[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by joe1980

I need help with some settings on my OM-D EM 5 Mk II. Recently, I have been doing prints with some of the photos that I take. I did some 15 x 15 prints and they turned out to be good, but when I did a 30 x 30, the pictures weren't that great! They sort of looked blurry. Is this a limitation of the micro four thirds sensor or is it some settings that I had wrongly chosen? I believe that my settings weren't proper! Can some of you that own a OM D, let me know what picture settings I should select so that I get a shaper 30 x 30 prints?

For a 30x30 inch print, you are looking at 115 ppi (taking the shorter side of original image into account) if you are not upsizing.

That's a little less, but sharp prints are very much possible if your shooting and processing (for print) techniques are alright.

[Jeroen]

If you want to get a feel what kind of pictures you can take with a very simple mirror less camera these days:

http://www.olympuspassion.com/2017/0...raviraj-kande/

[Thad E Ginathom]

what kind of pictures you can take with a very simple mirror less camera these days

Wow. But that guy could probably take winners with a disposable film camera (if those things still exist)!

Bought a Sony a6000. It has a nice, real-camera feel in the hand, without the weight and size of [D]SLR. I like that. It is certainly clever. Waaay clever. At the end of day one the menu option I really needed was "reset to defaults," and on day two I started to take things more slowly.

It is clever, but it it is not foolproof. Perhaps less foolproof than a pocket P&S. Even with two levels of fully "intelligent auto."

So, where I am now is like stepping back forty years to the time when I did have to think about shutter speeds and aperture and where the light is coming from. New adventure.

(Sony Alpha A6000Y 24.3MP Digital SLR Camera (Black) with 16-50 & 55-210mm Lens (ILCE-6000Y)

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Wow. But that guy could probably take winners with a disposable film camera (if those things still exist)!
])

Yes, those disposable cameras still exist.
I met this guy in Delhi a few year ago. We were both active on a Olympus Facebook page group.

I had bought the then brand new Pen F whilst travelling in Europe and it wasn't available in India. I wrote about my experiences and showed some images. He contacted me and we ended up meeting , having a coffee and talking photography for a few hours. Nice guy. He did wel and is now an Olympus ambassador next to his day job as an actor/comedian.

Jeroen

[ampere]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Bought a Sony a6000. It has a nice, real-camera feel in the hand, without the weight and size of [D]SLR. I like that. It is certainly clever. Waaay clever. At the end of day one the menu option I really needed was "reset to defaults," and on day two I started to take things more slowly.

Absolutely love this one! I have the basic 16-50 and the 50mm. The 50mm (APSC version) is damn sharp. Am thrilled to bits with this combo. It hardly leaves my 6000. And its the best combo to carry at a moments notice. Battery is bad. But with USB charging, you can charge in the car too.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Good. I have the double-lens kit with the 16-50 and the 55-210. Surprised how useful the 16-50 is; the 55-210 has not spent much time on the camera yet.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Good. I have the double-lens kit with the 16-50 and the 55-210. Surprised how useful the 16-50 is; the 55-210 has not spent much time on the camera yet.

I use the 16-50 mostly for wide angle. Not as wide as 10-22 on my Canon. But helps most occasions so that I dont carry the 10-22.

I dont have the 55-210.

[Thad E Ginathom]

I'm trying to improve on my just-diary-snapshot photos taken at concerts. Some of my efforts are dreadful!

Why do many of my pics taken in one hall look completely flat? Could it be because most of the light on the stage is coming from above them?

[Samurai]

The lighting in concerts and shows are very challenging for photography. If you are a point-n-shoot photographer, you truly have no prayer. If you are a serious photographer, you'll need a very fast lens, lots of luck and decent PP skills.

I shot this at my son's school event, from 100ft away using a 45mm F/1.8 lens. My son is at the center. Then it was the longest lens I had.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Samurai

The lighting in concerts and shows are very challenging for photography. If you are a point-n-shoot photographer, you truly have no prayer.

Please offer me some hope!

Yes, it is tough, even though in a carnatic concert they are, at least, sitting in the same places. But not keeping still. I've long since discovered that it is better to photograph the vocalist when they are not singing. Often they sing with their eyes shut, move about more, and frequently have an expression closer to a grimace than a smile as they loose themselves in the bhava of the moment.

This one was pure point-and-shoot luck, back in December 2014. I have the Music Academy to thank for the background and lighting, and the mridangist for making the ladies laugh. I'm happy to say that a print adorns the wall of the main artist, Smt Vedavalli. She tells me it has even been on the television.

I'm sure it has many faults. It was completely unplanned, un-thought-about, and I did not even know about it until I uploaded the pics to the computer.

Now I have a much better camera... but I wonder if I will get a better stage-group picture!

I usually sit within the first two or three rows. Moving about, in these concerts were people do not generally behave very strictly, is ok. I see pros come and go. Some of them have huge. monopod-supported lenses; some have very modest-looking equipment. Only the hobby photographers spend all evening with their cameras: the pros are at work, they get what they want, in a few shots, and move on.

That is what I'd like to learn how to do, because, ultimately, I'm there for the music, not the camera.

[joe1980]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

This camera is used by many professional shooters these days. Certainly in combination with the pro lenses you should be able to print razor sharp poster size. The largest I print from my Emk2 is A3 but only because my printer can't handle larger size paper.
But before starting with the setting you need to have sharp enough image to start with. What format are you using, do you do any post processing before prining. As already suggested please post a few images that appear to have this problem

Jeroen

Sorry for the late response! With regards to the settings, what I have is:

Picture Mode is set to either Portrait or Natural
Still Picture is set to LF+RAW

So my question was if these are the correct settings to make a print 30 x 30 without any post processing? The pictures that I printed kind of had an Orangish tint on the skin, but I do not see it when viewing it on my computer. So I", starting to think if this might be caused by the Kodak printer that I used at the shop. I"ve checked with the guys at the shop and they told me that if I order the prints instead of printing them right away (like I always did), it might be of a better quality.

@Samurai - I will soon upload the picture and let you all know.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by joe1980

Sorry for the late response! With regards to the settings, what I have is:

Picture Mode is set to either Portrait or Natural
Still Picture is set to LF+RAW

So my question was if these are the correct settings to make a print 30 x 30 without any post processing? The pictures that I printed kind of had an Orangish tint on the skin, but I do not see it when viewing it on my computer. So I", starting to think if this might be caused by the Kodak printer that I used at the shop. I"ve checked with the guys at the shop and they told me that if I order the prints instead of printing them right away (like I always did), it might be of a better quality.

@Samurai - I will soon upload the picture and let you all know.

Size/lack of sharpness and colour/tint are different issues and require different approaches to mitigate for prints.

[joe1980]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

Size/lack of sharpness and colour/tint are different issues and require different approaches to mitigate for prints.

What approaches do you recommend? Any general ideas that you might want to share?

[joe1980]

Sorry that I'm chaining my post. I was a little bit late to edit my post above as I wanted to add the following video link that I found useful to determine the print sizes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDd7C4d0R4U

[AnniHilat0R]

Guys I am planning to buy a Sony A6300. Is there any alternative to consider which costs around the 70k mark ?