14-45mm Zuiko
Date: 2005-03-12
The first part of the test. This picture is taken with the kit lens, a Zuiko 14-45mm (f/3.5-5.6) set at 45mm. Minimum focusing distance is 38cm (1.2',15") throughout the zoom range.
The subject is on a table with a 60W incandescent bulb sitting bare in a small table lamp. The camera is on a tripod, facing straight down. The tripod has telescopic legs plus a crank-adjustable extension.
Focus is set to minimum (38cm) and the subject is brought into focus by adjusting the extension with the crank. I should have set the WB; the camera made a bad choice here.
The Zuiko lens is great, but one thing I really don't like about it is that the focus is electronic-only. In manual focus mode, you turn a ring which sends electronic signals to the focusing servo. Note also that this camera's AF hunts a lot in low-light conditions.
The subject is on a table with a 60W incandescent bulb sitting bare in a small table lamp. The camera is on a tripod, facing straight down. The tripod has telescopic legs plus a crank-adjustable extension.
Focus is set to minimum (38cm) and the subject is brought into focus by adjusting the extension with the crank. I should have set the WB; the camera made a bad choice here.
The Zuiko lens is great, but one thing I really don't like about it is that the focus is electronic-only. In manual focus mode, you turn a ring which sends electronic signals to the focusing servo. Note also that this camera's AF hunts a lot in low-light conditions.
55-200mm Sigma
Date: 2005-03-12
This one is taken with a Sigma 55-200mm telephoto lens (f/4.0-5.6) set at 200mm. Minimum focusing distance is 1.1m (3.6', 43.3").
Same technique is used to take this photo. This time the camera made a much better WB adjustment. Note that I didn't postprocess any of these test images.
As I noted earlier, the kit Zuiko lens has an electronic focus ring, which I don't particularly like (although I do like the 14mm wide angle). This Sigma lens has a switch that disengages the gears on the AF servo, giving you control over the focus.
I've ordered a Sigma 18-50mm (f/3.5-5.6) lens. Similar to the Zuiko kit lens in range, it should (I really hope) have a manual focus ring like this Sigma. It also has a smaller minimum focus (9.8", 0.8', 25mm) which, combined with the extra 5mm of focal length should make for a better macro lens.
As you can see here, the telephoto lens actually does get closer to the subject. I think that the Sigma lens I've ordered should be about equal to this, if not more. I'll post a similar test when I get it.
The disadvantage to using the Sigma 55-200mm for macrophotography is that a) it's very sensitive to hand-shake movement, and b) focusing is more sensitive (smaller DOF) - you can see that the paper background isn't as focused as it was earlier.
Same technique is used to take this photo. This time the camera made a much better WB adjustment. Note that I didn't postprocess any of these test images.
As I noted earlier, the kit Zuiko lens has an electronic focus ring, which I don't particularly like (although I do like the 14mm wide angle). This Sigma lens has a switch that disengages the gears on the AF servo, giving you control over the focus.
I've ordered a Sigma 18-50mm (f/3.5-5.6) lens. Similar to the Zuiko kit lens in range, it should (I really hope) have a manual focus ring like this Sigma. It also has a smaller minimum focus (9.8", 0.8', 25mm) which, combined with the extra 5mm of focal length should make for a better macro lens.
As you can see here, the telephoto lens actually does get closer to the subject. I think that the Sigma lens I've ordered should be about equal to this, if not more. I'll post a similar test when I get it.
The disadvantage to using the Sigma 55-200mm for macrophotography is that a) it's very sensitive to hand-shake movement, and b) focusing is more sensitive (smaller DOF) - you can see that the paper background isn't as focused as it was earlier.
Sigma + reversed Zuiko
Vignetting Date: 2005-03-12 Now we get into some serious macrophotography. The following photos are taken with the 55-200mm lens mounted on the camera, including its lens hood. Next, the Zuiko 14-45mm is reverse-mounted by sticking it front-first into the hood of the 200mm lens. The hood is wider at the front than where it joins the lens, and luckily the Zuiko jams nicely in there. It even allows full motion of the Zuiko's zoom without touching the Sigma's lens.
This photo is taken with the Zuiko at 45mm and the Sigma at 102mm. Going this wide, and wider on the Sigma gives vignetting, as you can see. Look at the almost non-existent depth of field - you can see the inner ring of the coin, but only the front surface is in focus. Next, we close in a bit with the Sigma to eliminate the vignetting.
Vignetting Date: 2005-03-12 Now we get into some serious macrophotography. The following photos are taken with the 55-200mm lens mounted on the camera, including its lens hood. Next, the Zuiko 14-45mm is reverse-mounted by sticking it front-first into the hood of the 200mm lens. The hood is wider at the front than where it joins the lens, and luckily the Zuiko jams nicely in there. It even allows full motion of the Zuiko's zoom without touching the Sigma's lens.
This photo is taken with the Zuiko at 45mm and the Sigma at 102mm. Going this wide, and wider on the Sigma gives vignetting, as you can see. Look at the almost non-existent depth of field - you can see the inner ring of the coin, but only the front surface is in focus. Next, we close in a bit with the Sigma to eliminate the vignetting.
Sigma + reversed Zuiko
Widest w/out vignetting Date: 2005-03-12 This is with the Sigma at 140mm. This is as wide as I can go without any vignetting.
BTW, I haven't mentioned it before, but the coin is 19mm across. I should've taken a picture with a clear-plastic rul..., er, scale in there. When I get the Sigma 18-50mm (and if it really does have manual zoom, I'll keep it instead of returning it) I'll test with that lens and put the clear plastic scale in the photo, too.
Widest w/out vignetting Date: 2005-03-12 This is with the Sigma at 140mm. This is as wide as I can go without any vignetting.
BTW, I haven't mentioned it before, but the coin is 19mm across. I should've taken a picture with a clear-plastic rul..., er, scale in there. When I get the Sigma 18-50mm (and if it really does have manual zoom, I'll keep it instead of returning it) I'll test with that lens and put the clear plastic scale in the photo, too.
Sigma + reversed Zuiko
200mm (Zuiko @45mm) Date: 2005-03-12 Here we have the Sigma zoomed all the way to 200mm. I tried to measure that "S" with the clear plastic scale and got something like 1.7 or 1.8 mm (hard to tell) from top to bottom.
200mm (Zuiko @45mm) Date: 2005-03-12 Here we have the Sigma zoomed all the way to 200mm. I tried to measure that "S" with the clear plastic scale and got something like 1.7 or 1.8 mm (hard to tell) from top to bottom.
Sigma + reversed Zuiko
200mm (Zuiko @14mm) Date: 2005-03-12 Finally, with the Sigma still at 200mm, I widened the Zuiko to 14mm. The previous shots were hard to focus; this one was almost impossible! The DOF is non-existant d:) It took me three or four tries to get this focussed.
200mm (Zuiko @14mm) Date: 2005-03-12 Finally, with the Sigma still at 200mm, I widened the Zuiko to 14mm. The previous shots were hard to focus; this one was almost impossible! The DOF is non-existant d:) It took me three or four tries to get this focussed.
Zuiko @45 w/ extension tube
Date: 2005-03-22
OK, so I had looked at the extension tube and said to myself, "Self, that costs $240 not including tax. You can't have one." The (ever growing) part of my brain that's obsessed with gadgets said "Aw..., but..." and that's when the wallet-conscious part slapped the gadget-obsessed part (let's just call that part Marvin for now) really hard.
A day or two ago, a member of a forum for E-system photographers that I hang out on put his extension tube up for sale, asking $100USD plus shipping. Marvin started murmuring, but the wallet-conscious part (we'll name that part Buck for now) studiously ignored Marvin. Noticing that said friendly guy from the forum was actually an Ottawa local, Marvin snuck off while Buck was asleep and emailed friendly guy.
Buck wasn't too happy with all this, but in the end, instead of paying $240 + tax + shipping, I paid $120 and drove over to pick it up while I was out getting gas for my car.
Then I came back home and immediately did some tests.
A day or two ago, a member of a forum for E-system photographers that I hang out on put his extension tube up for sale, asking $100USD plus shipping. Marvin started murmuring, but the wallet-conscious part (we'll name that part Buck for now) studiously ignored Marvin. Noticing that said friendly guy from the forum was actually an Ottawa local, Marvin snuck off while Buck was asleep and emailed friendly guy.
Buck wasn't too happy with all this, but in the end, instead of paying $240 + tax + shipping, I paid $120 and drove over to pick it up while I was out getting gas for my car.
Then I came back home and immediately did some tests.
Sigma @55 w/ extension tube
Date: 2005-03-22
With the extension tube, the smaller your focal length, the closer you can get to the subject and thus the more of your image circle you can fill with your subject.
Thus the previous image, taken at 45mm, is closer to the coin than this one at 55mm.
I haven't taken an official test picture to post yet, but there's no limit to how close you can get to the subject and still stay in focus with the extension tube on. Well, OK, so the limit is when you touch the subject with the lens - or just before that, if you end up blocking all light.
Later on I'll post some closer-up images with the Zuiko and the macro tube.
Thus the previous image, taken at 45mm, is closer to the coin than this one at 55mm.
I haven't taken an official test picture to post yet, but there's no limit to how close you can get to the subject and still stay in focus with the extension tube on. Well, OK, so the limit is when you touch the subject with the lens - or just before that, if you end up blocking all light.
Later on I'll post some closer-up images with the Zuiko and the macro tube.
Sigma @200 w/ extension tube
Date: 2005-03-22
Here's our favourite coin taken with the Sigma at 200mm. The coin is around the size that we saw it in the shot where we get as close as possible with the 200mm without the tube - a tad larger here than there.
Laptop LCD
Date: 2005-03-12
My laptop's TFT LCD, up close. That's the bottom part of a 'd', and a piece of an 'e' on the right.
Sigma @200mm, min. focus of 3.6'.
Date: 2005-03-12
Here's another comparison of the Sigma vs. the Zuiko. This is Paddington, asleep on some pillows on the couch. This is taken with the Sigma at 200mm, the camera being hand-held 3.6 feet away.
Zuiko @45mm, min. focus at 1.2'
Date: 2005-03-12
Same subject, taken with the Zuiko at 45mm, from about 1.2 feet away. He's sleeping here, but he really loves having his picture taken. Look at the "Old Apartment" gallery for ample evidence. Sadly, he had a cold on this day (he's been sneezing a bit).
You can't get as close, but I think I like the results a little better. The DOF is wider and the picture seems less flat. The colour is better, too, but that was just my camera making a bad WB choice in the earlier photo.
You can't get as close, but I think I like the results a little better. The DOF is wider and the picture seems less flat. The colour is better, too, but that was just my camera making a bad WB choice in the earlier photo.
Zuiko @45mm
Date: 2005-03-12
This is Fluffernutter, Paddington's sister. I wanted her eyes to be in focus; instead, I got her nose d:). Moving subjects aren't easy to capture, although with the dSLR, it's my bad timing, not the camera's. This dSLR is really good for being able to take a picture immediately when you click the button.
