Distance from working Moose writes:
<<The problem for me would be working distance. Sure, it's got the AoV of a 70
mm, but the working distance is still that of a 35 mm lens. Get in that close,
and the bug can carve its name (Kilroy, of course) in the lens FE. :-) Possibly
good for what Bill is looking to do, though.
Well if one considers mag ratio I suppose that is technically correct, but
filling the frame and "apparent mag" is more important. One effectively gets
more working distance on MFT/ 4/3 sensor than FF at same FL--not twice FF
however as Chuck had previously stated:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/msg05530.html
Becomes complex very quickly given the design of macro lenses and the FL
shortening in many/most as mag increases. I wonder what the "effective FL" as
it relates to working distance at say "1:4" or 1:8 on FF with the MFT 60/2.8.
I bet closer to a 90-100 on FF.
Mag ratio doesn't change, I know, with change in format--but you know what I
mean.
Don't spook the critters, 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/
|