Stylus 1, happy start, Wildflowers, butterfly and bee close and super macro

Hi Elliot,

It has 8 diopter, 2.5x, is quite zoomable, very clear (does not reduce light on my f2.8 lenses), auto focus works like charm (if you are at the right distances), snap-on adapter for 52-67mm very handy. I guess will have no problems to attach to the CLA adapter, I believe it is 55mm ?


They have it at B&H :


I do have a Bower fisheye + macro but it´s IQ is very inferior.

Dpreviewmember said:

Hi Elliot,

It has 8 diopter, 2.5x, is quite zoomable, very clear (does not reduce light on my f2.8 lenses), auto focus works like charm (if you are at the right distances), snap-on adapter for 52-67mm very handy. I guess will have no problems to attach to the CLA adapter, I believe it is 55mm ?

http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/dcr/dcr250/indexdcr250eg.htm

They have it at B&H :

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/275182-REG/Raynox_DCR_250_DCR_250_2_5x_Super_Macro.html

I do have a Bower fisheye + macro but it´s IQ is very inferior.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info,

CLA adapter, Kiwi version, is 58mm, same as the od of the tcon 17 neck, so I presume Oly adapter is also 58mm od.

It is smooth, no texture or raised ridge to grab onto. How much pressure, and how well do you think the raynox adapter would stay on a smooth tube? It's not like they are moved around vigorously, but, could you rest the bottom of the adapter on something without it tilting for instance? I guess yes, but to be sure.

btw, front of tcon 17 is 80mm and it has no threads.

Hi Elliot,

I have an old Oly SP-510UZ with the CLA-4 Lens Adapter Tube, which provides a 55mm diameter mounting thread. You telling me that the new adapter for the Stylus-1, the original one, does not have at thread to attach 55mm filters ?

I do have the TCON-17 (1.7x), but the old model, which has a 55mm thread, the new doesn't ? is it attached by pressure ?

That would be a very odd decision from Olympus. I hate when they keep changing things to force us to buy new adapters all the time. Would be a real turn down since I had the idea that CLA-13 would allow me to use my current adapters and filters.

The Raynox M250 can be clipped only on filter threads. I doubt that it will hold securely on a completely smooth surface. It has a 49mm front element thread for attaching filters and a hood, also a mounting thread of 43mm in case you preffer to use a conversion ring.

Dpreviewmember said:

Hi Elliot,

I have an old Oly SP-510UZ with the CLA-4 Lens Adapter Tube, which provides a 55mm diameter mounting thread. You telling me that the new adapter for the Stylus-1, the original one, does not have at thread to attach 55mm filters ?

I do have the TCON-17 (1.7x), but the old model, which has a 55mm thread, the new doesn't ? is it attached by pressure ?

That would be a very odd decision from Olympus. I hate when they keep changing things to force us to buy new adapters all the time. Would be a real turn down since I had the idea that CLA-13 would allow me to use my current adapters and filters.

The Raynox M250 can be clipped only on filter threads. I doubt that it will hold securely on a completely smooth surface. It has a 49mm front element thread for attaching filters and a hood, also a mounting thread of 43mm in case you preffer to use a conversion ring.

Click to expand...

All 4 are 55mm threads: Camera; Adapter Tube; Tcon 17 tele lens (and the auto lens cap)

The length of the adapter tube is 50mm, including the projecting threads, it's effective length when attached, not including the threads, is 45mm. How long is your adapter?

the camera has 55mm threads for the auto lens cap, it get's removed for the adapter.

the adapter tube has 55mm threads, and anything you want to fasten to the tube would need to be 55mm.

The tcon 17 has 55mm threads that fit the adapter's threads. It has no threads on it's face, so you cannot put a clear lens protector on it, or perhaps a UV or CPL filter. I was giving it's size in case someone was trying to find a case that would fit it when attached to the tube and camera. Attached, with it's plastic cover on, is 80mm. Plastic cover is 83mm diameter.

it's the OD of the adapter barrel I was mentioning. The Raynox is an adjustable adapter, and I was trying to describe what it would have to fasten itself to, a 58mm OD tube, no ridges or external threads.

The tube has a 55mm thread.

I have used the Olympus MCON-35 with much success on the Stylus 1 using a 55-62mm step-up ring (need same ring for use with the Olympus TCON-14B). The tube will also work with the Olympus TCON-17, B-300, and the TCON-17x with no ring. To use the Nikon converters (TC-E15ED or TC-E17ED) you need a 55-50mm step down ring. For many of the Cannon's you need a 55-58mm step up with the exception of the TC-DC58C (2x) which I needed to use a 55-62 step up coupled with a 62-58mm step down to tackle the longer threading of that converter. With the Konica-Minolta ACT-100 youi need a 55-49mm step down ring. With the Kenko KNT-20 you need a 55-52 step down. With the Sony's (VCL-HG1758 and others in their 58mm line) you need a 55-58mm step up.

A really nice combination is putting the Canon TC-DC58A onto the Nikon TC-E15ED for a 2.25x converter (1.5x * 1.5x).

I have tried the Reynox DCR-250 on the Stylus 55mm tube and am not as impressed as I am with the MCON-35 macro.

Elliott,

The Raynox attaches to inside threads.

Hi,

Yes, the M250 clips on the inside thread, very easily and securely !

Have you guys tried also the Raynox wide 6600PRO on the Stylus with CLA13 ?

The stylus has a very limited wide of 28mm that could maybe be a good buy if there is no vignetting when fully wide.

Dpreviewmember said:

Hi,

Yes, the M250 clips on the inside thread, very easily and securely !

Have you guys tried also the Raynox wide 6600PRO on the Stylus with CLA13 ?

The stylus has a very limited wide of 28mm that could maybe be a good buy if there is no vignetting when fully wide.

http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/dcr/dcr6600pro/indexdcr6600eg.htm

Click to expand...

thanks,

I got my adapter rings, tried my ebay cheapo .45x wide angle lens, (also 52mm diameter like this one is)

By the time I was past vignette, I was way past 28mm, a total bust.

I began thinking, perhaps a less wide one, like this .66x, might work, I sure hope someone finds something that gives us a wider view.

Some were made for video cameras with smaller diameter lenses, it will be luck when we find one. All we need is one that works!!!

I can mess with 58mm, 55mm, 52mm. I may go to B&H used department and try and find a slow time and helpful person.

They are very good these days, that would be a bad joke in the old days. Looking over my shoulder, not at me, they might say: "Come back when you know what you want! Next"

And, 47th street photo, the original location, upstairs, I used to go there with Hermann the German when he needed film. Priceless how they treated each other. Hermann would get what he wanted, but muttered all the way home.

The only wide converter that seems to work with the Stylus 1 is the Panasonic DMW-LW69. It was built for the Panasonic LC1/Leica Digilux 2 with a 69mm thread. Using a 55-77 step uo and a 77-69mm step down it can be connected to the 55mm threads of the tube. 69 mm threads are difficult to find rings to attached this converter too but I found the 77mm one. The converter is BIG and HEAVY (.82x), so for all the effort you can achieve 23mm nicely with no vignetting with the camera at 28mm.

Thanks for this info, you sure have a mighty collection, I would like to see some of your work.

I found the lens, roughly $400. add the 2 rings, shipping, etc, say $500. total

That's more incentive for me to trade my 28mm rx100m1 for 24mm m3 and have all of it's other advantages in my pants pocket along side my belt case Stylus 1, or both in the longer case that fits the tcon 17.

24mm probably not wide enough for many, for me, I never had more than 24mm which I miss frequently, so I wouldn't know what I was missing. Wider than 24mm would be fun to learn about I'm sure.

Just curious, is it a larger diameter rear glass opening that solves the problem?

--
Elliott

When you start putting rings on the tube you will almost immediately start seeing them at 28mm. I tried the Olympus WCON-8B which is big and heavy too and has 62mm threads with no luck. So to answer your question, yes, the 69mm size of the Panasonic wide converter is what allows it to work with the Stylus 1. Its just not practical for that size camera. It was a great converter for the Leice Digilux 2 and Panasonic LC1 which has considerable size and weaght to support it, but not for a lightweight Stylus 1.

DigitalSparrow said:

When you start putting rings on the tube you will almost immediately start seeing them at 28mm. I tried the Olympus WCON-8B which is big and heavy too and has 62mm threads with no luck. So to answer your question, yes, the 69mm size of the Panasonic wide converter is what allows it to work with the Stylus 1. Its just not practical for that size camera. It was a great converter for the Leice Digilux 2 and Panasonic LC1 which has considerable size and weaght to support it, but not for a lightweight Stylus 1.

Click to expand...

thanks for explanation.

Well, big, and High IQ, especially corners for these, means lots of dollars, so I guess I will stop looking, but still hope to be surprised by a budget solution.

some more close when I was in Ocean Grove (can't remember if close, macro, super macro, AF or MF, or, what I was focusing on if they were low, I can't bend, and too much glare for lcd, I just point and shoot, and quickly, I had Ben with me, gotta keep his attention.

this one, I am happy I could crop the original so much





the original





this was a similar crop, I didn't save the original





some flowers









I don't know what any of these are, my memory is poor, so I don't even try to remember their names.

--
Elliott

Hi,

Well can't have everything it seems. I had hopes that Raynox .66x will work since it has a macro lens before the wide part, as most fisheye converters.

Have you ever tried any of the fisheye converters ?

Images can be defished or simply cropped latter.

I have the Bower 0.16x ultra-wide, 58mm thread, it shows vignetting with my HS20/50EXR cams at 24mm but it stops at about 50mm (=8mm ultrawide), so maybe with the 55mm CLA-13 thread it would allow some wide view. Problem it's poor IQ, specially at corners. I still have to play more with it, maybe using larger f numbers will get better IQ. Softness is still present when you zoom to 50-100mm, chromatic aberration is very high at borders at 24mm but disappears from 50mm. Very well build, all metal, not too heavy or big.

Hi DigitalSparrow and Elliot,

I've been looking in DS's Stylus gallery + Elliot's samples and noticed that IQ in you photos are considerable worst than in Robin's blog samples :


They do show smearing of fine details, even worst than my Fuji HS50, and that wouldn't be expected from the Stylus having a bit larger sensor with lower pixel count.

Maybe is the Noise reduction and/or sharpness level settings ?

Did you try other settings ?

Are you guys shooting PASM modes or Auto everything ?

I've been thinking of buying this camera after reading Robin's blog and be perplexed by the IQ of this little baby, most people thought Robin was shooting with the OM-D 10 + tele lenses (75mm or 40-150mm) when he posted a teaser in his blog for people to guess about what cam+lenses he was using, was really flattering for a small sensor camera. But your samples show a lot of processing defects, noise and poor detail, worst than my 1/2" sensor cams. Any comments ? Please have a look at Robin's page.

Dpreviewmember said:

Hi DigitalSparrow and Elliot,

I've been looking in DS's Stylus gallery + Elliot's samples and noticed that IQ in you photos are considerable worst than in Robin's blog samples :

http://robinwong.blogspot.com.br/2014/01/olympus-stylus-1-review.html

They do show smearing of fine details, even worst than my Fuji HS50, and that wouldn't be expected from the Stylus having a bit larger sensor with lower pixel count.

Maybe is the Noise reduction and/or sharpness level settings ?

Did you try other settings ?

Are you guys shooting PASM modes or Auto everything ?

I've been thinking of buying this camera after reading Robin's blog and be perplexed by the IQ of this little baby, most people thought Robin was shooting with the OM-D 10 + tele lenses (75mm or 40-150mm) when he posted a teaser in his blog for people to guess about what cam+lenses he was using, was really flattering for a small sensor camera. But your samples show a lot of processing defects, noise and poor detail, worst than my 1/2" sensor cams. Any comments ? Please have a look at Robin's page.

Click to expand...

"Worst (worse) than my Fuji HS50"? Humm, love to see some of your stunning, high IQ images from this Fuji for comparison. Surely you have some to compare? Comments you ask? Sure. I'm viewing these same images on a hi def Sony monitor and they look pretty clean with very little artifacts. Can you be specific on which image(s) you find fault with?

Robins work is amazing, his knowledge of Olympus cameras and processors; his photographic skills; and PP skills combine for the superb results he gets. His shots made me WANT this camera.

Noise Reduction skills are a big part of Robin's success, I use in-camera NR. This small sensor may be the one that makes me learn some PP NR skills, I don't know, I'm lazy.

I am an amateur enthusiast, actively learning this camera. I shoot mostly Factory Defaults, Jpeg, OOC, No PP, and am quite happy with 'Good Enough'. I like the OOC Jpegs.

The image quality needs to be changed in the menu when you first get the camera.

I use Jpeg, Large, SuperFine Compression, typically S mode, touch focus area, and have metering set to follow the focus area.

If you can handle large files, I can take a few RAWs and send them to you, you can see what you can do with them compared to the OOC Jpeg version. send me a Private Message if you want.

I shoot the Stylus with the JPEG output at LF, Noise Reduction in Auto, and Noise Filter to Low. I also have image stabilizatin on and shoot mainly handheld and I use lots of converters when I need the extra reach and because that part interests me. I do not shoot RAW and do not apply any cleaning agents to reduce noise. I don't expect the same quality that I get out of my 4/3, m4/3, or Fuji X cameras as this is my riding camera... where it just goes along just in case I see something I want to take a picture of, and as such the quality is less of a concern for me.

There is some great work being done with this camera, and perhaps if I wanted to carry a monopod or tripod and would actually want/need to get more quality out of this camera (which I may learn over time and through people sharing on this forum) then great. Right now I am still learning the Stylus 1 and my real job requires most of my time. The photos I take would be more of what the average person would take... and maybe in time I will get better and have more time to achieve the mastery of a few others, but that time is not now. I do enjoy what the masters are getting for output, but I also enjoy the many who are learning and sharing as they enjoy their cameras.

I hope I answered your questions.

Sactojim said:

"Worst (worse) than my Fuji HS50"?

Click to expand...

Sure, thanks !!!

Member said:

Humm, love to see some of your stunning, high IQ images from this Fuji for comparison. Surely you have some to compare? Comments you ask? Sure. I'm viewing these same images on a hi def Sony monitor and they look pretty clean with very little artifacts. Can you be specific on which image(s) you find fault with?

Click to expand...

Hi, I know it is quite difficult to make comparisons (same f, mm, ISO, shutter time, etc.) but the point is that after looking at Robin's photos with Stylus-1, on his teasing post and reading that many, including myself, guessed wrong at that being the OM-D 10, I started wanting this camera because it's smaller, lighter and better IQ, than HS20 and HS50.

BUT after looking around for photos from regular photographers, like us ;-) , I just don't see anything better in IQ than I can currently get from my gear.



I'm totally amateur, have no time do dedicate enough because I have to work.

Your gallery does not have camera info so it make impossible to know what camera did you use. But lets take some examples from the first few photos:

- The one with the truck, tree leaves at the background on top of the truck are really washed and blurry like an oil paint. Maybe NR setting was too aggressive ? after looking at some photos with Stylus1, not only yours, I noticed that at full wide (28mm) the center is OK (like the truck) but borders are really fuzzy, a lens problem maybe. That is less evident in the Fujis even at wider 24mm !

- The closeup with the yellow fruit hanging in the tree is all fuzzy, but that maybe was a problem of focus accuracy ? Couldn't find the focus point.

- On the other hand, the wine bottle and glass seems like a different camera ! Wow, really sharp.



You will find many examples in my gallery, some have processing artifacts also even my settings being all at minimum (NR and Sharpness) plus I never shoot in Auto or EXR modes, only PASM. Makes a difference, like this at ISO400, extreme tele (more than could be achieved with Stylus-1 + TCON17), hand held, 8MP :







Or this, at long exposure with 2 stacked ND filters, the leaves that didn't move a lot are sharp :





And this macro, no converter used :





This at telephoto with converter :





Or even this one, with an old (2006) Olympus SP-320 7MP sensor :





Seems that to get considerable change in IQ it would require stepping to a M4/3, or waiting 10 more year

Cheers.

Hi Sparrow and Elliot,

Thanks for your info !

I'm like you guys, just a JPEG shooter, don't have the time nor the will to do more PP than the bare basics. We share many shooting styles, hand held most of the time, FINE JPEGs, Auto white balance, etc.

Maybe with NR, NR/filter and Sharpness at minimum you will get better results without NR in PP ? At least with my Fujis this is generally the case, the algorithms they use seem too strong and compromise detail.

Also try mode P instead of Auto, that is my 'lazy mode' and works much better than Fuji's Auto or EXR modes.

But like you say Robin's probably spends a lot of time in RAW PP and shoots knowing the exact conditions for the particular camera/lens to excel in IQ. But he is being paid for that ;-)

Guess I'll wait for the Stylus-1 to drop it's price to something more decent. I still like the fact that it's smaller and lighter than mine, a go everywhere camera. But U$650 is hard to pay since the OMD-10 is so close to that.

Best and happy shooting.