Price drop: Olympus 30mm f3.5 macro lens

[naoki]

I got email from Olympus about the sale of Olympus macro lens, and the 30mm macro is at a very good price (Link to the lens). I'm a big fan of their super-sharp 60mm macro, but I just jumped on this deal. It can't go wrong with this price ($199); it can go to higher magnification than typical macro lenses (except the specialized Cannon MP-E), and the review of this lens has been pretty good! I don't think that there are lots of micro 4/3 users, but I thought that I would mention about the deal. 30mm macro was released last year for $299, and about 1 month ago, the price went down to $249 (pretty good deal). Until July 8, you can get it at the cheaper price (Amazon and B&H etc have the same $199 deal).

 

[KyushuCalanthe]

Thanks for the heads up Naoki. I'm tempted at that price (though it is a bit more expensive here, coming in around 25,000yen), but I may have to wait. My main concern is that Panasonic bodies don't have in camera stabilization, and this lens isn't stabilized, so I'll probably go for the Panasonic equivalent Lumix G 30mm f/2.8 ASPH. MEGA O.I.S. Macro. It is more expensive, but probably a better fit for my G7. If I were feeling rich, I'd prefer the 60mm for obvious reasons - farther distance to the subject, weather proofing, extra features, etc.

 

[naoki]

Do you use G7 for most of your video?

I'm a bit confused about Panasonic line, but is G7 the only model without in-body stabilization in the current line? For macro, I use a tripod almost always, so I have to disable the in-body stabilization. But it would be nice to have one type of stabilization for general photos.

When I was Nikon only, I also had 105mm and 55mm macros, and I agree 105mm lens is much more versatile. So I would go with Olympus 60mm/2.8 (Leica 45mm is a bit pricey) if I were to have only one macro. Oly 60mm is a bit more expensive ($399) than Lumix 30mm, but it is still a bargain, compared to Canon/Nikon.

I'm hoping that the extra magnification of 30mm is useful for some occasions. With 16M pixels, there is a limit in cropping. I occasionally use extension tubes, Raynox DCR-250 (a macro filter), but they are tedious (and E-M1 in-camera focus stacking doesn't work too well).

 

[KyushuCalanthe]

Do you use G7 for most of your video?

Exclusively. It produces fantastic 4K video for the price - and that's the rub, price. I'd love a more expensive camera, but in the real world...

I'm a bit confused about Panasonic line, but is G7 the only model without in-body stabilization in the current line? For macro, I use a tripod almost always, so I have to disable the in-body stabilization. But it would be nice to have one type of stabilization for general photos.

The Lumix series has a bewildering array of models, and as far as I know only the newly released GH5 has 5 axis in-body stabilization. Lumix lenses in general have image stabilization however if used with a Panasonic camera. My understanding is that except for a few Leica lenses that are specifically built for Lumix cameras, off brand lenses with I.S. will not stabilize on Lumix cameras. With the upgrade of the in-body I.S. and lens stabilization as well, the GH5 should produce some really impressive hand held stabilization - especially if you are using a mechanical stabilizer like a glidecam, etc.

When I was Nikon only, I also had 105mm and 55mm macros, and I agree 105mm lens is much more versatile. So I would go with Olympus 60mm/2.8 (Leica 45mm is a bit pricey) if I were to have only one macro. Oly 60mm is a bit more expensive ($399) than Lumix 30mm, but it is still a bargain, compared to Canon/Nikon.

I'm hoping that the extra magnification of 30mm is useful for some occasions. With 16M pixels, there is a limit in cropping. I occasionally use extension tubes, Raynox DCR-250 (a macro filter), but they are tedious (and E-M1 in-camera focus stacking doesn't work too well).

I used to be a Canon guy. I loved my Canon SLRs, but the micro four thirds cameras are so small and versatile, I don't think I'll ever go back. If you are a stills person though, you cannot be fully happy with M 4/3 cameras. I am now primarily a video person, so it makes sense to use Panasonic cameras. A year ago I would have gone with a Sony a7 series camera, but I really don't like their design, ergonomics, etc., though their low light capability is just insane. That's the Achille's Heel with M 4/3.

I've used the Raynox DCR-250 too, and it produces nice macro shots (minus the serious vignette), but not what I'd call a serious product for in field use - mostly what I do.

 

[naoki]

Exclusively. It produces fantastic 4K video for the price - and that's the rub, price. I'd love a more expensive camera, but in the real world...

Your wonderful videos prove it!

The Lumix series has a bewildering array of models, and as far as I know only the newly released GH5 has 5 axis in-body stabilization.

I was curious about this, so I looked into the currently listed models. The ones without in-body stabilization are GH4, G7, and GX850. Others do have in-body stabilization: GX7 (2-axis), GX-8 (4-axis), GX-85 (5-axis), G-85 (5-axis).

I used to be a Canon guy. I loved my Canon SLRs, but the micro four thirds cameras are so small and versatile, I don't think I'll ever go back. If you are a stills person though, you cannot be fully happy with M 4/3 cameras. I am now primarily a video person, so it makes sense to use Panasonic cameras. A year ago I would have gone with a Sony a7 series camera, but I really don't like their design, ergonomics, etc., though their low light capability is just insane. That's the Achille's Heel with M 4/3.

I agree, I love the size of m4/3 (including the lens size) and overall lens selection. I rarely touch my Nikon D300 any more. m43 don't have the crazy low light capacity, but I would say that they are good enough for most purpose (well, I guess I have a low expectation). In the film era, I have used ISO of up to 800, and rarely 1600. So I'm happy if it can handle 800 or so. But a7 series is attractive. I'm not so sure about Sony lens, though. I have only used old Nex-3, which I didn't like the color much.

 

[KyushuCalanthe]

Your wonderful videos prove it!

Thanks! I bought the G7 primarily because it could produce 4K video that was on a par with its big brother the GH4.

I was curious about this, so I looked into the currently listed models. The ones without in-body stabilization are GH4, G7, and GX850. Others do have in-body stabilization: GX7 (2-axis), GX-8 (4-axis), GX-85 (5-axis), G-85 (5-axis).

Well, there you go. It is funny and confusing how different models have such different specs. The GX85 came out soon after the G7, and is essentially an upgrade, but it was too late for me to buy it. The GH4 was the professional level camera, but now has been supplanted by the GH5. The only downside of the GH5 is its size - almost like an SLR - and it does not track focus very well, so you need to decide the focus ahead before the shot.

I agree, I love the size of m4/3 (including the lens size) and overall lens selection. I rarely touch my Nikon D300 any more. m43 don't have the crazy low light capacity, but I would say that they are good enough for most purpose (well, I guess I have a low expectation). In the film era, I have used ISO of up to 800, and rarely 1600. So I'm happy if it can handle 800 or so. But a7 series is attractive. I'm not so sure about Sony lens, though. I have only used old Nex-3, which I didn't like the color much.

I get very good video/stills up to 3200 with the G7. I've heard that the GH5 does even a bit better, up to 6400 nicely. The large sensors of the Sony a7 line have much better results in low light, almost like night seeing glasses. Pretty impressive, but I agree about the lens selection. Each camera has its ups and downs.