Olympus E-PL1 Macro
Macro of course in marketing terms mostly really is close-up.
When
I was a boy long ago, macro meant 1:1 size of film/sensor up to 10:1
magnification on film/sensor. Close-up was the range 1:1 out to 1:10 on
film/sensor.
As for the E-PL1 kit lens 14-42mm Mk1 model, at
42mm and closest focus it can fit about 50mm side to side in the frame
for a "macro" ratio of about 1:2.9 with a nice working distance of about 100mm from lens front to subject.
The
later Mk2 14-42mm kit
lens sold with the E-PL2 when at 42mm can capture a frame width of
70mm, so is not quite as good as the older lens, but it does have an
optional macro adapter to improve on that. No idea of how much it
improves though until someone buys one and reports back how useful it
may be.
To
get true macro
down to 1:1 it needs the Micro Four Thirds 60mm macro lens or the Four Thirds 35mm macro lens which does focus from
infinity to 1:1, meaning 17.3mm side to side in the frame. The Four Thirds
50mm
macro lens will focus down to 1:2 for half size on the sensor and when
the EX-25 extension tube is added it can focus down to 1:1. Both these
lenses are a little bulky compared to the usual kit lenses and are
rather slow at auto focus plus of course need the MMF-1/2/3 adapter.
The 60mm lens is the only dedicated Olympus macro lens at present.
Meanwhile the addition of the Raynox 250 (seen here)
to the 40-150mm kit lens will take the side to side view on the frame
to 15mm for better than 1:1 macro when at 150mm. The lens needs to be
manually focused and kept at "infinity" focus to achieve that, because
the focal length will shift to shorter as it is focused closer, thus
losing some of the extreme macro effect.
As an experiment I dug
out my old large original 4/3 40-150mm len with the f/3.5 to 4.5 maximum aperture
and added the Raynox 250. That lens will frame 15mm at infinity focus
and 13mm at closest focus when at 150mm setting. That lens obviously
does not shift its focal length as it focuses closer. The 13mm frame
means that it achieves approx 1.3:1 macro.
The Raynox certainly makes a cheap entry to spectacular macro and with good working distance to the subject.
Next
lens bought was the Olympus 14-150mm and the Raynox 250 on that is
disappointing due to severe vignetting but gives excellent results if
prepared to crop and lose a few pixels.
Meanwhile I dug out my
old Nikon 4T close-up add-on lens of +3 dioptre and double element
construction. It fits to the front of the 14-150mm using a 58mm to 52mm
step-down ring.
Without the added lens the 14-150mm lens manages
70mm frame width captured when set at 150mm and with a working distance
of about 280mm. Same close-up ability as the Mk2 14-42mm kit lens.
Add
the Nikon 4T and now at 150mm focal length and closest focus the frame
width captured is 40mm and working distance about 145mm, move the lens
focus to "infinity" and the same 40mm frame width is captured but now
the working distance increases to about 350mm. The 40mm captured
represents about 1:2.3 macro ratio.
Zooming back with the
14-150mm lens to change framing size is vignette free until about the
area halfway between 45mm and 25mm markings on the lens. From then and
wider it adds quite sharp corner vignettes but nowhere near the mess
that the extra strength and smaller diameter Raynox creates. The Raynox
250 much better suits the 40-150mm lenses, better possibly would be the
Raynox 150 on the 14-150mm lens to yield less vignetting(?) and make it
more useful. The +3 dioptre seems to be a happy strength, if a larger
diameter (say 52mm to 58mm) +3 or +4 dioptre lens can be found it
will be quite useful. Canon made some but not sure of availability now.
Niels from Denmark reports that "I
use a 58mm Canon 250D +4 diopters closeup lens with my m.Zuiko 14-150mm
lens. It is an excellent lens giving a field of view about 34mm by 26mm
in size at 150mm. There is a slight vignetting at 14mm which is gone by
17mm. The corners of the images are somewhat blurry from 14mm to around
25mm but fine at longer focal lengths." That 34mm frame width
translates to a macro ratio of slightly better than 1:2.
Of
course when chasing macro and depending on how it will be shown on
screen or slide show or print, you can safely usually crop by a factor
of 2x so improve the apparent macro ratio somewhat.
Example photos and shots of setups and working distance will follow later......