35mm marco worth to buy?

[rui51]

Hi all,
i m newbie in marco world.
due to the reason of ex pricing in zuiko 50mm marco, i m thinking of to get a 35mm marco instead.
may i know whether 35mm marco lens is able to take insects' marco?
will it be very tough for the short focal length?
and is it worth to buy?

 

[headfonz]

the working distance on the 35mm and 50mm macro may be too short for insect macro.

some insects (e.g. butts) are very sensitive to our presence, shadow or breathing. others may be harmful when they get aggressive, so having more working distance can make life easier.

the difference between working distance and focusing distance is explained in this diagram.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/about/lens_knowledge.html

if stretch your budget by some, the Sigma 105 f/2.8 macro may fit your budget. esp if you get a 2nd hand unit.

 

[Oly5050]

Before the 50 mm F2.0, I was using the 35 mm. Now it lies in the dry cabinet. Although it is about the same size as the 50 mm, the 35 mm is lighter. And both can fit the ring flash adaptor.

 

[nstclicks]

A budget entree into macro would be to use a reversal adapter to stack a 2nd hand manual focus lens in front of your existing lens (e.g. a kit 14-42). I've posted some pictures taken with this setup here

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4978912#post4978912

An advantage of this set-up is that you retain automatic aperture control and a limited range of autofocus. Disadvantage is that working distance is short and primary focus will still be by moving the camera back and forth. Adaptor costs ~$10-20 and lens would cost $100-$150.

But I must say I'm much happier now that I have a Vivitar 90/2.8 macro lens. Yes, it's manual focus and manual aperture, but the image quality is good and most importantly, I actually have decent working distance now ! Having the working distance also solved a lot of the lighting problems I had earlier because now the lens is not jammed right up to the subject. I paid ~US$200 for it on ebay but I've seen similar lens going for less. Depends on your luck and patience in bidding. OM adapter is ~$20.

If you can find a used sigma 105 within your budget, go for it, but if not, you can try using manual lenses.

 

[kwan0029]

maybe he juz wan a flower shot?

Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 macro?
versatile lens... but not prime lens.

 

[rui51]

the working distance on the 35mm and 50mm macro may be too short for insect macro.

some insects (e.g. butts) are very sensitive to our presence, shadow or breathing. others may be harmful when they get aggressive, so having more working distance can make life easier.

the difference between working distance and focusing distance is explained in this diagram.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/about/lens_knowledge.html

if stretch your budget by some, the Sigma 105 f/2.8 macro may fit your budget. esp if you get a 2nd hand unit.

thanks headfonz! now i know what is different between working distance and focusing distance. may i know what is the working distance for 35mm marco lens?
i saw a lot of photo in flickr which are taken by 35mm marco lens. the details is fantastic!
and it seem no problem for them to take the bugs photo, so i m wondering are they using any extra device to extend the working distance? or no such things in marco world?
btw, sigma 105 still over my budget.

 

[rui51]

A budget entree into macro would be to use a reversal adapter to stack a 2nd hand manual focus lens in front of your existing lens (e.g. a kit 14-42). I've posted some pictures taken with this setup here

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4978912#post4978912

An advantage of this set-up is that you retain automatic aperture control and a limited range of autofocus. Disadvantage is that working distance is short and primary focus will still be by moving the camera back and forth. Adaptor costs ~$10-20 and lens would cost $100-$150.

But I must say I'm much happier now that I have a Vivitar 90/2.8 macro lens. Yes, it's manual focus and manual aperture, but the image quality is good and most importantly, I actually have decent working distance now ! Having the working distance also solved a lot of the lighting problems I had earlier because now the lens is not jammed right up to the subject. I paid ~US$200 for it on ebay but I've seen similar lens going for less. Depends on your luck and patience in bidding. OM adapter is ~$20.

If you can find a used sigma 105 within your budget, go for it, but if not, you can try using manual lenses.

Thanks nstclicks! u get the key point, now i was using the 2x marco closeup filter.
all the disadvantage u mention here were my current problem.
been fed up with short working distance n move front & back to focus.
the Vivitar 90 marco is an OM lens? i think it is rare n ppl normally wont sell.
it is a good choice, nice image quality n of course within my budget.
i will keep on eye for this kind of 2nd lens.

 

[rui51]

maybe he juz wan a flower shot?

Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 macro?
versatile lens... but not prime lens.

thanks kwan0029! i prefer shooting bugs
i think i wont get tis lens since the working distance is short
and look duplicate with my 14-42.
btw, u knw how much is tis sigma lens?

 

[rui51]

Before the 50 mm F2.0, I was using the 35 mm. Now it lies in the dry cabinet. Although it is about the same size as the 50 mm, the 35 mm is lighter. And both can fit the ring flash adaptor.

hi Oly5050. thanks for the comment.
u feel any big different between 50mm & 35mm when taking bugs marco (on convenience or image quality)?
hav u thinking of selling ur 35mm since it has no use for ages..:bsmilie:

 

[headfonz]

thanks headfonz! now i know what is different between working distance and focusing distance. may i know what is the working distance for 35mm marco lens?
i saw a lot of photo in flickr which are taken by 35mm marco lens. the details is fantastic!
and it seem no problem for them to take the bugs photo, so i m wondering are they using any extra device to extend the working distance? or no such things in marco world?
btw, sigma 105 still over my budget.

for 1:1 magnification on macro lenses, i think the the working distance is usually about the length of the lens you are using. you can work it out a close estimate by subtracting the flange distance + lens length (to front element) from the min focusing distance. for the ZD35, it should be about 5 - 6cm.