Oly35mm Overview - Zuiko OM Series - Macro Lenses
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ม.ค. 2017
- Possibly the most diverse and interesting range in the Olympus Zuiko OM stable. With nine lenses and a wide choice of accessories, the Macrophoto Group was designed to capture subjects from 1:10 to 12:1 (0.1x to 12x magnifications).
Samples can be found at:
www.flickr.com/photos/1296226...
The Oly35mm 2015/16 project is now closed and I will not be answering any more comments (as from 1st April 2017).
Thank you to all who have taken the time to watch these videos, and a special thank you to everyone who commented, or added extra information to them.
I wish you all many happy years of using film, or any other photography you enjoy.
Cheers
Oly - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
The Oly35mm 2015/16 project is now closed and I will not be answering any more comments (as from 1st April 2017).
Thank you to all who have taken the time to watch these videos, and a special thank you to everyone who commented, or added extra information to them.
I wish you all many happy years of using film, or any other photography you enjoy.
Cheers
Oly
Very comprehensive. I was a little sad watching this knowing it's one of the last videos in the project but I'm so glad you did this project in the first place. The information you put out will live on long into the future and benefit those who seek it more than you may ever know.
Thanks Old Cameras. I will be sorry to miss the interaction with likeminded people, but am looking forward to other photographic projects.
Like yourself, I believe the information sharing of this wonderful engineering is vital for a new generation of film photographers coming to the medium (or an older generation revisiting). It's amazing what great information is already out there, but I think I have helped complement it, rather that just thrown out more of the same.
These days you're likely to be using LED lighting for macrophotography, but the OM TTL flash system with the OM2n OM2sp and OM4 is one of the best around. Multiple T20s used together, or a ringlight or a multi-flash head fastened to the filter thread were available.
The connecting cables and adapters can be hard to find, but tend to gather with macro lenses and are worth seeking out at the same time.
These items are described fully in the OM System Flash Group documentation.
Very few LEDs put out enough light.
Another great video, thanks.
Thanks John. It's comments like this that have kept me going. One more overview video (and a farewell) to go.
Thank you for this video. I was considering getting the 80mm over the 50mm for the 1:1 macro, but I didn't know you needed bellows for it. Saved me buying a more expensive lens that I wouldn't be able to use!
I recently got this lens as I was curious to try macro with a vintage lens (on my OM-D E-M1). I have mine hooked up to a couple extension tubes (10 and 16mm) a focusing helicoid (35-90 M42) and appropriate adapters. It's not very pretty but functional :)
Trust me: the bellows is worth it. Also, don't be put off by the 80mm manual lens. If you get a good multicoated one it's just as easy to use as the auto. Easier in some ways. The only think you miss on the manual is a focus ring. The manual iris ring is super easy. The 50mm f/3.5 is an epic little lens that can do just about anything and also works very well on the bellows.
May I ask what the magnification is on the 135mm with the adapter and how close from the front of the lens can you get?
nice video
Thanks Ivan.
Sample pictures PLEASE.
I am thinking of buying the Olympus 65-116 extension tubes with the 80mm macro lens. What range of magnification would I get please.. thank you
0.5x to 1.2x.
ничего не понял,но очень интересно.
I have the bellows and the 80mm f/4 manual and 50mm f/3.5 auto. Both are fantastic. You can use these leses on a mirrorless camera with confidence and if you know what you're doing, you will get brilliant results. Real macro doesn't need an auto lens and in some ways it's easier without it. Unfortunately the 90mm macro has become a cult lens and you will pay over a barrel for one because idiots use it for portraiture. Olympus were very good at this and were, in fact, industry leaders in macro and micro photography.
Be careful buying the bellows. Mine are very good but they are sometimes cracked.
Agreed re the 80 and 50mm lenses----two very high-performing Zuiko underdogs, of which there are several. What don't you like about the 90 macro for portraiture----just its excessive sharpness? I don't have one, but other 90mm macro lenses (such as the Tokina 90mm f/2.5 AT-X macro) have been _the_ most versatile lenses I've had and have lived on my camera, and yes, have often been used for portraiture.
@@JLongTom
*_"What don't you like about the 90 macro for portraiture----just its excessive sharpness?"_*
That's right: they are too sharp. I'm a bit of a traditionalist. When I was a working photographer, I used two lenses and I used them from approximately the same distance. I had the 85mm f/2 and the 135mm f/2.8. I generally shot the 85mm at f/5.6 because it looked right to me. That's it. I didn't go down the 'bokeh' rabbit hole because it was almost unknown then. In any case, I wouldn't have and I don't now. The 135 I mostly used at f/8.
The reason I mention this is because the 85mm was 100% designed with portraiture in mind. I remember reviewers being a bit surprised that it was slightly soft in the centre. I think this was a minuscule amount of softness but it was caused by a certain amount of spherical aberration that was designed into the lens. And it was done that way because it was a better way to reproduce human skin. I got this from Olympus.
Peter Coulson, whose studio session I have done, said to me he believes modern lenses are too sharp. FWIW, I agree with him 100%. If you are shooting for a client, that client is not going to thank you if they then have to reduce that sharpness to get the look they usually want. It's never just a matter of putting gaussian blur layer over it in Photoshop.
I have the Sony 85mm f/1.8 and it's extremely sharp. It's too unflattering. When I did Peter's studio session, I wound up using my old 135 (with an adapter, of course) for a few shots, just to get away from that look. Peter agreed. I also have a 60mm f/2.8 M.Zuiko macro but I wouldn't use that for portraiture either.
Look, a lot of this is just me but if I were going to do another studio shoot with models, doing portraiture, I would consider doing it on film. It just looks so much nicer. You have to get it right in the camera, even if you use a drum scanner because film is a discipline. Nevertheless that's what I'd do. FWIW, my Olympus film kit has been retired because the body is too rare to risk it so I have a Bronica SQ. The 150mm f/4 is made for portraiture.
PS: If you're going to use a macro lens for portraiture, at least put a half black pro mist on it or something.
@@thethirdman225 Interesting to hear your perspective---I very much agree with the thrust of it.
I used my various 90 macros for portraiture on film, and in that context the inherently lower-sharpness nature of the medium (at least with the films I'd be using for candid portraits) largely offsets what would otherwise be brutally sharp lenses on a high-megapixel digital camera. Beyond that, I don't have the 85mm f/2, but a Zuiko lens I love for portraits is the 50mm f/1.2, not to go down the bokeh rabbit hole, but because of the wonderful and magical spherical aberration present wide open (and only wide open). In such contexts I might go for a much slower and sharper film.
I know what you mean about the temptation to retire kit because of its rarity or condition (and since I'm a user and not a collector, I hate it!). The OM-4 is my favourite Olympus camera alongside the OM-1, but my copy is just so pristine that I feel I have to take extra care of it, and it doesn't come along for rough-and-tumble outings. I'll probably pick up a battered copy just to forget about condition and use the thing!
@@JLongTom My ‘retired’ body is an OM-3. Quite a rare body. I used it when I was a working photographer and despite its faults - like totally draining the batteries in a couple of weeks - it was the best 35mm SLR I ever used. Being a mechanical camera, you could still use it even if the batteries were flat so I carried a Minolta digital light meter with me. It has the newer MD-2 motor drive but that never let me down. The inbuilt spot meter was an incredible tool, especially for one who worked mostly with transparency, where the latitude is very narrow and correct exposure is crucial.
There is no way I’m ever going to risk that body. If the shutter fails, that’s it. You can’t get them repaired any more. The circuit boards are no longer available either. If I were to go back to 35mm I’d probably find an old OM-1. I already have one but I don’t use that either, for sentimental reasons. It has the MD-1 on it. Built like a tank and incredibly reliable, it was my first SLR.
Yeah, I imagined you'd have the OM-3(Ti). It does sound like the perfect OM camera, although I didn't know that it too was afflicted with battery issues. My OM-4 has the Ti circuitry and is thus spared. I have the same OM-1 version as you (well, three or four actually, to take out both B+W and colour films at different speeds if I really want all bases covered). I've only had the first body I got for five years or so, but it's already producing a sentimental attachment thanks to the tactlie pleasure it gives while using it and the images it has produced. Maitani simply nailed the design philosophy with these cameras and lenses---the best image is the one you actually capture, after all, so small, light and simple wins (alongside little or no compromise on the image quality front). Then you can choose between the truly miniature slower lenses or slightly larger but still small f2s (or f/1.2 in the case of the 50; the 85 is the notable exception here, being still tiny).