For a different perspective on working distance, see Jan Steinman's amazing
mushroom photo in the Unofficial Olympus Gallery:
http://www.taiga.ca/~gallery/
OM-4T, Zuiko 16mm/3.5, 7mm extension tube; subject 1/2" from lens.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of W Shumaker
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 10:06 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] macro working distance
Hi all. Life has been very busy and I have not participated in the
group much lately. I just returned from a week photography workshop
with Rod Planck in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. I feel I learned a
lot and will be attempting to incorporate many new ideas into my
photography. Everything from field techniques, composition, a new way
to edit and work with film, and especially proper exposure.
A lot of the photography involved macro work in the field. I tried a
lot of different combinations with my OM gear that I've never tried
before and will be interested in seeing the film when it gets back. It
became very clear that working distance in field macro photography is
very important. I ended up using the following macro combinations:
90mm macro
90mm macro + extension
90mm macro + extension + 1.4X
135mm macro with auto extension + 1.4x
180mm f2 telephoto + extension (25mm and 50mm) + 1.4x
The 180/f2 combination gave the best working distance but also heavier
to work with. The 135 combination was easier to set up, but very dim
display made focusing difficult. The 90mm macro worked for subjects
that allowed closer working distance. There is a lot I could talk
about, if/when I get the time.
Again, working distance with macro photography was important. Which
brings me to the question of the new Olympus E-1 system. In 35mm, to
achieve 1:1 macro with long working distance, a longer focal length is
needed. Now is focal length the main criteria, independent of film (or
sensor) format? The E-1 system macro lens is a 50mm with magnification
of 2x that of film. The fact that the sensor is smaller increases
magnification, but not working distance - is that correct? If so, it
seems that the new E-1 system will have some limitations with regard to
possible macro lenses and working distance? Or would it be just as easy
to design a 200mm macro for the E-1 as it is for film, with equivalent
working distances. I think I am not understanding something fully? If
my thinking is correct, then this may be a major drawback to the 4/3's
system and macro nature photography.
Wayne
|