Portrait and Macro on m43, which do you use?

[defconfunk]

At first blush, portraiture and macro photography seem like such different beasts, yet for several reasons, good macro lenses often make good portrait lenses (very sharp, bright, and FOV in the vicinity of a 100mm lens on 35mm film). In the m43 world, we are really lucky to have quiet a few good options for macro / portrait lenses. I thought it would be interesting to hear people’s thoughts on these lenses and share images taken with them.

Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm F2.0 Macro
Admittedly, this lens only really applies E-M1 users (for now, hopefully the technology spreads to the rest of the m43 family). It was what got me thinking about this discussion in the first place. I think it is a good option for E-M1 users, and I think there are a lot of users who don’t know it exists, nor how good it is.

When I got the E-M1 I knew I wanted a weather sealed portrait prime (ruling out the otherwise fantastic Oly 45mm). I really liked Robin Wong’s shots with the 50mm in his E-M1 review (http://robinwong.blogspot.ca/2013/09/olympus-om-d-e-m1-review-shooting-with.html). I’m very comfortable with 100mm as my portrait length (most my previous portrait work being done on an adapted 50mm or the 14-54 II at full zoom). So, I decided that I’d keep an eye out for a good deal on the 50mm. I was very lucky to get a great deal on one and the 50mm-200mm (the other ‘must have’ lens on my wish list).

In my use of it so far, I’d say pros are:
-Image quality
-Inexpensive, brand new these are $450, and they’ve been around for 10 years, so used copies are cheap
-A full stop brighter than every other AF lens on this list
-AF is fast in good light
-Weather sealed

Cons
-Only works with PDAF capable cameras (currently only EM-1 or older Four Thirds bodies)
-AF is slow in low light, and if it misses, it takes a long time get it right
-Macro is 1:0.5
-Lens is “loud” by current standards, now there’s a nitpick if I ever heard one

Since I don’t yet have any post-worthy shots from this lens, I thought I’d just link to the Flickr pool – there are some good shot in here:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/1290235@N21/


Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm F3.5 Macro
Wider and slower than I’m used to for portraiture or macro work. I have absolutely no experience with it. Strangely, I couldn’t find a flickr pool for just it. Between the weather sealing, light weight, and 70mm equivalent FOV, I imagine it would be a good walk-around lens for tight compositions or semi-environmental portraits.

I’d love to hear peoples’ experience with this lens. Post any pictures you’ve got! How’s the AF speed compared to the 50mm?

Pros
-Dirt cheap, $180 brand new
-Macro 1:1
-Weather sealed
-Compact & Light (165g)

Cons
-Only F3.5
-Only works with PDAF capable bodies
-AF speed?

Flickr pool for both the 35mm and the 50mm
http://www.flickr.com/groups/35and50zdmacro/


Panasonic Leica DG Macro Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH
Another lens I have no experience with. Based purely on numbers, I wonder why people chose this lens over the less expensive Olympus competitors. If anyone has one, I’d love to hear why you chose it (was it the only m43 macro lens at the time, or did you chose it over the 60mm for a reason?). As the flickr pool shows, people are making some great photos with it.

Pros
-OIS, if you need it
-Macro is 1:1
-works with every m43 body
-AF Speed?

Cons
-Not cheap (more than half-again the cost of the Olympus lenses)

Flickr pool
http://www.flickr.com/groups/1237302@N20/


Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm F2.8 Macro
And the final AF lens in the list. This to me looks like the “easy” choice most people looking for a macro/portrait m43 lens would make; weather sealed, well reviewed, not expensive.

Pros
-Not expensive, only $450 new. Still pretty new, so I have no idea what the used market is like.
-Macro is 1:1
-Weather sealed
-Full m43 compatibility
-Fast CDAF AF

Cons
-Long (relatively speaking) lens
-Too tight for some people?

The flickr pool
http://www.flickr.com/groups/olympus60macro/


Adapted Legacy Lenses
Of course micro four thirds cameras lend themselves very well to using adapted lenses. The crop factor works in our favour for portraiture (the kit nifty-fifty turns into a nice sharp 100mm portrait lens). When it comes to macro work we run into the limits of lenses not meant for macro work (on the plus side, we’re only using the centre of the lens, which is normally the sharpest part of the lens anyways) and the tilt/shift from the adapter becomes visible.

Pros
-cheap
-almost unlimited selection
-As bright & shallow as you are willing to pay for (f1.4, no problem; f1.2, how much money do you want to spend?)
-As much magnification as you want (macro lens, extension tub, bellows, adapted microscope?)

Con
-No auto focus
-Stop down metering only
-Adapters introduce tilt/shift in macro images
-Lower overall image quality

These I do have some personal examples to share (all were shot on an E-510)

Vivitar Series 1 70mm-210mm F3.5 Macro

50mm F1.8 w/25mm Extension Tube

50mm F1.8 w/Auto-Bellows

50mm F1.8 Portrait

 

[Godfrey]

"All of the above."

- I don't own the ZD 50mm f/2 at present, but I did a LOT of photography with it in the past using it on the Panasonic G1, GF1, L1 and Olympus E-1 and E-5. It is a stunning 50mm lens, one of the best there is, and whether it auto-focuses or not is irrelevant to me.

- I pretty much kept my E-1 after selling off all my other FourThirds SLR equipment in order to keep using the ZD 35mm Macro and ZD 11-22mm lenses. The 35mm Macro is a sleeper ... cheap, light, compact, 1:1 macro when you need it, a lovely portrait tele length. Add the EC-14 for up to 1.4:1 macro capability. It's also a winner for landscape work:

Olympus E-5 + ZD 35 Macro
ISO 200 @ f/5.6 @ 30 seconds​

- When I had the G1, I had a loan of the Macro-Elmarit-DG 45mm f/2.8 ASPH OIS. It is a spectacular lens, again for macro, portrait, landscape ... all kinds of uses. Once I committed to the E-M1, I bought one for myself. With the E-M1, it provides the choice of using either its own optical stabilization or the in-body stabilization. Although only f/2.8, it is extremely sharp and well corrected even wide open, which makes it capable for obtaining reduced depth of field. A lovely lens in every way, with superb focus servos that are very smooth and precise.

- I have a selection of other lenses that can bear on doing portraiture. The ZD 50-200 is superb and gives you a wide range of options. My Nikkor 50/1.2 and 85/1.8 are both great for portraits at more distance. So are the Leica R Summicron 50, Summilux 50, and Summicron 90. So is the M-mount Nokton 40, Nokton 50, M-Rokkor 90, and Hektor 135.

Each of these lenses has its singular imaging character. All of them are terrific for portraiture.

Which ones do I grab most often? The Macro-Elmarit-DG 45 and the ZD 35 Macro.

G

 

[Dwig]

Voted "adapter legacy", but I really use a mix.

For "portrait", I use either an adapted legacy lens (Takumar 55 f/1.8, Summicron DR, or Summarit 5cm) or my 14-45 zoom. The latter primarily when I want looser framing.

For "macro", I generally use my 14-45 with a Nikon #2 Closeup lens (+3d) or an adapted Olympus Zuiko-M 38mm f/3.5 with various ELNY extension tubes. The 38mm is a true macro that was originally designed for bellows use and not a typical "macro" made general photography and closeup work.

 

[raid]

I only use the Zeiss 85mm/1.4 (Rollei QBM mount) wide open with my m4/3 cameras. The results are beautiful. It is near perfection.

 

[biomed]

For macro I use a Nikkor 55/2.8 Micro. Since I already owned the lens all I had to buy was an adaptor - much less expensive than the Panasonic or Olympus alternatives. It gives me better than 1:1 and is very sharp. I have no need for AF in macro work.

When doing portraits I use three lenses: CV Color Heliar 75/2.5, the CV Color Skopar 50/2.5 or the CV Nokton 501.5, all LTM versions.

Mike

 

[marcr1230]

how about the Oly 75 1.8 ?

 

[Frank Petronio]

You know I do? I just put the little camera in my pocket with the 20mm and walk a step closer or back up as needed. To heck with changing lenses, these are baby cameras and it's silly to be messing around with lens, camera bags, and BS.

 

[JoeV]

I voted for legacy lenses.

FWIW, I don't see lack of AF with legacy lenses used in portrait and/or macro work as a disadvantage. I would opine that relying on AF with a seated portrait, for instance, is just sloppy technique.

The advantage I see in using legacy lenses for portraits is that often you find the edges and/or corners to be softer than a system lens, and lack of ultra-crisp micro-contrast might not be such a bad thing for subjects who are a bit self-conscious about skin blemishes and wrinkles.

Then there's the mechanical ergonomics of many legacy lenses, especially their long-throw focus rings that are mechanically coupled to the lens elements rather than fly-by-wire.

Lastly is cost versus performance. As stated earlier, any old film camera 50mm lens on a micro-4/3 camera becomes equivalent to a sub-f/2 100mm portrait lens at the cost of a mere pittance.

~Joe

 

[biomed]

You know I do? I just put the little camera in my pocket with the 20mm and walk a step closer or back up as needed. To heck with changing lenses, these are baby cameras and it's silly to be messing around with lens, camera bags, and BS.

Frank - you are old school. I like it!

Mike

 

[Texsport]

Has anyone tried the Vivitar S1 90/2.5 Macro "Bokina" for portraits?

Texsport