Olympus 60mm f/2.8 Macro vs. 30mm f/3.5 Macro

One factor that may or may not be of interest is that the 60mm f2.8 is compatible with the in-camera focus stacking on the later Olympus cameras, whereas the 30mm isn't. I use focus stacking quite a lot on my EM5 mkIII and it's very useful for macro.

Hi!

Very good photo you have made! Is this cropped or resized?

60mm is no doubt better optically. It also has advantage being faster lens (2.8 vs 3.5). Later shoud be no concern, as you use lighting anyways. Also using 60mm wide open at 2.8 might cause narrower depht of field (shallower area in focus/ sharp). That may or may not be problem for you.

If you need to get you whole face to frame by alms lenght, you can not do that with 60mm lens: it's field of view is that much narrower than 30mm's.

Not sure if this helped at all, but hope it did...

A s l a

ScottoG wrote:

Steppen wolf wrote:

One factor that may or may not be of interest is that the 60mm f2.8 is compatible with the in-camera focus stacking on the later Olympus cameras, whereas the 30mm isn't. I use focus stacking quite a lot on my EM5 mkIII and it's very useful for macro.

Sorry, but I wish to correct your statement. The Olympus 30mm macro lens is also compatible with Olympus bracketing and stacking.

(And, yes, stacking is great on the E-M5, isn't it!)

I was reading my way through the thread and was going to say both of those things too! Maybe Steppen wolf was thinking of the Panasonic 30mm f2.8, which of course isn't compatible with Olympus in-camera focus stacking (though contrary to what they said, I believe that focus bracketing - on any Olympus body which has it - is compatible with any native m43 lens, though how good the results are depends on the characteristics of the lens).

To the OP: focus bracketing and focus stacking are methods whereby the camera takes multiple shots in fast sequence, using the silent shutter mode (none of which your E-PL8 has), shifting the focus point slightly as it goes. This allows it to deliver more depth of field (i.e. more of the shot is in focus in front of and behind the actual point of focus) for a set aperture than normal. This in turn means that you can use a larger (wider) aperture such as f4 instead of say f8 or f11 to get what you need in focus. In turn, this means that you may be using the best aperture optically for your lens performance, plus you can use a faster shutter speed (less possibility of shake) and a lower ISO (less image noise) as well. It is really useful for close-up photography.

Focus bracketing does the sequence shooting (it gives you choices over the number of shots and how much it should adjust the focus for each shot it takes - "steps") but you then assemble the results in software afterwards, for example Helicon Focus or many other programs.

Focus stacking is similar but the camera also assembles the results itself after shooting, as a jpg. It too has a choice of how many frames and how large the steps should be, but it alters the focus point in a different sequence. Only 8 or 15 shots maximum are taken (it depends on the model) and most but not all models show a frame on live view to preview the slight crop that will result in the final shot from the alignment process. It will only work with certain Olympus lenses, and remains greyed-out and inaccessible if they are not used.

Currently available models which have focus bracketing (for assembly outside the camera in various programs) are:

E-M10 Mark II, Mark III, Mark IIIs, Mark IV

(NB: only the Mark IV has a screen that can face forwards which is necessary for the OP's use, whilst only the Mark II has the full version of focus bracketing - the others have a simplified form with so little control (program mode only) and so few step choices (two vs ten!) and shot numbers (up to 8 vs up to 999) that I find it pretty frustrating, though it has to work for some use cases, surely...).

E-M5 Mark II, E-M5 Mark III, E-M1 Mark II, E-M1 Mark III, E-M1X

(All of these have the full version of focus bracketing, and all have screens which can face forwards - out to the side of the camera. The E-M5 Mark II had it added in a firmware update - which you can do yourself but recently-built E-M5 Mark II cameras should have it already. The old original E-M1 also had it, but didn't have a forward-facing screen option).

E-PL9 and E-PL10

(These do have forward-facing screens but unfortunately only the limited version of focus bracketing I described in the E-M10 section).

Models with in-camera focus stacking as well as focus bracketing are:

E-M5 Mark II, E-M5 Mark III, E-M1 Mark II, E-M1 Mark III, E-M1X

(The E-M5 Mark II requires the latest firmware updates to get the feature and after those has the original version with 8 frames and no preview crop frame. The others (except the E-M5 Mark III, which also has 8 frames but does have the preview crop frame) have the full version with 15 frames max - lower numbers also selectable - and a preview frame. The original type is still useful - to me anyway - and the latest version better yet).

Here's a useful Olympus page, mainly about in-camera focus stacking:

FOCUS STACKING & BRACKETING WITH OM-D | Olympus (getolympus.com)

Albert Valentino wrote:

I am not a big fan of short macros for closeup work. The main reason is you need to get vert close getting very close can often wreak havoc with lighting, as in the camera/lens combo can block light sources from behind. With the right lighting set up all is well. 60mm os a more versatile option, and longer is always better when photographing living subjects like bees, frogs, butterflies.

so my point is consider lighting when considering focal length.

Important points. At a minimum I think you'll want a tabletop tripod and ring light for your pursuits--handholding would be an impediment I should think.

Am in early days with the 60 macro and appreciate its advances versus my old 35/3.5 four-thirds macro. The focus limit switch, the fact it does not extend while focusing (internal focus) and the speedy focus motor are big improvements. I have not handled the m4/3 30mm macro.

I suspect focus bracketing and stacking are irrelevant unless you are able to sit VERY still, although I have no personal experience with human subjects and those features.

Both lenses will work but I recommend the 60 over the 30. The longer working distance will be helpful and is a better focal length for portraits, if you wish to do those as well.

Cheers,

Rick

Tim Reidy Productions wrote:

The thirty mm lens should shoot your face with no worries,

you may even want to stop down a little.

it might be lighter weight and easier to use for your purpose.

Hi!

It is manageable... I took this with Sigma 30/1.4. I'm not marketing it, because it doesn't suite if making photo of partial face, like OP shared. But 30mm suits for selfies...

A s l a

"Selfie"

For shooting holding camera at arms length, you'd want a 30mm.  However if you were to move the camera further away, on a tripod, 60mm is a more flattering focal length for tightly framed photos of the face.   With the newer cameras, you can use wi-fi connection to control the camera with your phone if it is too far away to reach.

You could also split the difference with the Panasonic Leica 45mm f2.8 Macro.  It's fairly affordable used, but it is overpriced when bought new.

sevenpeanuts wrote:

I am posting on this forum because I am interested in a macro lens for sharper, more detailed images. I like my current quality (using a 14-42mm IIR Black lens), but if I get closer, I lose quality.

Great picture.

i'm not sure if your issue of losing quality when you get closer is due to a short supply of Depth of Field or you are working beyond the closest focusing distance of your lens.

Olympus list the lens' Closest Focusing Distance at 0.25m.

If your issue is a limited DoF issue then you can simply shoot from a little further back, to gain more DoF, and then crop as tight as you need.

Knowing all of this, do any of you have suggestions on which lens I should go with? Please let me know if there's anything I can answer to help the recommendations.

Paul Auclair wrote:

Olympus list the lens' Closest Focusing Distance at 0.25m.

If your issue is a limited DoF issue then you can simply shoot from a little further back, to gain more DoF, and then crop as tight as you need.

And that's the distance from the sensor, not the front of the lens, which makes a difference at these short distances.

Cheers,

Rick

sevenpeanuts wrote:

Hi everyone! I am a beauty photographer, and I take photos of my own makeup. I have an Olympus PEN EPL8. Typically I take photos of my eyeshadow, but occasionally I take photos of my entire face or parts of it. Here is an example of what I currently do:

I am posting on this forum because I am interested in a macro lens for sharper, more detailed images. I like my current quality (using a 14-42mm IIR Black lens), but if I get closer, I lose quality. I am torn between the M.Zuiko 60mm or 30mm. When I read forums about this same topic, many people interested in macro photography mention having to consider distance from their subjects, but because I am photographing myself, there is no chance of me scaring anything away.

When I take my photos, I am holding the camera in my hands while sitting at a desk where my lighting set up is. I am concerned about having to be too far away from my subject (my arms can only go so far from my face), so I lean towards the 30mm in that aspect. However, I have heard that the 30mm would not do well at anything besides macro shots, or that it might distort the proportions in some way. I am new to the world of photography, so I have a hard time understanding if I'd be able to photograph my whole face (or parts of it) using the 30mm, which makes me consider the 60mm instead.

Knowing all of this, do any of you have suggestions on which lens I should go with? Please let me know if there's anything I can answer to help the recommendations.

To get that framing with the 30mm f/2.8 Panasonic, the lens would be about 2 inches from the eye. That's about 1:2. If you needed more magnification, an edge of the lens could be touching the face. You could probably fill the frame with a face from arm's reach.

If you did everything hand-held, 30mm could work, but you'll probably block your light if you go beyond 1:2.  There's no way it would work using a tripod. You wouldn't have room to get close enough to a face.