Are there other lenses that are fully auto on a 4/3rds system other than
Zuiko? (though I will likely not be as happy, my kit lenses have been pretty
good in comparison to anything else)
DOF, I think Jan used this phrase and it made sense to me, is what is
acceptable. The further away I take a shot, the better it appears to me, the
closer I have the lens, the les depth I get, but the spot that is in focus
is superbly crisp. Just gets to, what is it you like or will accept. Me, I
want it all and I want it now.....but will just have to wait....
I've gotten the impression that a 90 would get me better Macro's, but the
wise old heads have said a 50 mm macro, f2 and I will shoot for that first,
experimenting later on.
BUT.... as Moose wrote here, will this lens retain the auto features?
" Now I realize that the Sigma 105/2.8 EX DG Macro is available in 4/3
mount."
Thanks again,
Scott
(interesting, Andrew and Phillip haven't minded ant OT posts on Macro menses
<snicker, that'll probably get another interesting barrage of literary works
form them>)
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Moose
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 10:11 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Mini Macro questions
Dan Mitchell wrote:
> Moose wrote:
>
>> First, I am not suggesting that you get a 90 mm lens.
>>
>
> That said, this prompted me to retrieve the Viv S1 90/2.5 1:1 macro
> off the shelf, and _wow_, is it ever a more pleasant experience taking
> photos with that than with the reversed 7mm.
Your comments lead me to something I either didn't know or had
forgotten. I wanted to make clear that I wasn't recommending a 90 mm
lens because I thought Scott might be thinking of a MF lens and I didn't
think there was an AF one available. I figured it is fine if he makes
that MF choice, but I don't ant to push it. I personally wouldn't want
my primary lens for hiking through the woods to be MF, but others will
have other ideas about that. The Tammy 90 Di is great, with the MF/AF
switch in push/pull of the focus ring, but not available in 4/3 mount.
Now I realize that the Sigma 105/2.8 EX DG Macro is available in 4/3
mount. I don't know anything about it except it has a 9.1 avg. rating
from 52 userson the FM ratings forum, which is really good.
With a 4/3 field of view eq. of about 200 mm on full frame, it would
have great working distance and is about $100 cheaper than the DZ 50/2.
A stop slower means less bright finder, but not much.
It wouldn't "fill the frame" any better than 50/2 with EX-25, 1:1 is
1:1, regardless of focal length, but it would do it from further away.
The thing I don't know about is DOF. My sense is that the trade-off for
the working distance would be less DOF, but I can't do the juggling of
different sensor sizes and focal lengths in my head.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|