Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Need advice: 38/2.8 Macro

Subject: Re: [OM] Need advice: 38/2.8 Macro
From: "Mike Cormier" <ronaldcormier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:10:02 ADT
Well, if money IS an issue, before you go off on a one way spending trip to bellows land, you might consider stacking lenses first. For example if you get a hold of a 49 to 49mm male to male tread adapter you can reverse a 50mm lense onto a prime lense and achieve some respectable magnification ratios. For example, a standard 50mm f1.8 reversed onto a 135mm f3.5 prime lense will provide about 2.5x magnification. Similarly, the same lense reversed on a 200mm lense will provide 4x magnification, all without expensive bellows, extension tubes, etc... the principle is the same as using a macro screw-on lense filter, except the 50mm lence is HIGHLY corrected, so you get extremely minimal vignetting, if any at all. Depends on the prime you use. Some experimentation may be necessary, but still cheaper than bellows which will run you at least $200 before you even buy a lense for it. Don't get me wrong, a bellows or Auto tele-extender is an EXCELLENT purchase, but if this is only an amateur application where cash is an issue and you don't plan on publishing slides to put the pros to shame, you might want to give it a thought. Lastly, if you want the versatility of handheld-like shooting without tripod limitations, look at Benbo outdoor tripods. There're aguably the bast available for outdoor macro work. Don't take the lense handbook's word for it and start shooting at more than 2x magnfication without a mounting system of some kind or you'll waste yards of Velvia, Provia and K64.

Yours in macro fetishes,
-Mike


I'm an amatuer hobbiest interested in blowing things up: errr... making
closeups of bugs and flowers. I've progressed from screw-in closeup
diopters to generic ext. tubes to a dedicated OM 50/3.5 macro. I really
like the 50/3.5, BTW. Now I've got an opportunity to get either a 38/2.8
macro or possibly a 135/4.5 macro. Apparently either would require an
additional purchase of either Auto Bellows or Telescopic Auto Tube.(Am I
right that each would require tubes or bellows?) From reading between the
lines in a 1984 ed. "The OM System Lens Handbook", it might appear to me
that the 38/2.8 macro with 65-116 Tele Auto Tube is a pretty good
combination for handheld nature closeups. However, I'm leary of spending
that much money and having to get that close, only to find out something
that makes me regret what (for me) would be a substantial cash outlay.
Getting lens touching close to some insects and plants is a cause of
concern, but for a variety of future projects larger-than-life
representations would be an asset.

To recap: my interest is strictly non-specific and amatuer in nature; (ie:
no specific requirements,... yet). Money _is_ an issue. Convience and
actual useability and flexibilty are other issues. I probably won't get
much use out of anything that's too much hassle to set-up and carry in

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz