Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 11, 2007, 4:52 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 67
Default

i have decided on the camera, olympus e500,

now for advice on macro shooting, i have seen 2 lens 35mm and the other is a 50 mm if i am right there is a total price difference of approx £200 between the 2, with the purchase of the twin lens kit, i could just about afford the 35mm lens, the reason for the camera is mainly macro

i was told in the shop yesterday, that with the 35mm lens, i wouid have to be 4 to 6 inches away from the subject does anyone know if this is true? as i hoped/thought i would be able to be a bit further away from the subject than that

does anyone use this lens, and can recommend it?

i have a canon s3is, of which i love, however i take a lot of macros of flowers and would like to try to take insects, the insects are camera shy and tend to hide when the s3 touches their foreheads, joking apart i struggle with a lot of shadows from either myself, or the adapter on the camera,

would this camera and 35mmlens be an improvement over my current camera, i.e. shadows, photo quality anddistance to subject please help

or are there alternatives to the olympus macro shooting????????, that i have not considered,

p.s. i am not interested in any other camera, as cost is the major problem, and 2, i have recently read olys dust removal system, wipes the floor with its competitors systems

thanks for any help or advice

alan
jad123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 11, 2007, 10:05 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10
Default

I bought the 35mm shortly after getting my E500, and it is true the subject to lens distance can be very short. Too short for most flower pictures, since you and the camera interfere with light (natural lighting conditions). and you have to "get down" to see into the viewfinder. I had to resort to picking wildflowers (relax. they were from my own garden) and setting up a mini-studio with artificial/mirrored lighting. The one advantage is that it is a pretty good lens for the price. I just ordered Sigma's 105mm macro. I'll post some comments when I have had a chance to put it in action.
On a related subject, I also ordered Adorama's right angle finder, which will make it a lot easier to take pictures in the field, since I will no longer have to lie prone to get good sharp pictures.
dandand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2007, 2:43 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
jorgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 200
Default

I keep reading that one gets too close with the 35mm macro so ones shadow will fall on the subject. I specialize in getting extremely close to my subjects: so far insects and lizards (very small lizards). Check out the macro category at http://jorgen.photoblog.com/.

The front of the 35mm lens is nearly 11.8cm from the "film" plane at maximal magnification 1:1, meaning that the front of the lens is very, very close to the subject - far closer than you would get to take a normal flower. And, no, it is not that difficult to avoid casting a shadow.

Note also that we in the old days happily managed with a 50mm macro. The 35mm is a 70mm in 35mm film terms!

An alternative solution is to buy the extension tube ex-25 and use it with the 40-150mm zoom. You won't get the same resolution (or magnification) as the 35mm macro, but you don't need the magnification and you will get the distance you want. This combination should beat your Canon s3, though you will miss the depth of field.

Jorgen
http://jorgen.photoblog.com/

jorgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 14, 2007, 2:00 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

jad:
I know you said your not interested in any other model but, the E-330 is a newer and in some ways more advanced camera than the E-500. It's also more suited to macro, because the live view feature is very useful there. And it's surprisingly available right now on clearance for seemingly the same price (check adorama for 2-lens kit around $600).

In someways the E-500 is maybe better to handhold--it does have a brighter viewfinder--but if you're really interested primarily in macro you should look at the E-330. It may not last long at that price.


kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 14, 2007, 2:28 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 67
Default

thanks for that, current u.k. price is approx £500, plus macro lens, at this time i cannot afford this, however i missed the e500 as the shop had sold the last one, by the time i approached them, i suppose it will give me time to carry on saving some more money, such is life, at the moment i am spending to much time looking at the computer, comparing prices and trying to justify to myself the outlay of around £500, and not using my canon, again thank you

alan
jad123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2007, 12:45 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 183
Default

I have the 35mm macro and if you don't need the wider aperture of the 50mm it's a great lens, especially for the price. I use it as a lightweight walkaround prime as well. As to the Oly dust-reduction, I have two E-1's and dust is not an issue with either.
stowaway7 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:01 AM.