Zuiko thread

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 end

Zuiko thread

bkwphoto
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #1 · Zuiko thread

Spent 3 months in Morro Bay California last winter. Great place, close to Montana De Oro and Paso Robles wine country. Of course the Ocean and all the gifts that come with it. A couple of shots with the 35 F2.8 on a 60D.


	© Brian Karl Werner 2012


	© Brian Karl Werner 2012

"Learning the Ropes"

Aug 06, 2012 at 07:49 PM

Ulff
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · Zuiko thread

Scrolling through the images in this thread I'm positively surprised by the pictures from the 50 1.4 and 50 1.8: great portrait, twoeye, and I like the flower picture a lot, bkwphoto!

Some more with the 50 2.0 macro, all wide open:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Aug 06, 2012 at 09:42 PM

Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · Zuiko thread

Groovy!

Here's a few from the most recently acquired OM 50/1.4 (all at about f/1.8):

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Aug 06, 2012 at 10:49 PM

bkwphoto
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · Zuiko thread

Ulff that last shot, looks like a coneflower, gorgeous high key and delicate details in the flower.
Bifurcator my eyes are bleeding from the first shot, girls and bikes.

5D and Zuiko 50 1.8


	© Brian Karl Werner 2012

Lily

Aug 08, 2012 at 01:37 AM

bkwphoto
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · Zuiko thread

Something a little different. E-PL1 Zuiko 35- 70 3.6 on bellows. Massive crop.

Sratches on Watch Crystal

Aug 09, 2012 at 01:52 AM

rbn920
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · Zuiko thread

Bifurcator you must be a manual focus master! Nice work locking onto those birds on page 1.

Aug 09, 2012 at 02:11 AM

bkwphoto
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #7 · Zuiko thread

Bifurcator wrote: "Currently between $500 and $600 for a 50mm, mag 1:2, F/2.0 hmmm... worth it?
Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 - $350 ~ $450 ***
Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.5 (52E) Macro 1:2 - $200 ~ $300 ***
Tamron SP 90mm f/2.5 (52B) Macro 1:2 - $100 ~ $200 ***
Minolta MD 100mm f/3.5 Macro 1:1 - $250 ~ $350
Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D, 1:1 - $350 ~ $450 ***
Nikon Ai-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8, 1:2 - $150 ~ $250 ++

Nikon Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 AI-S Macro 1:2 - $150 ~ $250 ***
Minolta AF 50mm f2.8 Macro 1:1 - $250 ~ $350 ***
Minolta MD-X 50mm f/3.5 Macro with Tube 1:1 - $150 ~ $250 ***
Canon EF 50mm F2.5 Macro 1:1 - $150 ~ $250
Canon FD 50mm f3.5 Macro 1:2 - $75 ~ $150
Pentax-A SMC 50mm f2.8 Macro 1:2 - $150 ~ $300

*** I own it or have owned it, tested it, and it rocks!
++ I own it or have owned it, tested it, and it's good!

Just quickly looking at ebay's prices." end of quote:

I see what your saying about the macro lens does this apply to the whole f2 series 24f2 28f2 etc. Are there any standouts in the olympus f2 line that justify their expense? I see keh has a 250 f2 coming in, not that I could afford one, of course no price listed yet. Just curious!

Aug 09, 2012 at 02:46 PM

Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #8 · Zuiko thread

Thanks RBN!

BKW, Beats me. I just read the question about if it was worth it and then started looking up the prices of other macro lenses.

The OM is a 2.0 but this is macro. Most macro guys are bummed that their lenses have diffraction limitations. It's pretty much the hope of every macro user to stop it down as far as possible all of the time. So IMO (and I guess the opinion of most macro shooters) anything below about 4.0 is just wasted. If it's higher speed that's wanted the OM 50/1.4 can be had for like $50 to $75 for example, and its hella sharp from 1.8 on.

So while some might argue hay, it's a f/2.0!!! I don't think that matters. When one also considers that speed is usually associated with weight and size it's a lose lose all around IMO.

In the same breath I haven't owned the OM 50mm F/2.0 Macro (1:2) so it very well may be that it kicks ass on all of the lenses I listed - although that would be quite a feat as some of those above are just phenomenal and a half.

<shrug>

In the end I guess if you can find one of those unmatchable "deals" that happen every so often you should go for it but at it's current standard price... Hmmm, why?

Aug 09, 2012 at 05:27 PM

LightShow
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · Zuiko thread

I have a few normal macros, a Yashica ML 55/2.8, FD SSC 50.3.5, Rokkor MC 50/3.5.
All 3 are nice and sharp, I really like that the Yasica is f2.8 I the extra speed lets me use the lens for more than just macro.
I'd like to try some Oly macros but their prices are more than I would like to spend.

Aug 10, 2012 at 02:20 AM

JohnJ
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · Zuiko thread

Bifurcator wrote:
...The OM is a 2.0 but this is macro. Most macro guys are bummed that their lenses have diffraction limitations. It's pretty much the hope of every macro user to stop it down as far as possible all of the time. So IMO (and I guess the opinion of most macro shooters) anything below about 4.0 is just wasted. If it's higher speed that's wanted the OM 50/1.4 can be had for like $50 to $75 for example, and its hella sharp from 1.8 on.

Aug 10, 2012 at 03:01 AM

Ulff
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · Zuiko thread

JohnJ wrote:
Bifurcator wrote:
...The OM is a 2.0 but this is macro. Most macro guys are bummed that their lenses have diffraction limitations. It's pretty much the hope of every macro user to stop it down as far as possible all of the time. So IMO (and I guess the opinion of most macro shooters) anything below about 4.0 is just wasted. If it's higher speed that's wanted the OM 50/1.4 can be had for like $50 to $75 for example, and its hella sharp from 1.8 on.

So while some might argue hay, it's a f/2.0!!! I don't think that matters. When one also considers that speed is usually associated with weight and size it's a lose lose all around IMO....

Your assuming that the only reason one would use a macro lens is for maximum depth of field, ie such as when focus stacked or massively stopped down. This is simply not the case as macros are used for pictorial reasons as much as anything else. It's not always about achieving maximum depth of field or technical perfection.

I use an ML55/2.8 usually wide open (but I do double up with an F8 shot because there is often a technical reason to do so). If I had an F2 macro I would regularly use it wo, indubitably.

+1

I use both my macros (Zuiko 50 2.0 + Zeiss 100 2.0) mostly wide open (at least in macro shots of flowers). The above images with the 50 2.0 are all done wide open. Stopped down they would have looked different and not to their advantage IMO. I used to have slower macros in the past and I didn't use them for non-macro shots because they were too slow for me. F2.0 lenses are perfect although to use them in low light and for portrait for example. They are two lenses in one and that's a big advantage for actually using them. Furthermore, the Zuiko 50 2.0 is the sharpest 50mm lens at f2.0 I ever had and I tried a lot of them.

Aug 10, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · Zuiko thread

OK, if you guys say so.

For all the shots you guys are talking about there are f/1.4 lenses that close focus available for $50 to $100 and are much better suited for those tasks - especially on µ4/3 where you also have a selection of 30 or 40 such inexpensive lenses - many of which are hella-sharp at f/2.0!. When you get down to between 1:6 and 1:1 reproduction ratios no one human can tell the difference between 2.0 and 3.5 - which is the slowest one I listed above. With some of the others we're talking about the difference is between f/2.5 and f/2.0

. And it's pretty rare that anyone would want to shoot at those magnifications near to it's widest apertures - it happens but it's rare!

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Zeiss_Jena_Biotar_50mm_F2/With_17_Diopter/_1050477.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/Zeiss_Jena_Biotar_50mm_F2/With_17_Diopter/_1050478.jpg

So yes, I'm assuming quite a few things all of which seem only to be common sense.

Wanna take macro shots - get a macro lens.
Most (all?) macro shots need to be stopped down to see anything almost at all. The DOF at those magnifications is just too narrow!
There is no humanly detectable difference between 2.0 and 3.5 at macro magnifications - let alone between f/2.0 and f/2.5...
For portraits or flower shots like above there are way better options available without having to spend an extra $400 on a macro lens that opens (only) to f/2.0
Most macro fanatics know that the hobby requires a good command and understanding of light, lighting equipment, and technique - the difference between 2.0 and 3.5 isn't hardly going to save anyone ever. And for sure never between 2.0 and 2.5 - etc.

The Zeiss 100 2.0 is a bit of a different story as it produces images at normal and far distance focusing which are quite unique with only a few other lenses capable of the same. In that case the person might want it specifically. And also 2.0 is quite fast for any 100mm lens - macro or not - whereas f/2.0 on a 50/55/58mm lens is pretty darn slow and not worthy - again, macro or not.

But that's just how I see it. I'm not out to convince anyone of anything. I do like sharing my thoughts on a topic tho.

So here you can see the non-macro Olympus OM Zuiko 50/1.4 with only a slight crop and not yet to it's minimum focusing distance either:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

1/500s, f/8.0 or f/11, ISO 100, GH1, Reproduction Ratio: Between 1:12 and 1:15, - processed of course.

Edited on Aug 11, 2012 at 10:27 AM · View previous versions

Aug 10, 2012 at 11:49 AM

dasrocket
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · Zuiko thread

The 21 3.5 and 50 1.4 are my two go-everywhere lenses on the NEX 7.

Michael, et al, how easy do you find focusing the 21 on a FF?

Aug 10, 2012 at 04:32 PM

Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #14 · Zuiko thread

rbn920 wrote:
Bifurcator you must be a manual focus master! Nice work locking onto those birds on page 1.

Thanks! However, if we think back to the time before AF existed there were plenty of awesome BIF shots. So both in theory as well as in practice I've found, it doesn't take much mastery.

I bet most AF systems would miss most of those shots anyway so even the AF guys would likely be turning to MF to get some of those.

I appreciate the compliment tho!

Aug 11, 2012 at 10:05 AM

c00kiem0nster
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · Zuiko thread

i got myself a zuiko 28 2.8 last week and soonafter bought an adapter for my 5dII.

here are my first shots with it on the canon. i have to say, i expected focussing to be more difficult without any special kind of screen and with no focus confirmation but surprisingly it is quite easy

anyway, here are some of the photos:

... by juke5489, on Flickr

... by juke5489, on Flickr

all with the zuiko 28 2.8.
the middle one was taken at f11, the other two wide open.

Aug 19, 2012 at 06:51 PM

c00kiem0nster
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · Zuiko thread

double post

something new from my zuiko 28 2.8 on my 5D Mark II from my recent trip to italy:

... by juke5489, on Flickr

... by juke5489, on Flickr

both shot at f11.
all in all definitely the best 40 bucks i spend in the last year.

Sep 02, 2012 at 04:37 PM

michael49
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #17 · Zuiko thread

bkwphoto wrote:
Let's see some more f2 shots. I Haven't made the investment yet, let's see if they're worth it.

Olympus E-PL1 ,Olympus OM 50mm f/1.4 Zuiko MC Auto-S ,25mm Extension Tube with big crop.
Second shot 5D Zuiko 50mm f1.8

Love both of those.

Sep 02, 2012 at 11:25 PM