Macro options for m4/3

[slau]

I can use my 1DMk3 for comparison. I can use one of the following macro lenses:

Sigma APO 180f3.5
Contax Zeiss Makro-Planar 100f2.8
Hasselblad 120 S-planar
Canon EOS TSE 90 + tubes

The Sigma will be easier on the Panasonic camera as it has its own lens mount so that it will not be putting too much stress on the GH1 lens mount. My personal favorite will be the Contax macro. But, I think you want to 'take the lens out of the equation'. What kind of subject do you have in mind?

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey - have you actually gotten the EC14 to work with the Panasonic DMW-MA1 adapter? The Panasonic site lists it as incompatible, along with the EC20 and the EX25 extension ring. I tried the EX25 (in spite of the warning) and found it didn't work, as stated. I have the ZD 35 macro and if you have the EC14 working I'd love to give it a go.

Unfortunately, no, not for Oly ZD lenses. I forgot that we were talking about the Lumix G cameras ... I use the 35 Macro with the EC14 on my L1 and E-1 bodies.

I have used the EC14 on the G1 with Pentax and Nikon lenses in front of it, on FourThirds mount adapters. It does an excellent job that way: only its optics are being used. Olympus ZD lenses can't be used with it, they simply remain inert, do not focus or work the aperture.

 

[petermcwerner]

Mark,

Has anyone used the same lens on the GF1 and a high resolution DSLR like the Canon 1DsmkIII or 5DII. i would be interested in seeing some comparisons where the lens is taken out of the equation. A macro comparison would be fantastic.

I had already made such a comparison between the G1 and the Nikon D700 in my post G1 compared to Nikon D700 but the consensus of the comments was that it was not very meaningful.

I have a G1 and a Nikon D700, as well as a Nikon adapter for the G1 and could take a different shot. However, if I take the same scene from the same location, the G1 will catch only a fraction of the FOV of the FF D700. I cannot see this to be very interesting. Or do you have a better proposition?

Cheers
Peter

 

[pellicle]

Mark

Has anyone used the same lens on the GF1 and a high resolution DSLR like the Canon 1DsmkIII or 5DII. i would be interested in seeing some comparisons where the lens is taken out of the equation. A macro comparison would be fantastic.

nearly, but not exactly. I wanted to take my OM 50mm lens with me, but fluffed it up and left it behind. So instead I had to use my kit zoom and the Canon EF 24-105L.

My blog article is here, and my personal question was what is the per square cm image capture like between the 5D MkII and the G1 ... meaning if we get a 36x24 sensor of the same density as the G1 will it perform any better than the 5DMkII does.

Here is a screen shot (scaled down) of the same central portion with the same focal length.



clicking that image should load the full size (I hope)

 

[slau]

I have been shooting my GH1 and 1DMk3 side-by-side during my last few trips. Also, have been making up to 13X19 prints (of images with tons of details) from both cameras from the trips. Even with the Panasonic kit lens 14-140, the Panasonic GH1 holds its own very well when the light is decent and ISO is lower than 400. I have lots of confidence in the GH1 for outdoor landscape type of shots (when it is not raining ). Basically from my real world experience, you have to be very observing to tell the prints apart. No, the Panasonic cannot replace the Canon 1DMk3 yet, probably not for another couple of years.

 

[pellicle]

hi there

I have been shooting my GH1 and 1DMk3 side-by-side during my last few trips. Also, have been making up to 13X19 prints (of images with tons of details) from both cameras from the trips.... Basically from my real world experience, you have to be very observing to tell the prints apart.

nice to hear such positives

since there are such differences as:
* weather sealing
* frame rate (images / sec)
* AF and stabilized lens availability
* tilt shift lens availablity

I can imagine why you say

No, the Panasonic cannot replace the Canon 1DMk3 yet, probably not for another couple of years.

but knowing all the above makes me feel happier to be on a trip to Rome / Spain / France next month with just the kit 14-45, 9-18 and an FD 200f4 and not feel like "gosh I should have taken my ..."

now, if I had a 12-60 I probably would leave the 9-18 at home ;-)

 

[apicius9]

I'm not sure whether I should open a new thread about that, but I would like to hear some opinions on tripods for macro work if I may? I have a very light Slik Sprint Pro that is light enough to actually carry it around with me but doesn;t hold much weight. Now I have a 4-way rail and a bellows & lens combo on the way, and was thinking about a basic tripod that would be used 95% of the time for macro and product shots with my little light tent and probably never would leave the house. I see that the prices on tripods are open-ended, but for such a basic use, wouldn't a cheap one be enough as long as it holds the weight of the rail & camera and doesn't fall over? I don't need speed, low weight, fast assembly, ballheads etc, and I can do all the precision work with the rail. Or am I totally off? To be honest, I never understood what the advantage of the high-priced branded tripods was... Thanks for your input,

Stefan

 

[Godfrey]

I'm not sure whether I should open a new thread about that, but I would like to hear some opinions on tripods for macro work if I may? I have a very light Slik Sprint Pro that is light enough to actually carry it around with me but doesn;t hold much weight. Now I have a 4-way rail and a bellows & lens combo on the way, and was thinking about a basic tripod that would be used 95% of the time for macro and product shots with my little light tent and probably never would leave the house. I see that the prices on tripods are open-ended, but for such a basic use, wouldn't a cheap one be enough as long as it holds the weight of the rail & camera and doesn't fall over? I don't need speed, low weight, fast assembly, ballheads etc, and I can do all the precision work with the rail. Or am I totally off? To be honest, I never understood what the advantage of the high-priced branded tripods was...

If you don't need compact size, light weight, speed in setup, flexibility in positioning, etc, then the bottom line comes down to how stable the tripod is and how durable it is. Top of the line tripods are durable and very stable, cheap tripods tend to wear out quickly and are filmsy for a given elevation and weight-bearing capability.

The tripod I use in the studio (or carry when I'm not going to be pounding distances into the field away from the car) are a nice set of Manfrotto 3021BN legs (purchased new as a remainder for $80) fitted with a Kirk BH-1 ball head. They weigh a bit, are utterly stable for gear up to 30lbs weight, and stand more than tall enough without column extension for eye-level work. The head's expensive, the legs not, and will likely last for 20 years or more ... a very serviceable tripod for a lot of uses.

(Actually, I don't really need them at all anymore ... I don't need a tripod that can handle so much weight since I stopped shooting medium format. If anyone wants a good set of legs and a top-notch head, drop me a line.)

 

[mark1958]

I am responding to Pellicle's 45mm 5DII and panasonic comparison posted above. I read the blog and have a couple of comments.

I did some experimenting with the GF1 14-45 and 5DII 24-105 the other day. I did all of my tests handheld but in good light. I used the equivalent focal lengths. so 14mm/GF1= 28mm on the 5DII. Now you get more coverage with the 5DII when doing this--- so for landscape shots, I am not sure i would agree that the 4/3rds system is superior. In my case, I shot a wood fence surrounded by plants and trees-- the fence had lots of grain. In my opinion, at the low isos, the detail was pretty close and the overall image quality also pretty darn good, when pixel peeping. However, when trying to upsize the 4/3rds to equalize the pixels on the L side, you could start to see the differences and the 5DII won out. However, the difference was not as great as I might have expected.
So for landscapes, if you were trying to get the same visual field, different focal lengths are required and then i think you would start to see more differences. I need to make some prints to see how well this holds up in that respect.

 

[mark1958]

HOw about anything with alot of detail (e.g. rusty nail) and shoot that 1:1 in both cases

I can use my 1DMk3 for comparison. I can use one of the following macro lenses:

Sigma APO 180f3.5
Contax Zeiss Makro-Planar 100f2.8
Hasselblad 120 S-planar
Canon EOS TSE 90 + tubes

The Sigma will be easier on the Panasonic camera as it has its own lens mount so that it will not be putting too much stress on the GH1 lens mount. My personal favorite will be the Contax macro. But, I think you want to 'take the lens out of the equation'. What kind of subject do you have in mind?

 

[mark1958]

I guess there is no right or wrong way to make this comparison. If you use the same lens, would it not be the most accurate to move the camera so that the FOV is the same?

Mark,

I had already made such a comparison between the G1 and the Nikon D700 in my post G1 compared to Nikon D700 but the consensus of the comments was that it was not very meaningful.

I have a G1 and a Nikon D700, as well as a Nikon adapter for the G1 and could take a different shot. However, if I take the same scene from the same location, the G1 will catch only a fraction of the FOV of the FF D700. I cannot see this to be very interesting. Or do you have a better proposition?

Cheers
Peter

 

[slau]

I guess there is no right or wrong way to make this comparison. If you use the same lens, would it not be the most accurate to move the camera so that the FOV is the same?

I still believe that the final result is the ultimate comparison: a print. But, there can be a lot of disagreement about the size of print should be used for comparison

 

[f6cvalkyrie]

Rafael,

Please let us know your opinions about this. I just checked it and wonder its possibilities.

Hi,

my rail arrived yesterday, so I barely had the time to mount and test it.
I did a pano-shoot in my living room, moving the camera back to have rotation around the entrance pupil, and stitching was a child's game.

That's one good point !

Today, I'll try to test it in macro setup !

Build and finish of the rail seem better than appropriate for the price !

C U
Rafael

 

[Ron Evers]

Peter, I see we are both using the same focusing rails. However, I mount my camera 180° differently than you so that the lateral control knob is at the back rather than under the lens.

Shown is a Minolta 100mm/f3.5 with a set of three extension tubes.

 

[Odry]

I would like to do this with you girls as well. The autism walk was great. RDP walks for Breast Cancer....sounds great Ill sign up this week.

Do you already have a team set up?

 

[JerryMK]

My "other" Macro setup. This way with the Kiron MD 105mm f2.8 mounted.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

My "other" Macro setup. This way with the Kiron MD 105mm f2.8 mounted.

Hello Jerry, you are one of the people who got me into buying Canon FD stuff,
because of your wonderfull macro's.

Found FD bellows (very cheap) and last sunday I bought on a Photographica fair a Canon macrophoto coupler to use your lenses reversed. It has even a hood for the other side of the lens which makes the aperture working.
The guy had a 35mm 2.8 for €10. Light like a feather. Got the f 2 version too. And the 85/1.2, in good condition (no hood) and much cheaper then the Bay prices. Whow that looks like a serious piece of glass!(heavy)
Of course some other nice lenses too
Now I am waiting for my adapter from Hong Kong.

How do you like your new Kiron compared to your other around 100 mm macro lenses?
Regards, Michiel

 

[JerryMK]

Hello Jerry, you are one of the people who got me into buying Canon FD stuff,
because of your wonderfull macro's.

Found FD bellows (very cheap) and last sunday I bought on a Photographica fair a Canon macrophoto coupler to use your lenses reversed. It has even a hood for the other side of the lens which makes the aperture working.
The guy had a 35mm 2.8 for €10. Light like a feather. Got the f 2 version too. And the 85/1.2, in good condition (no hood) and much cheaper then the Bay prices. Whow that looks like a serious piece of glass!(heavy)
Of course some other nice lenses too
Now I am waiting for my adapter from Hong Kong.

How do you like your new Kiron compared to your other around 100 mm macro lenses?
Regards, Michiel

Hi Michiel, nice to read you got inspired. That is what sharing is all about. Did you went to Houten last weekend... reading your info I amost regret I was not there. The 85/1.2 is a killer lens, is it the L version? Good buy. I have the 58mm/1.2 (fl mount)

My experience with the Kiron so far is that it is a very sharp piece of glass and the rendering is beautiful. Had (still) to get used to the very narrow DOF at full extend. (The Tokina 90mm did not left mt G1 body for a long time...) But it produces nice sharp images. What I also like is that the lens on itselves reaches 1:1. With my Tokina I have to use the extender.

Looking forward seeing your G1/FD shots here.

Regards,
Jerry

 

[Vivek]

I stopped going to Houten a while ago.

I have not used my Vivitar S1 90/2.5 on the m4/3rds thusfar. Too heavy.

So, Jerry is also from the Netherlands?

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

It is the second time I went to Houten and I went with specific interests and found what I wanted (party).
The 85/1.2 is the L version Could get a good deal on a TS FD 35/2.8 lens as well, but I had to restrain myself.
Today the 50 macro arrived and I do also have the 50/1.4
All without chrome ring and very light.
But I have to wait because Hong Kong is far away :banghead:

BTW Which FD lens would be interesting on the macrophoto coupler?
With step up rings a lot is possible.
Michiel

Hi Michiel, nice to read you got inspired. That is what sharing is all about. Did you went to Houten last weekend... reading your info I amost regret I was not there. The 85/1.2 is a killer lens, is it the L version? Good buy. I have the 58mm/1.2 (fl mount)

My experience with the Kiron so far is that it is a very sharp piece of glass and the rendering is beautiful. Had (still) to get used to the very narrow DOF at full extend. (The Tokina 90mm did not left mt G1 body for a long time...) But it produces nice sharp images. What I also like is that the lens on itselves reaches 1:1. With my Tokina I have to use the extender.

Looking forward seeing your G1/FD shots here.

Regards,
Jerry