Venus Optics officially launches the Laowa 25mm F2.8 2.5-5X Ultra Macro

I understand why marketing added word ultra. It comes from other brands where the lenses have word macro in the name but the maximum magnification is only 1:2 at the best case....

Mar 11, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

At the best case? At the best case it is 1:1 or more like 1.25:1. In worst case it is 1:2 or 1:4 or even less!

This should just have had "Macro" without anything else. It would have been correct.

Mar 11, 2018permalink

Yes, 1:2 is the best case because there are worse cases. 1:1 is not the best case, it is correct case which is not the reason why to add word "ultra" to diferenciate the lens from the other "macro" lenses....

Mar 12, 2018permalink

n3eg

And it's not extremely ugly like some other macro lenses.

Mar 10, 2018permalink

A question to Venus Optics / LAOWA Lenses (if someone is still around):

Is the increase in magnification accomplished only by moving the lens part away from the sensor (as if using a macro lens on bellows) or are single lenses internally shifted as well relative to each other?

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

I've looked again at the one I have here. The lens elements do move forward as a group, but the rear rectangular baffle moves forward less.

It's difficult to be certain, but I think there -might- be some small internal movement in the optical group as well, but not a lot

Not my lens to poke around in so I can't be sure ;-)

Mar 10, 2018permalink

Thanks for the (effort of) information! ;-)

I'm not sure, but I suppose (because of the indicated working distances) that Canon's MP-E65 (which I don't own) does not keep constant the 65mm focal length over the whole magnification range.

Mar 10, 2018*permalink

The whole idea of 'focal lengths' is fraught with complexity when working with lenses like these - especially in comparing with say a 'normal' 25mm lens.

Focal length is nominally stated at infinity, which lenses like this and the MP-E65 don't do.

Even the Canon TS-E135 I recently reviewed has an effective focal length of ~220mm at its closest 1:2 setting.

I'm sure those better versed in optical design can provide detail, but for close up working take apertures and focal lengths as referring to something a bit different to when we note them in day to day photography ;-)

Mar 10, 2018permalink

sh10453

Questions:
Why should I use this lens, or any similar 3rd party lens, instead of using billows and a native lens?

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

Because bellows are large, and if used in the field are very vulnerable to tearing, being punctured by thorns etc.

Mar 10, 2018permalink

sh10453

Thank you, but my question was from a technical point of view.

Mar 10, 2018permalink

That is the technical reason why this type of lens exists. It is the reason Canon made the Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 1-5x lens, and before that Olympus made their telescopic auto extension tube. I appreciate it might not be a limitation to yourself if you don't use macro lenses out in the field.

Mar 10, 2018permalink

Often better image quality. The optics of the normal lens are rarely optimised for very close working. You can of course reverse lenses for tubes/bellows, but the specialist lens is still often better and often easier to use.

I do have some EF mount bellows and EF reversing attachment, but to be fair, it's clumsy to use ;-) As to use in the field - all my paying macro work is in the studio :-)

Then again I made a very good macro from a reversed lens that cost me £3 in a junk shop, attached (with hot melt glue) to a £5 set of cheap EF tubes...

Mar 10, 2018permalink

ChatBot

It is 25 millimeter (effectively 50mm on m43). This lens isn't going to get me close to anything, unless the subject is stationary by nature. I would get more use out of a macro filter.

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

The lens is very much a specialist one for the magnification and many would find a lower magnification more generally usable

The focal length is somewhat irrelevant for this type of lens, so the normal 'doubling' for 4/3 is not strictly relevant.

When you are looking at magnification, it is relevant to sensor size, so my 65mm MP-E65 at 3x covers the same area as the L25mm at 3x

The smaller m43 sensor just covers a smaller part of the lens image circle

Whilst his could be thought of as a higher magnification for equal sized prints (from say FF, APS-C and m43) it's often far easier to use the lens by working out the physical area covered in the focal plane.

Mar 9, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

25mm is 25mm, regardless even if you would use a ruler with imperial scale...

Mar 11, 2018permalink

David610

Tom 25mm is 25mm, regardless even if you would use a ruler with imperial scale... no it isn't. We are not talking about focus at infinity. Read the other posts before you reply.

Mar 14, 2018permalink

Suhas Sudhakar Kulkarni

Does this mean we have 5x magnification for m43? Is this magnification defined in terms of 35mm full frame sensor area?
Olympus says its 1.25x macro lens gives effective magnification of 2.5x.
I will buy if we can get 5x effective magnification

Mar 9, 2018permalink

Pixel Pooper

It is max 2.5:1 to 5:1 optical magnification, so 5:1 to 10:1 effective on M43.

Mar 9, 2018permalink

The lens delivers magnifications from 2.5x to 5.0x.

This means the following:

An object of 2mm natural size (horizontally, as seen in the view finder, e. g. a tiny insect) shows on the camera sensor a size of

a) 2.5 x 2mm = 5mm (with magnification setting 2.5x on the lens)

b) 5.0 x 2mm = 10mm (with magnification setting 5.0x).

Since the M4/3-Sensor is smaller (roughly 2 times smaller in each direction up/down or left/right), the image of the object takes a larger part of the sensor than on a full frame sensor with more space around.
This makes the object look to be magnified twice as much (when observed in equal size of let's say 1920x1080 pixel on a computer monitor), but in reality, if you magnify each sensor image (for final viewing) by the SAME factor, let's say 10x, the M4/3-picture is only half the size (height and width) of the FF-picture, but the object's (insect's) size in both pictures is the same.

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

(unknown member)

You do NOT change the magnification value what so ever.
Forget the equivalence, it is BS.

1:1 is 1:1 is 1:1. There is nothing else.
It is optical magnification value, what is in front of the lens will get projected back of the lens in same size. That is Macro.

Macro is from 1:1 up to 10:1 so you can magnify the subject 10 times of its real life size!

Mar 11, 2018permalink

@Tommi K1:

The word "magnification" may cause some irritation.

You are right, 1:1 (or whatever else) is independent of the sensor size. You call it "optical magnification".
The objects' sensor image has the same size as the natural object.

But when you view the tiny sensor image enlarged on your monitor - and this is usually done by the same size if the pixel count of the 2 different sensors is about the same - then you may draw the conclusion that the smaller sensor has the larger magnification.

It's the same discussion as with tele optics, where you read over and over again that a 200mm lens has 400mm focal length on a M4/3 cam (compared to full frame).
It hasn't.
It's just that the angle of view is smaller due to the smaller sensor. And if you enlarge now both images to the same full monitor size, M4/3 looks like 400mm on FF, but it isn't actually - the smaller image just has been magnified twice as much and usually lost some sharpness thereby (also compared to a 400mm on FF).

Mar 11, 2018*permalink

andidas

"Canon EF, Nikon F, Pentax K & Sony FE mounts available"
What mount would work best for a m43 user with the adapter?
Or is the adapter for a particular mount to m43 only?

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Herp Photos

My advice is buy the native mount which will hold the most resale value because of number of users in the system (ie. Canon or Nikon). You can buy adapters to any other mirrorless system Fuji, M43, Sony for use on those other systems without being tied into a lens mount which will be much harder to resell later due to a much smaller user base in the mount.
As an example, I tried the laowa 15mm macro for a couple of years and made the mistake of buying in Pentax mount even though I didnt own a Pentax body then and onky used it with converters to M43, Sony and Fuji. When I decided to resell it, the time I had to have it on the market was much longer than if I had it for sale in a more common mount and the amount I got in resell value was much less because of fewer potential buyers.

If I was to buy this lens I would buy it in Nikon or Canon mount and then use my existing mount converters to use it on my Fuji, Olympus and Sony bodies.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Pixel Pooper

My advice is to buy lenses to use them, not to resell them. This lens is cheap enough anyway. Why compromise every time you use a lens just because you might get 50 bucks more if you decide to sell it?

Mar 9, 2018permalink

Herp Photos

What compromise are you talking about pixel pooper.
This lens is manual focus with no info fed back to the camera.
It also doesnt come in m43 mount and requires an adapter to be used on that mount. The original poster was inquiring what base lens mount would be best to use. How does choosing the lens mount which will retain the most value compromise anything and how does your comment lend any info to answer the posters question?

Mar 10, 2018permalink

fusoexplorer

Could you focus stack with this successfully?

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Read some of the reviews...

...many of the super detail shots in the samples are stacked.

Largest stack I've done with the 25mm is ~190 images, so yes ;-)

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Donald B

you cant successfully use this lens without stacking, at 5x with on diffraction your dof is going to be the thickness of a piece of paper. :-)

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Disagree - use of stacking depends on the use of the photo you are taking

Yes it's useful and I will often use it, but it's not essential in the commercial photography I do with such lenses (I don't do insects/plants so YMMV)

Mar 8, 2018permalink

xPhoenix

I don't think this would work with the auto-focus-stacking on the D850, would it?

Mar 8, 2018permalink

No - not at all.

To stack with this lens you need to physically move the camera.

I use a motorised Stackshot rail for the examples in the review (including the animated one)

See also the earlier answer to this same question ;-)

Mar 8, 2018*permalink

xPhoenix

Thanks!

Mar 8, 2018permalink

zzzxtreme

for hobbyist - a reversed nikkor 24mm gives you x4

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Donald B

with no working distance and no way to properly light the subject.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

TimberCODE

Sure Donald... I never used a Tamron 24mm lens reversed on my K10D back then with a Gary Fong diffuser on the built in flash as the only light source... Never. Ever. And it never ever gave me proper lights. But I am sure you are writing about your own experiences too...

Mar 8, 2018permalink

SirSeth

Super cool!

Mar 8, 2018permalink

fabbui

It looks awesome but the website seems to lack information. I assume this is manual focus so cannot use the focus stacking of the Nikon 850 ?

Thanks

Mar 8, 2018permalink

fabbui

Looking more in deep it is manual focus, manual aperture. No infinity focus (expected) . Still looks like a pretty good option...

Mar 8, 2018permalink

jnd

There is no focus, it is fixed. You can change the magnification, then focus by moving the lens with camera. Canon's MP-E works the same.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Changing the magnification IS changing the focus. But no, it won't automate on a D850 (possibly unless you add a TC-16A). If you want to focus stack automatically, various software can drive a powered macro rail, or you can just take lots of shots manually.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Toselli

When you get that near, changing focus means above all changing position because the front lens moves toward the subject, sort of having a normal lens that zooms while you focus. So it's way easier setting the focus (in the form of magnification, depending how big you want to frame), and then move the camera to move the plane of focus.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

mxx

"Canon EF, Nikon F, Pentax K & Sony FE mounts are available."

Just sayin'.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

and Micro Four Thirds adapter ($30), or Fuji X mount adapter ($30)

Mar 8, 2018permalink

EXX

Why there is no Sony A-mount version is beyond me. This is a fully manual lens, so making one for A-mount as well would have been very easy.

Mar 9, 2018permalink

Agree, as most of their other lenses has A-mount as well, very strange...

Mar 9, 2018permalink

QuietOC

This isn't the first all-manual SLR lens not available in A-mount. I keep looking at those $100 85mm F1.8s that are only available in Nikon F and Canon EF.

Mar 9, 2018permalink

@QuietOC: Laowa (Venus Optics)?

They have few that are not made for anything else:
1. Laowa 15mm f/2 FE Zero-D Sony FE only
2. Laowa 7.5mm f/2 MFT M43 only
3. Laowa 9mm F2.8 Zero-D yet to be announced.

The other 5 has A-mount as an option.

Mar 9, 2018permalink

jrconner

Probably best to consider it the functional equivalent of a low-power, zoom microscope lens. At the low end, it approximates the magnification of a 24mm reversed on a 60mm. At maximum magnification, its the functional equivalent of a 35mm reversed on a 180mm. But the Laowa's optical performance might be better than jerry-rigging lens combos to obtain similar magnification.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

The few reviews out there say it's really sharp.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

LAOWA Lenses - Venus Optics

I've rigged quite a few lens combinations (inc. for telecentricity) and have an MP-E65.

Until they take it back, the laowa is the best I have for 2.5-5x detail

Mar 8, 2018permalink

susutou

Not sure if Sightron is Venus Optics' Japanese parent company. I couldn't find this information anywhere else except DPReview.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Sightron is our Japanese distributor.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

susutou

Thanks - that's my point, "distributor" doesn't mean "parent company" right? "parent company" sounds like Venus Optics is partly owned by Sightron. You might want to ask DPR to change the narrative here.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Spectro

I didn't plan on buying any lens soon, but this might do it. 5:1, yes. But then again I got macro extension tube for my 1:1 macro lens. not sure what that ratio is, but I am guessing git is more then 2:1.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

yslee1

Extension tubes generally add magnification based on the ratio of the extension length to the focal length. Note that this means extension tubes give greater magnification with shorter focal lengths.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

In the Raw

Will definitely unlock the padlock(s) on my wallet to buy this lens.

Also, am I the only one here who makes a point of hiding his macro lenses around the house when going out...and then forgetting where I have them stashed? lol

Mar 7, 2018*permalink

A great lens to use - somewhat sharper than my MP-E65 at f/2.8

There is a thread about this lens in the Macro forum, since I've been testing one for the last month or so.

My own review and comparison with the MP-E65 is one of the ones listed in the full press release

Mar 7, 2018permalink

samtheman2014

Thank you for letting is know Keith and of course the review

Mar 8, 2018permalink

super steel

why dont you link the review here?

Mar 12, 2018permalink

bulletsie

Ordered mine within minutes of it being available. I'm going to love this lens! I shoot at 2:1 and was contemplating getting a 10x microscope objective and tubelensing it but it would have lots of chromatic aberration. This lens looks to be perfect for my needs.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

Venus seem pretty on fire with the cheap, interesting lenses recently. And the optics have been good, from what I've seen. This lens sounds super cool.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Overall this looks like an excellent lens, and I particular like the narrow end of the lens. Anyone who has used a macro lens at these magnifications knows that if you are shooting small objects of a flat surface, say Springtails, it can be difficult to get low enough for a side view as the edge of the lens can foul the surface.

The only limitation is that the lens is not auto stop-down. This means that with an optical viewfinder on a DSLR at 5x and at the taking aperture the viewfinder will be very dark, almost black. So you either you will need to use quite a bright LCD to focus, or live view. The problem won't be as bad on a mirrorless camera as the viewfinder can gain up, but rigging a focus lamp will improve the EVF image. This is where the Canon MP-E 65mm has an advantage for handheld shooting using a flash. Seeing the image with the lens wide open makes it a bit easier to judge where the plane of focus is.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

DavidKennard

If they had included a filter thread you'd be able to mount the MT-24EX (which does have focusing lights) via an adapter ring.

It appears to have grooves for a hood, which possibly the MT-24EX or some other front mounted flash that features focusing lights could mount to. But I think the groove is probably too far back and likely the front of the lens isn't the correct dimensions for mounting the MT-24 anyway.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

I suspect the bayonet fitting is for the lens cap. I saw a video hands on with this lens, and it mentioned it had a fancy metal lens cap.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

The reason for omitting the filter thread (to attach a macro flash) might be that the working distances from lens end (or top) to focused object are not sufficient:

I read:
2.5x magnificatiuon: 45 mm
5.0x magnification: 40 mm

Concerning the iris which must be closed manually before shooting and therefore results in a dark (or - mirrorless - bright but noisy) preview image:

It a pitty that noone of the developpers remembers the analog photo times, when people used a bellows an a macro or almost micro lesn for such purposes.
And the clue was a cable release socket at the front side of the bellows and a (mechanical) double cable release:
By pressing it, first the preselected iris of the lens closed and after that the second cable relesead the camera shutter.
Simple but effective!

Why not revitalize such a good idea, maybe with an additional mechanical (thread) to electrical (usually mini jack) adapter for the camera relase

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

Above text edited:

The reason for omitting the filter thread (to attach a macro flash) might be that the working distances from lens end (or top) to focused object are not sufficient:

I read:
2.5x magnificatiuon: 45 mm
5.0x magnification: 40 mm

Concerning the iris which must be closed manually before shooting and therefore results in a dark (or - mirrorless - maybe bright but noisy) preview image:

It's a pitty that noone of the developers seems to remember the analog photo times, when macro photographers used bellows and a macro or even micro lens with iris for such purposes.
And for the case that the bellows were not an auto bellows or the lens had not auto iris, the clue was a cable release socket at the lens side of the manual bellows and a (mechanical) double cable release:
By pressing it, first the preselected iris of the lens was closed and immediately after that the second cable attached to the camera relesead the shutter.
Simple but effective!

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

continued from above:

Why not revitalize such a good idea, maybe additional to the standard double cable release with a mechanical (thread) to electrical (usually mini jack) adapter for the electronic camera relase.

Mar 9, 2018permalink

text correction:

".. .. And for the case that the bellows were not an auto bellows or the lens had not auto iris, .. .."

should read:

.. .. And for the case that the bellows were no auto bellows (with iris transmission) but the lens did have an auto iris, .. ..

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

text correction:

".. .. And for the case that the bellows were not an auto bellows or the lens had not auto iris, .. .."

should read

".. .. And for the case that the bellows were no auto bellows (with iris transmission) but the lens did have an auto iris, .. .."

Mar 9, 2018*permalink

DavidKennard

Working distance is similar to the MP-E 65mm, so shouldn't be a problem. The lack of a filter thread is quite odd.

I guess a double cable release would be better than nothing, but electronic communication with the camera to enable automatic stop-down (and communication of magnification for EXIF) would be better still.

Mar 10, 2018permalink

I think Fuji is one rare camera producer who still provides camera release knobs with built-in threads.
However, in their latest camera, X-H1, it's missing, whereas the X-T2 still has it (the X-T1 did not either).

Concerning the electronic communication camera <-> lens:
Yes, this would be best, but those extreme macro lenses (and for stacking purpose not seldom micro lenses) usually are fully mechanical lenses.

If the developpers of mechanical adapters for vintage lenses (in general) mounted to mirrorless FF, APS-C or M4/3 cameras would offer such adapters as well with cable release threads (to close the iris to a preselected f-stop), we could at least manually focus those lenses with open iris (if they have an iris at all) before closing it and releasing the shutter with the mechanical double cable (maybe complemented with an additional adapter for the electronic remote socket of the camera, as decribed above).

Mar 10, 2018*permalink

pannumon

In case someone else is wondering: "Canon EF, Nikon F, Pentax K & Sony FE mounts are available" (their website). Furthermore, as mentioned in the article, Micro Four Thirds and Fuji X mount adapters are available for a very reasonable $30 price.

If the lens is optically excellent, mounting it to APS-C or 4:3 sensor camera might even make sense.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

OOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG IT IS ONLY 400 DOLLARS BUY BUY BUY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Well, it's more expensive than the Mitakon 20mm f/2, but that's 4-4.5x and therefore somewhat less flexible.

I'll not sure I get the size argument. This and the Canon don't look so different in their shortest form, which is surely all that matters for transporting them.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Ranger Danger

You probably are the only one.... it's nothing to do with transport size and all about the pointy end and how much light it lets hit the subject.

Mar 7, 2018*permalink

And then I realize auto exposure won't work with this lens because it doesn't have electronic contacts. Stupid Nikon keeps you from using the AE system if the camera does not recognize the lens on their lower end cameras. It's not even a physical limitation it is just an attempt by Nikon to discourage you from using lenses from other manufacturers (exposure works fine of course with Sigma, and Tamron lenses).

Mar 8, 2018permalink

I get the need to reduce the light occlusion from the front of the lens (which this appears to do much less effectively than the - optically simpler - Mitakon), but the article specifically says "Ultimately, this lens was designed to be as portable as possible" - which seems odd.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Gavin: I could still have this wrong, but...

Nikon don't support metering on low-end bodies because there's no way to tell a mechanical Nikkor (whose aperture changes when the stop-down meter moves) from a completely uncoupled lens. With no aperture follower ring (expensive mechanics by D3x00 standards) the meter can't tell how much the lens will stop down. Live view is a separate problem, although you can eyeball exposure and some models have histograms. I do wish Nikon still had stop-down metering (especially on the Df).

So there *is* a physical limitation; if you could tell the camera the difference between lenses you could get around it, but that complicates a consumer body's UI.

I'm less sure why Canon won't use their digital rangefinder on manual lenses. Maybe something to do with wanting to select between AF points based on max aperture?

I'm sure both want you to buy their latest electronic lenses, but that obviously doesn't help when there's no equivalent available.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

On higher end bodies there is a way to tell the camera what is mounted via menu system. They stripped that out on the beginner models which I find extremely irritating.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Oh yes. I suspect that's a "simplification" thing. I appreciate it might confuse some customers, but I'd really like an "expert mode" that fills out the menus. Though uncoupled Vs mechanical is beyond what the high end bodies offer.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Mssimo

I don't see a marking for infinity focus.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

It ends at 2.5:1 mag. No at inf.

Mar 7, 2018*permalink

Since it is able to effectively zoom from 2.5-5 times magnification it is unable to use infinity focus (it is the same story with the canon mp e lens). You get a similar effect if you attach extension tubes (which move the lens farther from the sensor/film) however you lose sharpness and all lens problems (chromatic aberration, etc) are amplified. Using this lens is like using a lens with extension tubes that you can't take off.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

it's actually an optical design specifically made for the macro magnification, so not so much like adding tubes (from an image quality POV).

With lenses of this design you move the camera or subject to focus once you've set the magnification

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Mssimo

So basically its a fixed focus lens with a zoom ring that moves the all the elements (as one group) away from sensor till 5:1 magnification. Would that be correct?

Mar 7, 2018permalink

I'm not sure how the elements move, but I think there is some additional internal movement since the rear element doesn't quite move forward as far as the front of the lens when you go from 2.5-5x, that and the rear baffle also only moves part way inwards.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

+Keith Cooper I understand that a lens of this nature will produce better results. I was just stating that you get a similar effect (from a usability point of view) when you use a lens with extension tubes.

Mar 8, 2018permalink

Mssimo: basically it is not fixed focus lens. Usually you can get all important information from the name of lens. It is fixed focal length 25mm (of course it is not ideal and it can change when you are changing focused distance) and focusing is limited. Limitation is transformed to magnification data 2.5x = the farest focused distance and 5x = the nearest focused distance.

Mar 10, 2018*permalink

Magnar W

If contrast and sharpness is as great as the sample photos indicate, this is an interesting lens.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Cephalotus

Sharpness can not be great because it is diffraction limited in any possible setting.

The maxium real aperture is F2.8 * (1+2.5) = F10.

But this doesn't matter because other ultra macro lenses face the same physical limitations.

F2.0 would have been significantly better though.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Magnar W

@ Cephalotus:
I think you should take a closer look at the link that SteB posted.

For other lenses, diffraction isn't that much of a problem before you go beyond f:16 or so.

Mar 7, 2018*permalink

It's interesting to see the reduction of sharpness as you step through the aperture settings of this lens. I've lots of examples in the review
(I don't do bugs/flowers etc, so my technical sample images didn't make the press info ;-)

The absolute sharpness drops off exactly as you'd expect, but the out of focus areas get accordingly sharper as you stop down. So, as with any macro work, the utility of any aperture depends on what you want from the image.

For some (stacked) images I'd use the 25mm with, the fall off at f/4 is more than I'd want, whilst other shots (especially if down sampled) I could happily use f/8 or 11 - f/16 gets really soft though.

At the f/2.8 setting with really fine steps, this lens works a treat with my stackshot, 5Ds and Helicon.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

John C Tharp

Can we get Keith an 'official' tag, guys?

Mar 8, 2018permalink

The photo showing the lens attached to a camera and compared to the Canon MP-E 65mm is taken from John Hallmen's blog. This is in Swedish, but if you put it in Google translate, it's quite readable. There are just a few terms which don't translate well. For instance with Google translate "auto stop-down" translates as auto-dimming. It's well worth reading John's blog because he is an expert macro-photographer, one of the best. The Google translate John has put at the top of the blog didn't work for me, so just drop in the URL yourself into Google translate.
http://makrofokus.se/blogg/2018/2/7/forsta-intryck-laowa-2528.html

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Magnar W

Thanks a lot, great info about this lens!

Mar 7, 2018*permalink

Niklas k b

thank you so much, it gave me good information about the lens.( i understand swedish )

Mar 8, 2018permalink

25mm is awfully short for a macro lens.

What is the working distance from the front element?

tEdolph

Mar 7, 2018permalink

mfcam

Well, it's written in the article you haven't read.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Henrik Herranen

How about searching for the words "working distance" in the article?
"[...] which allow for a max working distance of 40 mm (5x) to 45 mm (2.5x)."

Mar 7, 2018*permalink

@mfcam,

It isn't cleat to me if that is from the film plane or the front element. If it is from the film plane (OK, image plane) and you look at how far that lens sticks out you might only have a centimeter of working distance?

Perhaps you can help me out with this, after all, you did read the article, right?

Tedolph

Mar 7, 2018*permalink

The working distance is not bad, and not that different to the Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 1-5x macro lens at comparable magnifications. The working distance of the Canon MP-E 65mm is 41mm at 5x, 51mm at 3x and 63mm at 2x (the Laowa lens starts at 2.5x, and the working distances are marked on the Canon lens, but only for full increments, and not half distances).

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Doug Pardee

tedolf: in the macro-lens world, the term "working distance" means distance from the front-most lens surface.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

Thanks.

That is not how Olympus reports it for their macro lenses.

tEdolph

Mar 7, 2018permalink

shigzeo

@tedolf

I think that is because Olympus haven’t any real macro lenses in their current arsenal. Instead they have multi purpose lenses that may or may not go down to 1:1. A true macro lens is something else.

Mar 7, 2018permalink

@shigzeo,

They have two: a 30mm 1.25x and a 60mm 1:1. Panasonic also has a 45mm macro. The Oly was on sale for $99.00 so I got one!

The working distance at 1.25x is only a centimeter or two in front of the front element but it is reported as 4.5cm.

Tedolph

tedolph

Mar 8, 2018permalink

shigzeo

@tedolf

I meant a macro lens as a lens that only does macro. The Oly is a multi-purpose lens that goes to infinity, and may, because of that, have different designations to the sensor rather than working distance as from the front of the lens.

Mar 8, 2018permalink