jamesbcouch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>Good points Moose. In particular one of my gripes with many "macro"
>features on zooms is that they only work at the wide end, giving you
>less than useful working distances. You are right that none of the
>lenses I listed give you anything close to macro capability. If I am
>doing much in the way of true close-ups I bring a macro lens, extension
>tubes, or auxilary close-up lenses. 1:4 is not really adequate for most
>macro work, let alone 1:6+ as you are aware I am sure. I find, even for
>flowers, etc. that you will want to be working in the 1:3 or 1:2 range.
>
Even that 1:2 boundary gets in the way often enough to be annoying. If
I'm expecting anything like that, I carry the Kiron 105/2.8, which goes
to 1:1. Even if not, my little bag carries a 50/1.4 on a Vivitar Macro
Teleconverter ==> 100/2.8 to 1:1. Not as flat field as the Kiron, but
does double duty for speed without the extender when needed.
>As you have pointed out, even most 'macro/close focus' zooms won't get
>you there.
>
Yeah. That Tamron SP 35-80 gets pretty close. The Tamron 60-300 and
Tokina 50-250 both get really there. Neither is so large and heavy as to
be unusable with the camera tripod socket attached to a tri or mono
'pod. The Tamron is a bit awkward, but the Tokina is pretty comfy that way.
>The other poblem with using many zooms for macro work is the lac of a
>tripod collar. This is not a real issue with a 50mm macro lens, but you
>get a large zoom and then focus it close on a subject and the lack of a
>tripod collar can really be a pain!
>
Moose
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|