<<Longer lens of course will give you better working distance but requires
faster
<<SS even for macro-
<<geometry dictgates it is not just mag--- Last I tried to determine the
minimum
<<hand holding speed macro is (full frame) 1/ [FL* (1+M) **2]
<<So at 1:1 the SS need to be about 4 times faster--
Or I. S. Moose writes:
<All very well, but largely irrelevant to those of us using IS lenses or
bodies. And IS is a moving target. E-PM2 clearly isn't as good at macro Mags as
E-M5. E-M5 II is <better at long tele than E-M5. And I'll bet also at macro, as
that's where Oly touts improvement.
but FL still matters! Not everyone here bought this, but geometry is geometry
and lenses , lenses.
Or I. S. Moose writes:
<Sure - but - different IS systems do best at different FLs, or may level the
difference between FLs. It's possible for IS to trump geometry. I have shots of
flowers where <the same flower, shot at 43 mm and 1/320 in 12-50 macro mode is
indistinguishable in this regard from 252 mm (500 mm FF eq!) at 1/125. Neither
has any visible <motion blur.
Point of factoring in the IS ability is well taken--but---Longer FL magnifies
the effect of some cam displacments so IS would have a harder time taming them.
In round numbers the EM-5 11 IS provides about 3 stops stability over 1/FL rot
(rule of thumb) on dpreview test at 24mm and 200mm. Of note sony does NOT
stabilize non system lens that does not report focusing distance to cam in x/y
planes--thus only 3 axis stabliization. X/Y displacment especially imp't for
macro. Any idea if Oly has
5 axis stabilization for lenses on adapters? I have wondered about that for
ages. Anyone? Speculation welcome.
Curious, Stand back but keep speed up, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|