macro options

[Andrewcn]

Yes, that’s correct. A simple system of camera plus lens for macro. What makes it difficult is that I could choose any brand of camera as I only have the x100v.

 

[a_c_skinner]

OK then. Buy a Fuji with IBIS and the 60mm

 

[Strangefinder]

I do all my photography on the X100V at present and the only restriction that I miss is a macro lens. So, I'm thinking of buying a camera and single macro lens just for this purpose. I like to shoot handheld and so would prefer ibis or ois in the lens.

I was considering the following possible options:-

1. Fuji X-T2 with 80mm macro (both used)

2. Olympus OM-DEMO II with 60mm macro (both. used)

The fuji has 24mb v 16mb on the Olympus.

Has anyone used both of these and could comment on the benefits/disadvantages of both? Obviously there is a difference in cost and the fuji option is much larger and heavier.

I would only be photographing flowers, plants etc no insects or anything moving.

Thanks

For a dedicated macro kit, I’d recommend checking out the Sigma sd Quattro with the ART 70mmF2.8 macro.

Incredible tonal range and IQ for organic, fine, overlapping, or textile subjects at low ISO. At high ISO it reduces rapidly, but at low ISO it can rival medium format depending on the conditions.

Also incredible value, new the camera + kit is barely costs more than the 80mm Macro alone: $700 + $570, and they may be available used from DPR forums or Fred Miranda’s sale forum, or from Japanese traders on eB etc.

The weight is 1140g (625g sdQ + 515g ART70) and it already has a large grip. Not as nimble as Olympus, but lighter and better handling than the Fuji kit. The batteries are the same as those used in the Panasonic GH5/G9 so Watson, Wasabi etc dual-charger + spare battery kits are cheap and reliable.

The Olympus and Fuji options are great, but Foveon is definitely worth looking into for this subject matter.

Links:

Tutorial videos on the processing software https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4205745

Sensor info https://www.blauvista.com/html/the-sigma-foveon-sensor-a-perspective/

https://thrutheframe.wordpress.com/...iture-using-the-sigma-70mm-f2-8-dg-marco-art/

https://www.sigma-global.com/en/magazine/m_series/art-line-lenses/a-70-28/a-70-28-spmov/

https://www.sigma-global.com/en/magazine/m_series/art-line-lenses/a-impression/a-70-28-imp/

https://www.blauvista.com/html/hawaii-flora/ (Mixed with the 180mm macro)

Flickr search https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Sd Quattro 70mm art macro

DPR thread on this combo https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4373712

https://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lounge/70mm-macro-sdqh-pmonaghan-021119/

--
“If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” Malcolm X
"If lies can begin wars then the truth can end them." Jx/xxn Xssxngx
“Remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible. But in the end, they always fall. Always.” Gandhi

 

[number_5]

Yes, that’s correct. A simple system of camera plus lens for macro. What makes it difficult is that I could choose any brand of camera as I only have the x100v.

Personally, I take the small size over the big. If prefer autofocus, get the native macro lens. If okay with MF, Laowa 65mm 2x. If want cheaper, 7artisans 60mm. Keep in mind the Fuji's 1.5x crop and Oly's 2x crop for the FL. Also, the Oly's 16MP (64MP FF) has higher pixel density than Fuji's 24MP (54MP FF). If you get into using flash, a small system uses a small flash. [EDIT: the only one below that does not have IBIS is the X-T2]


X-H1+80mm, X-T2+80mm, X-S10+60mm, E-M10M2+60mm

 

[Tim van der Leeuw]

Yes, that’s correct. A simple system of camera plus lens for macro. What makes it difficult is that I could choose any brand of camera as I only have the x100v.

You're familiar with Fuji, and if you're also comfortable with that interface, another Fuji seems a logical choice.

The X-H1 and X-Tx series have a great viewfinder, much better than the smaller cameras.

However something like an Olympus might be a smaller overall package.

Whatever your choices for a body, I would seriously recommend you get one of the Laowa macro lenses for APS-C on it. They're just really good, and give you the freedom to zoom in really close -- or not, if you don't need it. It gives you a lot more freedom to explore.

And financially, they're a lot cheaper as well than most 1st party choices.

BTW, next to Fuji and Olympus you may also want to consider Canon EF-M system with the Canon EF-M 28mm macro lens. I personally got quite frustrated with my Canon M5 for general photography but they're small cameras, the EF-M 28mm macro is very small as well, has a built-in ring led light (very weak though), goes up to 1.2x max magnification, and is really affordable.

Pair it with an M6 mark ii and you should have good AF too (no viewfinder though, only back screen). Then you can still buy a Laowa 65mm for EF-M mount later.

No OIS in this package though, but with a flash unit on top you may not need this and using flash you can keep the ISO low, which keeps the image quality from this Canon sensor acceptable.

It wouldn't be my choice at this point -- but there are advantages to such a kit to consider.

 

[yardcoyote]

The Olympus 60mm macro is a mini powerhouse in the garden, especially on one of the smaller Oly bodies. I have mine on an E-M10 mk 2 and could not be happier with my results-- and it fits in my smallest bags.

I do have a X-T2, and I have considered the 80mm macro many times. But it is so big and so terribly expensive even used that it's hard to justify when I already have the excellent Oly 60 kit and the wonderful Pentax 100mm macro for my KP. When the X-T2 ventures out into the garden (which it often does) I depend on the quirky but pleasing old 60mm macro and the surprisingly good close focus performance of my everyday walkaround lens, the 50mm f/2.

--
Instagram: @yardcoyote

 

[number_5]

Yes, that’s correct. A simple system of camera plus lens for macro. What makes it difficult is that I could choose any brand of camera as I only have the x100v.

You're familiar with Fuji, and if you're also comfortable with that interface, another Fuji seems a logical choice.

The X-H1 and X-Tx series have a great viewfinder, much better than the smaller cameras.

The EVF is a huge deal for MF, but not sure how much for AF though.

However something like an Olympus might be a smaller overall package.

Whatever your choices for a body, I would seriously recommend you get one of the Laowa macro lenses for APS-C on it. They're just really good, and give you the freedom to zoom in really close -- or not, if you don't need it. It gives you a lot more freedom to explore.

And financially, they're a lot cheaper as well than most 1st party choices.

BTW, next to Fuji and Olympus you may also want to consider Canon EF-M system with the Canon EF-M 28mm macro lens. I personally got quite frustrated with my Canon M5 for general photography but they're small cameras, the EF-M 28mm macro is very small as well, has a built-in ring led light (very weak though), goes up to 1.2x max magnification, and is really affordable.

Pair it with an M6 mark ii and you should have good AF too (no viewfinder though, only back screen). Then you can still buy a Laowa 65mm for EF-M mount later.

No EVF might be a deal breaker, especially under bright sunlight. It does have an optional external EVF, but it takes away the hot shoe for a flash unit. I wonder if the M50 II might be a better choice. Disclaimer, I have no experience with Canon M mount.

No OIS in this package though, but with a flash unit on top you may not need this and using flash you can keep the ISO low, which keeps the image quality from this Canon sensor acceptable.

A big part of the macro is about the subject details, and keeping the ISO low is important. The de-noise software are getting much better now, but that just gives us some room to play with. It’s better to use the camera’s base ISO from the get-go, and a flash unit plays a big part of it.

It wouldn't be my choice at this point -- but there are advantages to such a kit to consider.

 

[Artur Darulewski]

To avoid needing to read the rubbish I've posted elsewhere just to point out the new 70-300 gets pretty close at 0.33x according to Fuji which gets pretty close at a long working distance.

You can use the 1.4x with the 55-200 if you put the thin extension tube between them and get fairly close too. Seems acceptably sharp stopped down a bit.

You are right! However, if I read OP correctly, he's looking for a simple camera + lens combo only for macro, to supplement his main camera. Your suggestions seem a bit overkill, especially, the [1.4x TC + extension tube + 55-200mm].

I know that XF55-200 + 1,4TX + Tubes sounds weird, but it works fine (as below):



the same subject taken with laowa 65/2.8 @1:1 magnification:



Both are 1:1 crops.

I can confirm Laowa as very nice lens that should be enough for plants/flowers as they're stationary subjects (and don't escape). It seems to me that XF60/2.4 should be enough as well with its 1:2 magnification.

For insects I'm still thinking about Canon EF 180/3.5L (I know, it's big and heavy, has sluggish AF and no OIS, but excellent quality and bigger working distance). Has anyone tried it on Fuji (maybe with 1.4TC)?

Cheers,

Artur

 

[number_5]

To avoid needing to read the rubbish I've posted elsewhere just to point out the new 70-300 gets pretty close at 0.33x according to Fuji which gets pretty close at a long working distance.

You can use the 1.4x with the 55-200 if you put the thin extension tube between them and get fairly close too. Seems acceptably sharp stopped down a bit.

You are right! However, if I read OP correctly, he's looking for a simple camera + lens combo only for macro, to supplement his main camera. Your suggestions seem a bit overkill, especially, the [1.4x TC + extension tube + 55-200mm].

I know that XF55-200 + 1,4TX + Tubes sounds weird, but it works fine (as below):



the same subject taken with laowa 65/2.8 @1:1 magnification:



Both are 1:1 crops.

I can confirm Laowa as very nice lens that should be enough for plants/flowers as they're stationary subjects (and don't escape). It seems to me that XF60/2.4 should be enough as well with its 1:2 magnification.

For insects I'm still thinking about Canon EF 180/3.5L (I know, it's big and heavy, has sluggish AF and no OIS, but excellent quality and bigger working distance). Has anyone tried it on Fuji (maybe with 1.4TC)?

Cheers,

Artur

Didn’t said it was weird, just more complicated than what the OP was looking for. With 1.4x, that’s one stop of light, and doesn’t adding a tube lose the infinity? Besides, unless you already own the TC, it doesn’t make sense to get one just for macro; it alone costs more than the Laowa, and you still don’t have a lens yet. I did not know the 1.4x TC works on 55-200 though [EDIT: never mind, it’s the tube, right?].

BTW, nice images.

 

[Rod McD]

Hi Artur,

I haven't tried the Sigma or Tamron 180/3.5 macros. Both are reputed to be very good lenses. So is the more recent Sigma 180/2.8 but it's a monster in terms of size and weight. I have tried the older Sigma 180/5.6 Apo Macro. I wrote a review of it in the Adapted Lens Forum here

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60767395

They're quite a good little lens - smaller that anything available today. OEM manufacturers seem to have given up on small tele primes, yet with today's excellent high ISOs, they're more viable than they ever were on film. These old lenses were never sold in numbers and were discontinued after just a couple of years. So they're rare , but they do trickle into e-Bay and sell for around $150-200. They often look a bit rough in the outside - Sigma used an external paint that did not stand the test of time very well. They came in an MF version and then an AF version. From my reading, there's little difference between them optically.

Cheers, Rod

 

[Artur Darulewski]

To avoid needing to read the rubbish I've posted elsewhere just to point out the new 70-300 gets pretty close at 0.33x according to Fuji which gets pretty close at a long working distance.

You can use the 1.4x with the 55-200 if you put the thin extension tube between them and get fairly close too. Seems acceptably sharp stopped down a bit.

You are right! However, if I read OP correctly, he's looking for a simple camera + lens combo only for macro, to supplement his main camera. Your suggestions seem a bit overkill, especially, the [1.4x TC + extension tube + 55-200mm].

I know that XF55-200 + 1,4TX + Tubes sounds weird, but it works fine (as below):



the same subject taken with laowa 65/2.8 @1:1 magnification:



Both are 1:1 crops.

I can confirm Laowa as very nice lens that should be enough for plants/flowers as they're stationary subjects (and don't escape). It seems to me that XF60/2.4 should be enough as well with its 1:2 magnification.

For insects I'm still thinking about Canon EF 180/3.5L (I know, it's big and heavy, has sluggish AF and no OIS, but excellent quality and bigger working distance). Has anyone tried it on Fuji (maybe with 1.4TC)?

Cheers,

Artur

Didn’t said it was weird, just more complicated than what the OP was looking for. With 1.4x, that’s one stop of light, and doesn’t adding a tube lose the infinity? Besides, unless you already own the TC, it doesn’t make sense to get one just for macro; it alone costs more than the Laowa, and you still don’t have a lens yet. I did not know the 1.4x TC works on 55-200 though.

BTW, nice images.

I think for flowers, XF55-200 or 70-300 could be enough (+ macro tubes for extreme close-ups). Even XF16/1.4 has small MFD. For someone who already has one of these lenses extension tubes might be a good and cheap solution for start playing with macro.

Regarding 1.4TC - agree, I wouldn't recommend for OP's macro setup but as far as I remeber know it can be used with XF80 as well.

XF80 has OIS and AF but is quite expensive. So far I didn't miss OIS and the only advantage of AF in macro for me would be possibility of use focus bracketing (for stationary subjects).

I would recommend to check manual lenses, especially Laowa 65/2.8.

Cheers,

Artur

 

[Artur Darulewski]

Hi Rod,

Many thanks for the link to your review.

Very detailed and interesting, it looks that old MF lenses can be very nice budget option as well.

Cheers,

Artur

 

[a_c_skinner]

Better than I did with that combo, I'll try again! (As buying the 70-300 seems out of the question at present!)

 

[a_c_skinner]

Close ups of flowers in the field is something I've done these 50 years. AF helps a huge amount because it is so quick and precise vs manual focus. I use the back button having chosen a point on which to focus.

 

[Bast Hotep]

In any system the close up but longer working distance is ill served, as is anything beyond 1:1 whatever system - makers stop at this almost always.

Could you please explain the technical reasons for these? I've never heard this before.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Getting very close has always been tricky but for many years many systems had bellows and lenses designed for very close up work on bellows. I know of only one now, which is a Novoflex offering and very costly. Canon makes a non bellows lens that gets up to 6:1 (IIRC), there are a number of third party lenses which get to 2:1. Nikon used to sell these: http://www.savazzi.net/photography/macronikkors.htm

The other part of this is longer focal length lenses capable of higher magnifications. Even those available often focus closer by reducing their focal length (so called internal focussing). The Fuji 80mm does this and at 1:2 has a lower working distance than the 60mm, which is a conventional helicoid focussing lens. Nikon has just discontiunued its 200mm Micro-Nikkor. Conventional long lenses are difficult to get up very close because of the extension you need to add.

I don't think the reason is technical but economic. Makers used to want a full system as part of their promotion of their brand despite very small volumes.

 

[baobob]

1. Fuji X-T2 with 80mm macro (both used)

That would be my choice

 

[Tim van der Leeuw]

1. Fuji X-T2 with 80mm macro (both used)

That would be my choice

I honestly find the AF with this lens so frustrating at macro ranges that it wouldn't be my recommendation to anyone, although pictures can be excellent.

However to get best results you should then use manual focus, at which point, in my opinion, one can just get the Laowa 65mm: cheaper, more versatile, lighter, smaller, excellent image quality, and much less disappointment in use.

The only advantage the Fuji 80mm brings to the table for me is ability to use in-camera focus bracketing, which is what I used it for over the weekend. :-D

But since it's now 2 weeks since the OP asked the question, I'm curious , Andrew, did you decide on anything and if yes what was your decision? :-D

 

[baobob]

I use the lens with my XH1 and XT3 and I don't have problems with AF

Why do you find it frustrating ??

 

[JayPhizzt]

I honestly find the AF with this lens so frustrating at macro ranges that it wouldn't be my recommendation to anyone, although pictures can be excellent.

However to get best results you should then use manual focus, at which point, in my opinion, one can just get the Laowa 65mm: cheaper, more versatile, lighter, smaller, excellent image quality, and much less disappointment in use.

The only advantage the Fuji 80mm brings to the table for me is ability to use in-camera focus bracketing, which is what I used it for over the weekend. :-D

But since it's now 2 weeks since the OP asked the question, I'm curious , Andrew, did you decide on anything and if yes what was your decision? :-D

To be fair most macro lenses have quite poor AF performance at macro distances. However the AF on the Fuji 80mm isn't that bad. I've definitely used worse. Macro shooters often tend to use MF, though. Personally I use a combination of AF and MF when I shoot macro.

I love the Fuji 80mm, it's the best lens I've ever used. It's an almost perfect lens imo. The only downside to it for me is the weight.