A7R2 with 90mm or E-M1 with 60mm for best macro quality/detail?

My question is how does the A7R2 with Sony 90mm macro lens compare to the Olympus E-M1 with the Olympus 60mm F/2.8 Macro Lens, and also how does that compare to my current RX100 with a x7 Diopter?

There is obviously a large difference in price and size between the two systems, but does that translate into a big difference in the end results, my main areas of interest are:

- overall quality

- fine detail in shots

- Focus accuracy, and speed, in auto mode

- minimum operating distance from port front to subject for 1 x 1

- DOF

- general handling/ease of use

Thanks for any help you can give.

Kevin

I have shot with a Canon DSLR with both 60mm and 100mm f2.8 L lenses. I now use the EM1 with the 60mm macro for 90% of my diving. The quality is great even compared to the Canon 100 L macro lens.

The housing (I use only Nauticam with the vacuum valves fitted, well worth the extra), port camera and lens costs about AU$5100 at today's prices. A quick calculation of the A7r with camera, lens, housing and port is over AU$10100 and is more bulky and heavier.

You get greater resolution and 4K video, but the battery needs to be changed after each dive (EM1 gets 2.5 dives for me which still well short of what the Canon gave me 3+ dives). It's only if you zoom in at 100% you would see the difference in quality. Another option if you want 4K is the Panasonic GH4 or GX8 with a MFT macro lens.

Hi Griff,

Thanks for the feedback. I've seen a lot of good reviews of the E-M1 with the Olympus 60mm, but my concern is how much of a step up it would be from my RX100 with +7 Diopter. I've been shooting with the RX100 now since it was released nearly four years ago and think I have reached the point where I can't squeeze any more detail from the system this especially applies to very small objects. I have tried adding a second diopter for greater magnification but this reduces the working distance to virtually zero and is therefore not usable.

Using my RX100 (one inch 20 MP sensor) on full zoom (100mm effective) plus the +7 diopter gives reasonably good results but as you can see in the attached pictures when really close the pictures loose detail.

Do you think the E-M1 (micro 4/3 16 MP sensor) with the Olympus 60mm will be better, what is its working distance, and would it be possible to add the +7 diopter for "Super Macro" whilst still maintaining a reasonable working distance?

My problem is that although I would prefer to spend less and get the smaller rig I'm worried that I may be disappointed with E-M1 with the Olympus 60mm set-up.

Thanks for any help you can give.

Kevin

I have owned the E-M1/Nauticam with 60mm macro for some time and Sony A7R II, 90mm macro and Nauticam NA-A7 II housing for several months. I have also used Sony RX100 IV.

What works for some may not be what would work best for you. While the Sony A7R II with the 90mm macro yields stunning images you will need to work harder to get them, that is the nature of Full Frame.

I would be recommending the E-M1 system if you are not an advanced underwater photographer.

Hi Phil,

Thanks for your feedback. Currently as you say I'm not an "advanced underwater photographer" more an enthusiastic amateur, however as I'm now fully retired (until recently I used to work as a freelance DM), and will be spending the next three to four years based in Curacao in the Caribbean, I would like to reach that goal.

I suppose my main worry is that if I upgrade to the E-M1/Nauticam with 60mm macro, it will not provide the jump in quality over my existing RX100 setup that I'm looking for, and that I will quickly reach it's limitations.

How would you compare the the gap between the RX100 > E-M1 > A7R II especially for "macro" work?

I'm more than willing, and have the time, to put in the required work to get the best possible shots with either system.

Thanks Kevin.