothness of water between the wavelets looks unnatural, even in the unprocessed image.

Hey - I can get you cheap tickets to Nicaragua so you come and compare the naturalness, with your own eyes - - - it may be that Nicaraguan wavelets are a little more edgy. Just kidding. LOL.


Thanks for commenting Jerome.
----

 

[Robert Watcher]

I thought that I'd throw this surfing image that I took a couple of months ago at the same beach. It was taken with my Olympus 4/3 camera and 600mm FF equivalent focal length lens. So I had quite an advantage getting in a bit closer that day.

For me, the Dynamic Range difference is remarkable - where it was impossible to hold detail in the highlights with the 4/3 sensor, while the micro 4/3 sensor of the E-PL3 yesterday did a much better job. Both days were sunny and bright and around the same time in the afternoon as far as I can recall. I used the same +0.7 exposure compensation. I was shooting on a bit of an angle to the sun on this day.

Olympus E-510 w/ 70-300mm lens at 300mm setting (600mm)