IMO, don't go buy the 80/4, you have to have the Auto-Tube to use it, which
isn't very convienent (plus the expense). I'd get a great Tamron 90mm or
Vivitar 90/2.5 S1 macro before I'd spring for a 80/4 + Auto-Tube. And in
general, I think that a 80-90mm macro lens offers much more versitility
than a 50mm macro as the working distance is much greater.
When I started out with macro, I used a 50/1.8 with extension tubes, which
is very cheap and will do quite well. A reversed lens isn't very practical
in the field, IMO. And the working distance with reversed lenses is very
small.
Clearly the most convienent methodology would be a macro lens. And the
50/3.5's are easily available for $125-150, or maybe less. Just remember
that the working distance with a 50 macro is a lot less than with a 90
macro.
Skip
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Eric ericboyce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 13:27:43 +0100
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] 50MM F3.5 MACRO OR 80MM F4 MACRO?
I am planning a trip to Kew Gardens to shoot some close ups of flowers etc,
and was wondering which lens I should buy if any.
Which is a good starter lens?
Should I just use a reversing ring on my 50 f1.8?
What are the benefits of the 80 over the 50 macro, do I need less extension
tubes?
Should I buy extension rings or get a bellows?
How much should i be expecting to pay for the lenses?
thanks again
Eric
ericboyce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|