On 6/29/2021 10:02 AM, Wayne Shumaker wrote:
At 6/29/2021 07:02 AM, Jim wrote:
Hi Wayne,
I have a Leica-R 60mm Elmarit Macro lens with its matched extension tube.  It
works well with a 4/3 body and produces very nice images. I haven't used it much lately
because I seem to do better with autofocus.
H Jim,
One of the main items for discussion was working distance and options for
longer focal length lenses. For which there is 1.4x teleconverter or close-up
diopter, where extension tubes don't work well. On the 60mm, an extension tube
is probably the best way to go for more magnification. Just be careful you
don't squish the bug.
My personal choice to avoid extension tubes in the field is based on practical ergonomics/mechanics (and automation
connections, where applicable), not optical performance. My experience with lenses with matched tubes is optically good.
On other notes...
Then we have Moose criteria of not removing lenses on the camera in the field,
which requires 3 hands. I agree as I am a notorious bobbler. I'm doing good
just to not drop the lens cap.
Not sure how auto focus works with close-up lens, if at all. I have canon 180mm
macro with metabones to sony adapter. It struggles to auto-focus the bare lens.
With the Sigma AML72-01 diopter attached, the autofocus tries to work but the
diopter messes up its internal algorithm. It does give closer focus but also
shortens the working distance. (I think the metabones uses an adaptive
algorithm, where the more it is used on a lens the more it learns how the lens
focuses.) Most of the time I focus in range and then move the camera or else
use a tripod anyway.
In the less complex world of native lenses without adapters, I've found AF to
work just fine with C-U lenses
Why doesn't anyone make 180-200mm macro lenses any more? Is it because
telephoto lenses do just as well most of the time? And 180mm macros are too
heavy?
One other question: How well does OSS or IBIS work with diopter or extension
tube?
MikeG and I are twins separated at birth. He is the theory guy. I'm the experiential guy. 😁 There are theoretical
reasons (I think. Mike?) to be concerned about IS with C-U lenses. I've not had trouble I know of with that.
Disclaimer: The advent of Topaz Sharpening, Motion Blur Mode has convinced me that the OS/IBIS performance I've had has
often not been as good as I thought. This is tricky to be sure of:
1. I'm talking mostly about long FLs, and other factors are often important,
principally subject motion and air motion.
2. This software is learned "AI". Just as there is often improvement of detail when using Denoise AI, Sharpen may be
doing image enhancement not strictly from correcting motion blur.
In any case, it's occasionally rather magical.
I know Sony 1.4x converters preserve OSS.
As do the Oly 1.4x and 2.0x TCs, for the couple of lenses they work on.
How I is S Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|