Macro Lenses & Olympus

I saw the E410 at a local camera shop today at a reasonable price. Assuming a decent housing soon becomes available, I can see myself investing in one. As I'm new to DSLR and primarily into macro photography, I will need some help choosing which lenses/combos to purchase.

According to the Four-thirds website, my choices include the following: 35mm Zuiko, 50mm Zuiko, 105mm Sigma, & 150mm Sigma. They also list a 1.4x teleconverter and 25mm extension tube. (Did I miss anything?)

Admittedly, I don't know much about teleconverters or extension tubes, and there are no diopters listed. I've read several wetpixel articles on the subject, however, the 4/3 equivalency isn't making this any easier. So please reply in simple words.

Thanks,

David

I own an E-330 with the Sigma-105.

When looking at macro lenses, remember the crop factor of the Olympus is 1:2 (or 2:1 depending on how you look at it). A 50mm lens on these cameras is the 35mm-film equivalent of a 100mm lens.

IMHO, for u/w macro photography, the 35mm is too wide and the 150mm is too narrow, the 50mm should be "just right;" I sound like Goldilocks. The 50 becomes even more attractive when combined with the 1.4TC.

The 105 is a wonderful lens, but does have its limitations. On the plus side, the working distance (minimum focus distance) is ~6" from the end of the lens port. This allows you to get maximum magnification from father away - great for skittish fish - and lots of room for strobes. The disadavantage is that it may be too macro for many subjects - great for pygmy seahorses, but poor for larger subjects.

Extension tubes boost magnification, decrease working distance, but maintain f-stop.

Teleconverters boost magnification, decrease working distance, and eat light.

Dioptres boost magnification, decrrease working distance.

I think it all depends on what you are going to shoot - nudibranchs? then get the 50 - pygmy seahorses? go for the 105.

Many of us are waiting for a Zuiko 100mm...

Does any of that help?

These were taken with the Sigma 105mm

This is very helpful, Jlyle. As I mentioned, I shoot a ton of macro, so my inclination is that I'll need to invest in both a 50mm and a 105mm. Is this overkill or a necessary evil? BTW, you mentioned that the 105 is great for pygmies. How close to full-frame can you get? Or, is a 1.4TC necessary?

Many of us are waiting for a Zuiko 100mm

What possible advantages would this lens have over the Sigma 105mm?

This is very helpful, Jlyle. As I mentioned, I shoot a ton of macro, so my inclination is that I'll need to invest in both a 50mm and a 105mm. Is this overkill or a necessary evil? BTW, you mentioned that the 105 is great for pygmies. How close to full-frame can you get? Or, is a 1.4TC necessary?

What possible advantages would this lens have over the Sigma 105mm?

Since pygmy seahorses are about 1/4-1/2 inch (6-12mm), you should be able to come pretty close to full frame with 1:1. I have not yet attempted to do so; we return to Indonesia in October. The only time I had the opportunity to shoot pygmies, I was using an Olympus c5050 with stacked macro lens adapters.

PSH are hard to see, difficult to locate in a viewfinder, move around, and turn away from the photographer...the working room with the 105mm will help. I don't think you will be able to use a TC with this lens without a tripod.

A Zuiko 100mm will have better optics than the Sigma. Not that Sigma has poor optics; it's a good lens. The Zuiko should be much better.