Starting a new thread to do a quick review of using the MFO-3 with the Olympus 60mm macro. The 60mm is commonly used on m43 setups as the usual macro lens, it's quite sharp and AF is quite good on later bodies but it's a bot on the long side at 120mm FF equivalent, so larger subjects require backing up a lot with a lot of extra water in the way along with all the particles to make backscatter. The MFO3 reduces the field from that of a 60mm lens to about 37 mm focal length increasing diagonal field from 20 to 33 degrees.

I used it for the first time in Lembeh Strait this week, popping it on to shoot things like Lionfish, anemone fish and other larger subjects like big cuttlefish. The extra field of view is significant and allows you to shoot these subjects with a lot less water between you and the subject. I found the field to be quite sharp into the corners when reviewing on my laptop and the subject really was very sharp. AF was pretty snappy as well. In Lembeh where you might be shown a tiny emperor shrimp followed immediately by a 200mm long scorpion fish or cuttlefish it was really very useful, in fact I'd say it was indispensable.

I carried in a pocket on a pair of cargo shorts complete with bayonet mount and found it easy to get out but a bit trickier to get back in with one hand. I took the supplied neoprene pouch on the boat and after rinsing stored it in there to stop it drying out.

some examples:

Weedy Rhinopia - slight crop:

A False clown anemone fish, I would normally crop and get in closer but this shows the sharpness across the frame:

A Trumpetfish which was about 500mm long :

A zebra lionfish, cropped slightly:

Hopefully this gives some idea what the lens can do. The only real downside is the bulk of the lens, it a big lump but easy to use with bayonet mount. The pics were chosen to show the versatility I found.

Lens supplied by Scubapix, the Australian Nauticam distributor it was from the first batch imported. I paid for the lens my myself.

Let me know if you have any questions, hope the review is useful for those considering it.

Thank you for sharing photos and experience...

The Zuiko 60mm macro and the MFO-3 apparently cover the range of two different setups: #1 Zuiko 60mm and #2 Zuiko 12-40mm behind domeport.

Will you continue to use Zuiko 12-40mm & domeport or is the MFO-3 a perfect substitute?

@Chris Ross thanks mate really appreciated.

@Architeuthis "The Zuiko 60mm macro and the MFO-3 apparently cover the range of two different setups: #1 Zuiko 60mm and #2 Zuiko 12-40mm behind domeport." This is interesting as I understood having the MFO-3 on with a 60mm was 'like' having a 30mm macro equivalent 'wet' solution which as expected is great for muck locations like Lembeh.

I will most likely get one too for my upcoming LOB trip from Ambon to Misool in October.

Will post some pictures as well for reference

@Chris Ross That works well! Nice photos, too.

The MFO3 reduces the field from that of a 60mm lens to about 37 mm focal length increasing diagonal field from 20 to 33 degrees. "

Does this mean that 60mm+ MFO3 is in practice more or less an equivalent to a Oly 30mm or Pana 45mm with a CMC2 wetlens? I mean considering of width of field, not of working distance.

Edited September 24Sep 24 by Floris Bennema

1 hour ago, Floris Bennema said:

The MFO3 reduces the field from that of a 60mm lens to about 37 mm focal length increasing diagonal field from 20 to 33 degrees. "

Does this mean that 60mm+ MFO3 is in practice more or less an equivalent to a Oly 30mm or Pana 45mm with a CMC2 wetlens? I mean considering of width of field, not of working distance.

I don't know if that is the way I would look at it. It gives the same field as the 12-40 at the long end but only focuses out to about 1.5m and you don't get the wide end. It has max 0.5x magnification, compared to 0.3x with the 12-40.

Also it's not like a 30/45mm with wet lens, the magnification is limited not increased. So basically it's all about being able to shoot larger subjects with a lot less water between you and the subject when on a macro dive. In theory you could use a 30mm macro to do the same job, but in practice the max magnification you can practically use is about 0.5x as you lose working distance and ability to light your subject.

The field review of using the MFO-3 was interesting.

The fact you got a (really good) shot of a Weedy Rhinopia out in the open at Lembeh... priceless.

Do you recall which site you found this at? I've been to Lembeh 4x (headed back next May), no joy on rhinopia... hairy everything, but no rhinopia.

7 hours ago, OneYellowTang said:

Do you recall which site you found this at? I've been to Lembeh 4x (headed back next May), no joy on rhinopia... hairy everything, but no rhinopia.

I have seen weedys at Nudi Falls few times, but that was about 8 years ago. Paddleflaps on other sites.

8 hours ago, OneYellowTang said:

The field review of using the MFO-3 was interesting.

The fact you got a (really good) shot of a Weedy Rhinopia out in the open at Lembeh... priceless.

Do you recall which site you found this at? I've been to Lembeh 4x (headed back next May), no joy on rhinopia... hairy everything, but no rhinopia.

I believe it was at Tanduk Rusa divesite, black sand slope and it was in a really large patch of the soft corals you can see in the background of the frame. May might be a stretch but you can ask the guides, they normally know if one has been seen recently.

22 hours ago, Chris Ross said:

I don't know if that is the way I would look at it. It gives the same field as the 12-40 at the long end but only focuses out to about 1.5m and you don't get the wide end. It has max 0.5x magnification, compared to 0.3x with the 12-40.

Also it's not like a 30/45mm with wet lens, the magnification is limited not increased. So basically it's all about being able to shoot larger subjects with a lot less water between you and the subject when on a macro dive. In theory you could use a 30mm macro to do the same job, but in practice the max magnification you can practically use is about 0.5x as you lose working distance and ability to light your subject.

I am more inclined to compare it with the Pan 45mm macro + CMC. I love the 45mm because it focusses at a nice distance, closer than the 60mm and farther away than the 30mm. At 15cm the lens magnifies 1X and it has diagonal field of 27 degrees. Apparently not as wide as 60MM + MFO3 but the reason I bought it after I bought the 60mm.

As a comparison to Chris photo, here is a pic of possibly the same fish, taken at the same site (Tandurusa) about a week earlier, using Sony 50 macro with 140 dome (A7RV) - similar field of view.

No cropping, in fact no adjustments at all (yet) although I will process it slightly when I get around to it.

Definitely the same fish, based on the color pattern 🙂

A further update, looking at these images back on my desktop, where I have EXIF reading apps, the focus distance is an easy way to pick that you used the MFO3. Recorded distance on the lens was between 2.5m and infinty, for example the trumpetfish above had focal distance recorded as infinty. The Rhinopias - 3.9m, the clownfish 5.8m. Easy to distinguish between the MFO3 and the bare 60mm.

6 hours ago, Chris Ross said:

A further update, looking at these images back on my desktop, where I have EXIF reading apps, the focus distance is an easy way to pick that you used the MFO3. Recorded distance on the lens was between 2.5m and infinty, for example the trumpetfish above had focal distance recorded as infinty. The Rhinopias - 3.9m, the clownfish 5.8m. Easy to distinguish between the MFO3 and the bare 60mm.

That's good to know!

I sometimes struggle with discerning between certain diopters (like the SMC-1 and AOI UCL-90PRO).