Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 100,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard you must register for a free account.
As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 3,000,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from 80,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
I hope to see a 90 to 100 mm F/2 macro that will go to 1:1 before the end of the year myself. The 8 to 16 mm zoom should be about half the cost of the 7 to 14 zoom and will complement the E-420/E-520 offerings out this year.
hi
- would anybody have any idea (guess ?) what the main difference would be in qualityterms between the existing 7-14, which is in the pro-range of Oly (but anyhow unaffordable), and the new 8(?)-16(?)mm which will be in the standard range ?
- what would be the main advantage of the 100mm macro (1:1) compared to the 50mm (1:2) ? probably the opportunity to stay a litle further from the animal ? Is this then really compared to a 200 mm in analog terms ? You could 'take ' the eye of a pygmeeseahorse ?
so both lensens are more to be expected in september probably ?
jan
The 100 mm is the 35 mm equv. of a 200 mm and will put greater distance between the port and subject. At life size (1:1) the subject will be the same size as it would be with the 35 macro at 1:1, the only difference would be distance to subject and shallower depth of field. The 100 mm macro will be a specialty lens for skittish subjects and NOT a standard macro choice, at least not for me. I will also take a higher degree of skill to use as DOF and steadying the lens will be challenging.
The Olympus standard range lenses have tested very well against the competition in the same price and angle of view range. The new standard wide zoom will not be weather sealed or as robust in build quality. However I use the 35 mm macro (under $200.00) all the time with outstanding results, you just can't get as close as you sometimes need to be because it focuses to about 3 mm from the port.
back again on the new lens:
I am a little puzzled on the possibilities of the new lens and this in relation to the 8mm fisheye:
- both are +/- same price
- the 8mm is a 'real' fisheye: angle 180 degrees
- the 9-18 has probably an max angle of 110 (I saw that the angle of the 'unaffordable' 7-14mm was 75 - 114 degrees, on the Belgian site there is mentioned that the angle of the 9-18 is 65 °, but this for the 18mm-side probably)
If I had to chose (I want to buy one) between the 8mm fisheye and the new one 9-18mm for underwater photography what is now really the best choice. For sure you can use/enjoye the 9-18 also above the water, which is not the case for the 8mm.
Probably also important if you consider the extra cost of the port: the 8mm needs a dome port, the 9-18 probable a less expensive port (not dome)
But what to do if you only consider the possibilities underwater ?
tnks
jan
After doing my first trip with the 50mm lens, I'm so glad I listened to Phil, Roger and others. That lens absolutely rocks. Throw a custom woody's diopter in front and you're getting some killer macro. I'll post some results later. Just got back and I'm whipped.
Linear Mode
