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

I could not tell how close up the OP wanted to shoot, but you can choose whatever you like with the lens,

if you need to shoot super close, get a ring light.

it is a 1.25 macro

it basically can focus anything in front of it with a tiny min focal distance.

BBbuilder467 wrote:

Helen wrote:

The OP's current camera, the E-PL8, has a tilt LCD that will fold down below the camera all the way to a vertical position, to face forwards.

Can you see the LCD when the lens is only 2 inches from your eye? With the articulating, I can use my right eye to focus on my left. I don't think I could do that if the LCD was above or below.

Yeah you need to shoot in portrait orientation.

Based on everything I read, isn't focus stacking out of camera better than focus stacking in camera?  There is good freeware that can do it and it is more flexible and can combine more images than what you can do in camera.

also I love the 60mm f/2.8 macro it is the best macro lens and is quite inexpensive.

Bassam Guy wrote:

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:

<Photo of beautiful eye removed for brevity>

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.

Lighting is important.

The minimum focus distance from the 30mm front element to subject is .6" (1.5 cm). Not only could a long eyelash graze the glass but you haven't much space to easily provide good lighting.

The 60 will give you much more lighting flexibility as well as great portraiture (and quelled my lust for the 75 1.8).

The video that my homeboy, vermont3133, linked above (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSb9oSeEGII) is worth watching. I'm not sure if the reviewer used the 60's focus limiter properly (usual cause of its hunting) and I see a greater IQ superiority than he did in the 60 vs the others. Ignore the conclusion, as you should weigh the categories according to your needs, not the reviewer's.

Another benefit I get from the 60 is the weather sealing. My rainy day hiking kit is the 12-40 2.8 plus the 60 2.8. But, of course, for indoor eye closeups, that means little unless the 60 brings you as many tears of joy as it did me.

60mm f/2.8 macro is the best macro lens that Oly makes.  That would be my main lens for flower macros.  I dont think the 75mm f/1.8 is a macro lens....I'm considering getting that for astrophotography because it's a super bright lens.

Cyvan wrote:

That is a gorgeous shot and if that's of your own eye its even more amazing. I've taken macro shots of my eyes before and it's NOT easy.

I have the 60mm and its a great lens. The longer focal length is good for insects etc so you don't have to get too close which would scare them away.

Here's the min'm focal distance of the lens with my hand in there for scale.

So as you can see it'd be further than the 30mm but still not too far. The EPL 8 has a drop down screen so seeing what u're doing shouldn't be an issue.

Re distortion. 25mm is considered the 'normal' range eqv to the standard and ubiquitous 50mm on a FF camera so distortion should be minimal. Distortion tends to kick in at the shorter focal lengths.

Perspective distortion has nothing to do with focal length-it is solely controlled by camera to subject distance.  In macro photography it doesn't matter much because humans can't see that close and don't know what those things are supposed to look like. Moreover, dedicated macro lenses have very flat field curvature, or no field curvature whatsoever, so there isn't going to be any optical distortion (which is different from perspective distortion).

You can sorta test it for yourself with your kit lens. Set it to 30mm and take a portrait shot of your face.

The 30mm is really designed for extreme closeups like for scanning documents etc. It'd allow you to get uncomfortably close to the point where you wouldn't be able to see the screen. I think the 60mm is more than enough. Also since you already have the 30mm range covered by your kit lens the 60mm would give u a focal length you don't already have plus the longer focal length tends to be better for portraits etc anyway.

Here's a shot I've taken of a friends makeup with the O60 from a couple years ago.

So as you can see it really allows you to get right up in there.

Oh! The 60mm is f2.8 vs the f3.5 of the 30mm so it would also allow you to use lower ISO's for your other shots as well. Your kit lens only goes as wide as f3.5 as well so even more diversity.

The 30mm macro would be more than suitable for her purpose. The main advantage of the 60mm is a longer working distance which makes things like shooting bugs and other moving things easier. The maximum working aperture is irrelevant as she is going to be stopping down either lens to F/4 for maximum sharpness.

Tedolph

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

Based on everything I read, isn't focus stacking out of camera better than focus stacking in camera? There is good freeware that can do it and it is more flexible and can combine more images than what you can do in camera.

one of the differences is the file type. In camera stacking creates a jpg. The number of shots that can be stacked in a lot, forget the number. The few times I used it on my EM1 I was blown away with the results and flexibility - like number of shots, space between each focus. It even has an option on how long to pause between captures to allow a flash, even third party ones like my godox, to recharge to get the same off camera lighting. It also automatically use the electronic shutter

also I love the 60mm f/2.8 macro it is the best macro lens and is quite inexpensive.

Agreed, it is fantastic, even the size makesit fun to use.

Can't you try a lens for free? Perhaps find a local facebook group?

The 60mm seems long for a handheld shot.

Do you use the zoom a lot, when you want to get your face in? In that case the 12-40 Pro might be interesting. Wider aperture, it can focus as close as 12cm (5 inches) away, and it has roughly the same zoomrange as your current lens.

tedolf wrote:

Perspective distortion has nothing to do with focal length-it is solely controlled by camera to subject distance. In macro photography it doesn't matter much because humans can't see that close and don't know what those things are supposed to look like. Moreover, dedicated macro lenses have very flat field curvature, or no field curvature whatsoever, so there isn't going to be any optical distortion (which is different from perspective distortion).

I'm aware of that, but the OP made mention of taking shots of her whole face. That sounds like a headshot. At headshot range the 60mm might give a more flattering picture than the 30mm since she would be closer with the 30mm. Hence my statement.

The 30mm macro would be more than suitable for her purpose. The main advantage of the 60mm is a longer working distance which makes things like shooting bugs and other moving things easier. The maximum working aperture is irrelevant as she is going to be stopping down either lens to F/4 for maximum sharpness.

Tedolph

I'm also aware that for what she wants to do with it the 30mm f3.5 would suffice. They both would. But if I had a choice I would want a lens that could do more than one thing. The OP already has a 14-42 f3.5-5.6. She gains nothing from the 30mm other than improved sharpness and the ability to focus more closely.  
Since both lenses could work I suggested the 60mm to give her some diversity in her focal lengths. 60mm is outside her kit lens range and the f2.8 is also faster. She can therefore use it as a great portrait lens or for a little more reach and it would be better in low light than what she has now.   She gets none of that with the 30mm. In my view, if she can afford it, the 60mm gives her more options.

Will you ever find youself photographing anything  besides make up?

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

Bassam Guy wrote:

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:

<Photo of beautiful eye removed for brevity>

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.

Lighting is important.

The minimum focus distance from the 30mm front element to subject is .6" (1.5 cm). Not only could a long eyelash graze the glass but you haven't much space to easily provide good lighting.

The 60 will give you much more lighting flexibility as well as great portraiture (and quelled my lust for the 75 1.8).

The video that my homeboy, vermont3133, linked above (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSb9oSeEGII) is worth watching. I'm not sure if the reviewer used the 60's focus limiter properly (usual cause of its hunting) and I see a greater IQ superiority than he did in the 60 vs the others. Ignore the conclusion, as you should weigh the categories according to your needs, not the reviewer's.

Another benefit I get from the 60 is the weather sealing. My rainy day hiking kit is the 12-40 2.8 plus the 60 2.8. But, of course, for indoor eye closeups, that means little unless the 60 brings you as many tears of joy as it did me.

60mm f/2.8 macro is the best macro lens that Oly makes. That would be my main lens for flower macros. I dont think the 75mm f/1.8 is a macro lens....I'm considering getting that for astrophotography because it's a super bright lens.

Didn't mean to infer that the 75 is a macro lens, just that the 60 macro is so good as a portrait lens that I stopped pursuing the 75 after I got the 60.