Olympus 40-150 f2.8 is fantastic

Okapi001 wrote:

Sdlv wrote:

Albert Valentino wrote:

. . . These are the types of shots I like to do and I think the 40-150 with the 1.4x TC, when needed, would be a superior alternative due to the flexibility of the zoom and the narrower FOV at the long end which helps smooth busy background. But at the moment I simply cannot afford it.

The 40-150+TC is a good lens for close-up photography of larger insects, as the OP's shoots show. But let's keep things in perspective. The 40-150+TC only achieves 0.3X max. magnification, while the 60mm macro goes to 1.0X. The biggest advantage of the 40-150+TC is in working distance at 0.3X -- around 20" (sensor to subject) -- versus around 12" for the 60mm.

Let's keep it in perspective, then;-) 0.3x on a m4/3 sensor is equivalent to a 0.6x on a full frame sensor. Which is quite respectable (meaning, you can get nice close-ups of larger insects - a 5 cm long beetle or butterfly will fill the frame). And if you don't need 16 or 20 mpix, because you view your photos on a screen, you can crop the image and easily get 1:1 in full-frame terms, with all the resolution you need.

O.3x or 1:3 is often all I need, especially with m43 sensor. Although I have owned several macro lenses over the past 12 years, mostly with APS format, i rarely got that close which is  why i like this combo since flowers and butterflies, and the occasional bee shot, is what I go for so the reach is welcome. Before leaving Nikon for Fuji over four years ago, i used a Sigma 150  f2.8 macro with the Sigma 1.4x TC attached 80% of the time. It was a stellar combo on my Nikon D300, but lugging that tripod.... Overall I am happy with my newly acquired O 60mm macro and my Tamron 90mm f/2.8 adaptall macro