- Location
- Tanagra
I don’t have the 25mm 1.4, but the 25mm 1.8 is at least somewhat close for a comparison. I’m not a super experienced macro shooter, but I’m willing to give it a try with some coinage.
Not to throw fuel on the fire, but it would easily slip into a pocket without any trouble, even with the caps on it, as the caps only add a little extra thickness, probably less than a thicker pinch lens cap. Heck, so far I’ve just held it in my hand when I don’t need it.One thing in the P02's favor over the Raynoxes is that the P02 looks to be significantly smaller, so easier to carry. Hmm... GAS attack!!
I don’t know if I understand the question, but I don’t know if you are asking if it magnifies or not. I don’t think it does, but rather it drastically reduces the minimum focus distance. The specs aren’t easy to find, but I did find them:It is ridiculous that Olympus does not specify the strength of these close up lenses. I have an old MCON-40 where helpfully the 40 indicates 40cm focal length which is 2.5 diopters. Similarly the 250 and 500 in Canon D250 and D500 close up lenses is their focal length in mm.
For comparison the DCR-150 and DCR-250 claim to be 4.8 and 8 diopters although my samples actually measure 4.2 and 7.1 diopters.
Does anyone know what the P01/P02 strength is or care to measure it?
Use the lens to focus a sharp image on a piece of paper or card and measure the card to lens centre distance. A flashlight at the far end of a darkened room is a good image to focus. The lens strength in diopters is 1000 divided by that length in mm.
There are useful close up lens and extension tube calculators here Cambridge in Colour.
Hi,That's an interesting idea about using it with the 12-35. I'm wondering if it might not work. I know, for example, that the WCON-P01 (wide adapter for the 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R kit lens) only works at 14mm (gets you to about 10.5mm wide). If you zoom in at all, it won't focus properly.
I realize that a wide adapter is much more dependent on FL than a close-up adapter that already works on 2 different lenses, but it will be interesting to see if the P02 works on a zoom. Might be another feather in its cap (I'm still looking for a good reason to buy it! I already have a 30 and 60mm macro lens).
OK, I think the problem I had with the WCON-P01 adapter must have been lousy image quality if I zoomed in at all (focuses OK). Anyway, for my use I decided that it would only work well at 14mm. I do remember that I did not think you could leave it on all the time as you describe. I cannot figure why it worked so poorly for me (it was a long time ago).Hi,
I've just bought the Wcon-p01 adapter and I don't get the focus problem you mention. I can still focus all the way from 14-42mm. So I can leave it on all the time if I want and the kit zoom converts to a 10.5-33mm zoom.
The Olympus spec sheet says the MCON p-02 works on a zoom, so it shouldn't be a problem. Increasing zoom increases magnification - and shortens working distance - so it's a useful way to find the best combination. I do it a lot with the Oly 40-150 and a Raynox 150.
I had the 60mm macro, but I didn’t use it a whole lot. I end up liking this more somehow.@Darmok N Jalad - thanks for this very useful thread and the examples.
Has anyone compared the 45mm + MCON-P02 versus the Oly 60mm f2.8 macro? I own the latter and certainly haven't achieved the same DOF as the former in the images above. Never having tried macro in the past, I'm happy to admit my poor results are down to inexperience but I'd still be interested in anybody's take on the comparative advantages / disadvantages of each set up.
You mean that the dof you get with the 60mm is too shallow? I don't have either lens but that's what I would expect.@Darmok N Jalad - thanks for this very useful thread and the examples.
Has anyone compared the 45mm + MCON-P02 versus the Oly 60mm f2.8 macro? I own the latter and certainly haven't achieved the same DOF as the former in the images above. Never having tried macro in the past, I'm happy to admit my poor results are down to inexperience but I'd still be interested in anybody's take on the comparative advantages / disadvantages of each set up.
The different focal length matters too. The 60mm is going to be even more shallow and might require even more stopping down, even when stepping back. 45mm seems to be a little more workable for me than the 60mm was, but it could just be a me issue.You mean that the dof you get with the 60mm is too shallow? I don't have either lens but that's what I would expect.
Dof is determined by aperture and subject distance so if you're using the same aperture at the same subject distance as Darmok, you should get the same dof.
But as the 60mm macro has higher magnification, I assume it has a shorter MFD than the 45mm +p02, so you're probably taking photos closer. If you step back you'll get a smaller image but larger Dof.
Hope this helps