opinions on this camera?

to me, those 4/3 system isn't really good for taking reef photography...
(For being 4/3 system.. sensor is even smaller than normal crop DSLR body
which means more noise at high iso and if u want to take pic of moving fish
you would need to bump up iso to get more speed and if high iso isn't much
usable, result might not be pleasing and lenses that are including
in that kit isn't really fast to capture action so in order to get decent shutter speed,
have to get higher iso since those lenses are slow)
it may work for taking full shot of tank but in order to take close up coral
pic, u need dedicated lens and for any DSLR system... it might be hard to find it for 4/3 system
and tripod to go along w/ that.. will set price high as 1.5k instead of
price on that link. If you are serious about taking reef photography, get entry level
crop DSLR body (1.5, 1.6x) w/ kit lens and get dedicated macro lens/tripod which is
about 600 ish + 350~500 + 100~200 ish
 
I really don't need a camera for anything other than macro shots. Anybody using a digital microscope for taking reef macro shots?
 
lol... if u wanna see each cell on corals!
most macro lens get to magnification of 1x
where microscope is go for 500x+?
Some P&S camera works.. for coral pic
but if you really want decent macro shots... at least you will need
dedicated macro lens and tripod besides the camera
 
woops. I meant to type macroscope. A usb ccd macro lense that does not use a camera body but rather uses a laptop as the viewing system. Anybody used these?
 
those 4/3 system isn't really good for taking reef photography...

I'm currently testing out the 4/3rds, and I disagree with this. I have had nothing but pure joy using their bodies. I enjoy using my E620 since its so light.
 
I like the 4/3rds system but am a little skeptical of it's macro capabilities. As far as I can tell, which isn't scientifically accurate, they have two macro lenses. One is a 50mm f/2 capable of 1:0.52x magnification. The other is a 35mm f/3.5 capable of true 1:1.

The 50mm f/2 doesn't do anything for me and I find it rather un-impressive compared to Canon's 100mm f/2.8. The 35mm f/3.5 on the other hand shows some very real promise. I have no experience actually using the lens and can't really say what it is capable of, but it excites my imagination. It *may* be possible to get images with the Olympus 35mm macro that can't be had with the Canon 100mm. Working distance would be short. You would only have 5-6 inches to work with for maximum magnification. The camera's small sensor then crops the image drastically and you get an "equivalent" 1:2 ratio. Of course it is still 1:1 in reality. Canon's 100mm macro gives an "equivalent" 1:1.6 ratio on it's cropped bodies but nobody ever says that -_-. The point is, you may get that extra 1:.4 """equivalency""" from Olympus. That said, I'll keep the Canon. Olympus could make some crazy macro lenses for their DSLRs, they just...don't...yet.
 
Last edited:
I would think you would want at least 100mm for reef macro, you would have to be so close to get 1:1 out of a 35mm and I have a hard time imagining that it could be done. If you're looking to specialize in one particular aspect of photography I would shift most of your concern to the lenses over the body. For this reason I would go with either Canon or Nikon, the Canon 100mm and Nikkor 105mm are both fantastic and I'm also a fan of the sigma 150mm.
 
The 4/3 system does have a 1:1 macro. In fact, using the Sigma 105mm on Canon is pretty sharp. However, it is a bit soft on the edges.

This same lens can be used with 4/3. Since the sensor is smaller, the best part of the lens is used by crop body design.

There is also the 150mm Sigma macro in a 4/3 mount. This lens turns into a 300mm macro :eek2:

Edit: Sample Shots
 
Back
Top