Micro 4/3 for macro

I'm thinking of buying a micro 4/3 & lens for, mainly, macro photography (bugs ranging from a couple of mm to dragonflies). I need something as compact as possible to take on long walks, but less limited than my Olympus TG-6 (rubbish at anything other than macro, idiosyncratic with light levels, aberrations in certain light conditions, no full macro, choice of only 3 apertures...).

A local(ish) camera shop has suggested, for the body, either the Panasonic G7 or Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mkiii, and for the lens, Olympus 60mm macro or the Panasonic Leica 45mm macro.

Thoughts please? I shoot hand-held, so image stabilisation is important. The Olympus body has 5-axis in-body image stabilisation, but I have no idea how this compares to other IS technology. I understand the bodies and lenses are interchangeable, but is there an advantage to having the same brand body and lens as they may have been designed to work best with each other?

Below is a photo from my TG-6 on a good day, using in-camera focus stacking, focal distance of 1-2cm. The bug was 2-3mm long. It would be good to be able to at least match that level of detail.

Columbusrat wrote:

I'm thinking of buying a micro 4/3 & lens for, mainly, macro photography (bugs ranging from a couple of mm to dragonflies). I need something as compact as possible to take on long walks, but less limited than my Olympus TG-6 (rubbish at anything other than macro, idiosyncratic with light levels, aberrations in certain light conditions, no full macro, choice of only 3 apertures...).

A local(ish) camera shop has suggested, for the body, either the Panasonic G7 or Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mkiii, and for the lens, Olympus 60mm macro or the Panasonic Leica 45mm macro.

More working distance with the 60mm, likely better light in some situations.

Thoughts please? I shoot hand-held, so image stabilisation is important. The Olympus body has 5-axis in-body image stabilisation, but I have no idea how this compares to other IS technology. I understand the bodies and lenses are interchangeable, but is there an advantage to having the same brand body and lens as they may have been designed to work best with each other?

Stabilization is excellent with modern - post EM-5 and EM-1 I bodies. I can shoot to 4 seconds handheld with the EM-1X (my most modern body). That said handholding and focus stacking is very difficult because you are likely moving to and fro as you shoot. I can do this if I am well braced like resting on my elbows. So, in some ways a single shot (talking handheld here) at a sufficient DOF is easier. But the new OM-1 is supposed to have smart algorithms that assist a photographer in handheld focus stacking.

The Focus Stacking function generally works only when the brand of camera and lens is the same. Focus bracketing would work cross-brands.

I shoot many Focus Stacked images of mosses with a tripod, and many single shot images of bees and butterflies handheld.

444 kb

Below is a photo from my TG-6 on a good day, using in-camera focus stacking, focal distance of 1-2cm. The bug was 2-3mm long. It would be good to be able to at least match that level of detail.

Thank you Gary

I tend only to use focus stacking if I can rest the camera against a fence, wall or similar - and chances are the bug will wander off partway through. Though I do like the occasional shot of a bug with 12 legs and 4 antennae.

I've only just realised that the Olympus body doesn't have a built-in flash (which throws out my weight comparisons). But then with better low-light performance than I'm used to maybe that's not a big drawback.

Thank you Woody. Your jumping (I think) spider is awesome, I'd be thrilled to be able to get a shot like that.

At the moment I'm trying to get my head around the different Olympus cameras. Why can't they just say what the difference between the OM-5 and OM-D E-M5 Mkiii is rather than showing me lots of (non-macro) photos taken with who knows what lens and telling me they will give me a heightened experience? I'm aware that the camera shop is only likely to have recommended cameras that they have in stock.

Columbusrat wrote:

Your jumping (I think) spider is awesome, I'd be thrilled to be able to get a shot like that.

Oh, your jumping spider has just turned into a raft spider! I'll see your raft spider and raise you a wasp spider;-)

Thanks John The second photo is a wasp, maybe ichneumon - but I wouldn't attempt to go further as I'm guessing you're not in the UK.

I'm tending towards the new Olympus OM-5 now - it's basically an upgrade of the the EM5 Mk iii, and £200 more, but has improved image stabilisation, an upgraded image processor, pro-capture, more custom settings (not that I tend to use them as the best settings can vary from plant to plant, and what I happen to spot)... I need all the IS I can get, and pro-capture can be useful when taking photos of bugs that are likely to have flitted by the time you've pressed the shutter. It's not released in the UK yet, and of course when it does come out the Mk iii is likely to drop significantly in price, but my aim is to never feel the need to upgrade again... (I wonder how many photographers have told themselves that, and gone on to buy a shedload of equipment!).

As far as lenses go, I'm wondering if the Olympus 60mm macro might be a little limiting, in that I'd have to get too close to insects like butterflies, which tend to be more skittish than other bugs. I'm now looking at the M.Zuiko ED 40‑150mm F4‑5.6 R, which would give me far more flexibility - I can't imagine the quality is as good, but it may be an acceptable trade-off.

It also means I can use my Raynox, which will add even more flexibility - and though I wouldn't want to carry two lenses and change them 'in the field', I'm happy to whip the Raynox on and off, which is useful when one 'target' disappears and I suddenly spot another one of different dimensions.

Grab the EM5 Mark 3 while it is going on sale likely....and the 60mm macro lens. Get the Raynox 250 and when you have the funds grab yourself a used MC-20 teleconverter. In the meantime, take a look at the posts I have posted in this forum, and go to this thread and read about the ability to use the MC-20 teleconverter with your 60mm macro lens.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64350035

Many here will knock on the setup because it isn't full frame.  Who cares if it isn't when you can grab photos like this through focus bracketing and stacking?  With the MC-20 teleconverter and the kenko 16mm extension tube attached to the Olympus 60mm macro lens you can get up to 2.6x magnification...with full ability to focus bracket up to 999 images (and stack up to 15 images internally).  Helicon is excellent for stacking - I use method C with no issues.

Add the Raynox 250 to this setup and you'll get 5.5x magnification....basically 3.5mm field of view.  Now, OM Systems did announce a 2:1, 90mm Pro macro lens to be released sometime next year...so you will have that at your fingertips as well....

Columbusrat wrote:

As far as lenses go, I'm wondering if the Olympus 60mm macro might be a little limiting, in that I'd have to get too close to insects like butterflies, which tend to be more skittish than other bugs. I'm now looking at the M.Zuiko ED 40‑150mm F4‑5.6 R, which would give me far more flexibility - I can't imagine the quality is as good, but it may be an acceptable trade-off.

It also means I can use my Raynox, which will add even more flexibility - and though I wouldn't want to carry two lenses and change them 'in the field', I'm happy to whip the Raynox on and off, which is useful when one 'target' disappears and I suddenly spot another one of different dimensions.

There will be a 90mm pro macro lens out next year at some point which will be a 2:1 lens for maximum magnification.  Yes, the 40-150 would be better for photographing butterflies for sure....and a Raynox will get your magnification to increase while decreasing the focal distance...

but see above for my suggestion if you want to do closer shots with the Olympus gear....

Oh wow, your photos are amazing, oneofone25! Thanks for the info, and showing me what is possible.

The EM5 Mk iii would make more sense financially, but I'm still tempted by the OM-5, mainly due to improved IS and weather-sealing (and the 4 custom settings could be useful). I'm very fortunate that I'm in the position where I can concentrate on the BEST camera for me, of course. It also has the advantage that I should be able to get my hands on the Mk iii next weekend to check I'm happy with the size, weight and feel, and then will have a couple of weeks cooling-off period. In which  hubby seems to think I'm going to sit down and read through the manual...

I'm also on a quest for better macro. This was taken with the Panasonic GX9 and the 30mm Panasonic macro and stacked in camera.

Watch dial diameter = approx. 0.9375" (lower disk) movement diameter = approx. 0.6875"

Not particularly happy but the rig is pretty small.

Looking at lenses for my FF Sony.

I grow orchids and like to take pictures of my orchid flowers.  This is technically not "macro" shooting, but I do like to get close.  I used to shoot full-frame but moved to the Olympus E-M5III for the larger DOF and the built-in focus stacking.  I have both the Olympus 30mm f3.5 macro and the 60mm f2.8 macro lenses.  I can't see any quality differences between the two lenses, but the 60mm lens lets you shoot from farther away.  The E-M5III is a fine camera, and other than the really confusing menu and settings, works fine.  I have now moved to the OM-1, but can't see any quality differences in the images.  The OM-1 is easier to use however and has other (non-Macro) advantages.

I don't think you can go wrong with the E-M5III and either of the Olympus macro lenses.

David

Thank you David - that's useful feedback

I went to Castle Cameras in Bournemouth today, hoping to get my hands on the EM5 Mk iii but annoyingly, they only had them in sealed boxes that they weren't allowed to open. Is it standard to expect customers to buy a camera without being able to feel it in their hands and play with the controls?

He did, however, let me try an OM-1 with the 60mm lens, which was useful. It would be nice to be able to have a greater focusing distance for skittish bugs, but I'm going to have to compromise somewhere whatever I do, and the lens is so very dinky, which is important to me.

The OM-5 is also a lot smaller  than the OM-1, so I'm happy it will be sufficiently lightweight and compact for me. I have seen that you should avoid it if you have large hands, but mine are pretty much child-sized, so that won't be a problem!

I have never encountered a camera store that doesn't have demo cameras for you to play with - you might as well just buy from a mail order camera store. They could open the box - they would just have to sell that camera as "open box".   The OM-5 has replaced the E-M5III, but it is basically the same camera (the body and controls are exactly the same) - so maybe you can test that camera.  The OM-5 will be more expensive and I don't think it is worth the difference in price - it still has the horrible old Olympus menus and the same sensor.  You could also look for a used E-M5III - I expect there are a lot of those floating around now.  Check the OM-DS website for sales - they do sell refurbed cameras and lenses.

I don't think there is much difference in body size between the OM-1 and the E-M5IIII - the OM-1 feels better in the hand, but there isn't a big difference.  My hands are relatively small.  I also shoot Sony (A7RM4 and the A7RM5 is on pre-order) and have no trouble holding those cameras too (Sony bodies are slightly smaller than the competing Nikon and Canon bodies).  But you really should find a way to actually hold the camera if you are switching to a new system.

Good Luck.

David

Thanks David - but I have now taken the plunge, and ordered the OM-5. Including battery, it's 414g compared to the OM-1's 599g, which for me and my dodgy shoulders is a major factor in portability.

Should I have waited till I can get my hands on one, or at least its predecessor? Arguably, yes. Buying the predecessor at a sale price would also be logical, but given the challenges of handheld bug photography in sometimes less than clement weather, the improved IS and weather sealing are both important for me. And if hubby can spend a darn sight more on a motorbike which is strictly for fun....

I had been wondering about ordering a flash as well, but reasoned that if I don't know if and when I need it, I certainly don't know which one would be best, and they range from around £70 to a few hundred, so it definitely makes sense to wait.

It's a shame the bugs will be thin on the ground for a few months...

OMDS puts a tiny flash in the box with the camera - at least it did for the E-M5III and the OM-1.  It doesn't use batteries, powers off the camera.  I have never tried to use it and it wouldn't likely be useful for Macro.  I don't use flash for my orchid photography - I have LED lighting.  That way I can see the lighting in the viewfinder.

The OM-5 does have better water sealing.  Olympus and now OMD actually document the weather sealing ratings for their cameras and lenses - most other camera companies just say "weather resistant" or something like that.

Have fun with the new camera.

David

Thanks David - I'm really looking forward to its arrival. I don't think the OM-5 comes with the flash (the M5 Mk iii still does). They're probably hoping you'll go for an expensive one rather than making do with the cheap one.