It's good I had OM-D and a $1000 macro lens...

Started Mar 7, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Senior MemberPosts: 1,360
Re: It's good I had OM-D and a $1000 macro lens...
In reply to danijel973, Mar 7, 2013

danijel973 wrote:

Honestly, after several attempts of photographing bugs with live view, I would not be likely to invest in an expensive macro lens for a non-SLR system. A good SLR viewfinder is much more accurate and there is absolutely no lag, which is essential for this type of photography. I only managed to get this because I got sharp 100% focus on the part of the flower I expected the bee to move around, and then I looked at the bee's movement directly, not through the camera, and squeezed off several frames at the right time. The camera is not exactly making it easy.

How mileage varies.

After capturing some tens of thousands of photographs of bugs using live view on an articulated LCD, I would not be likely to invest in a dSLR that required me to use a viewfinder. I find Live view to be extremely and reliably accurate, and (on my G3, unlike my previous cameras) very fast with virtually no hunting. And this is the case even in fairly poor light. And with a small, movable focus box, and even better with Panasonic's Pinpoint focus, I can place the centre of focus exactly where I want it, and even keep it there during sequences of shots when tracking a moving subject; which I find very beneficial for this type of photography.

But then again, relevant to the OP, I don't use a dedicated macro lens. I would like to, but I haven't found a rig, dSLR, SLT or MFT that would let me work, with a dedicated macro lens, the way I like to work. So for now, I use (inexpensive) achromats.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow