534 replies to this topic

[Deep6]

Add this to your wish list. From 4/3rumors:

Egami (Tranlsation here) spotted a new Olympus patent describing the design of three new wide angle lenses:
8-20mm f/2.8-4
8-35mm f/2.2-4
8-74mm f/2.8-4
From the description you will notice that this are actually Fisheye lenses! Right now only Canon (with the 8-15mm) and Tokina (10-17mm) have this kind of lenses on market. Is that something we need for the Micro Four Thirds system? Certainly not a priority lens but it’s always nice to expand the lens horizon.

It would be on my priorty list!

Bob

[glee719]

So guys what's the general consensus on the 12-50mm with the OMD and Nauticam? I just bought the lens at a low price, and am liking the convenience of the macro mode. However, if I take my photography habits on land to apply underwater, I don't think I'd be happy with an all-around lens but it's intriging in concept...

I guess I will ask the pros differently. If you go on a general dive trip (not specifically wide angle or macro) and can only take one lens, would this lens be chosen for the first dive?

Edited by glee719, 12 October 2012 - 07:12 PM.

[guyharrisonphoto]

I am a specialist AND a generalist. There are deep wreck and big animal wide angle dives where I live (South Florida), macro specialty havens like the Blue Heron Bridge, but also beautiful reefs for wide angle scenics that also are loaded with great macro opportunities. The 12-50 is a superb lens for the latter type of diving. I have ordered the Nauticam port/gear despite the cost because I think nothing else out there can touch it, in any format. At 12-18mm you have plenty of wide angle opportunities. As you zoom in, the focal lengths are excellent for fish portraits and head shots of larger fish. Close focus is good even in normal zoom mode.. This, of course, can be said of some other lenses in the 24-100 range (ff equiv). However, it is the macro mode that makes this lens really stand out. It is a "true" macro mode. The area covered in macro is roughly the area of a 35mm slide. While that is larger than 1/1 in the 4/3 format, it is roughly equal to 1/1 in 35mm, with no adapters needed. This is truly a remarkable capability. Deep closeups of feather dusters, head shots of jawfish, full frame blennies, all sorts of shrimp and arrow crabs are shootable in extreme closeup with very good quality. If you add a +5 or +10 diopter to the lens, you are now in ultra-macro territory, and with decent working distance (the macro mode focal length is 85mm ff equiv). I have not investigated, but plan to investigate, whether a wet mount wide angle adapter would also work to add wide angle reach if I cannot carry my wide angle lens/port for some reason.. The port is designed with the lens front element very close, and the lens does not change length when zooming, so this might be very feasable.

You can switch between all of these capabilities in mere seconds with the Nauticam port.

I also have the 7-14mm with dome, and the 60mm macro which also works in the 12-50 port. These are superlative specialty lenses that exceed the 12-50 in their respective areas.

BUT, If I could take only one lens? (for example a business trip where I might squeeze in a dive or two as opposed to a decicated trip), that is an absolute no-brainer for the 12-50.

Go for it!

[girelle]

I am a specialist AND a generalist. There are deep wreck and big animal wide angle dives where I live (South Florida), macro specialty havens like the Blue Heron Bridge, but also beautiful reefs for wide angle scenics that also are loaded with great macro opportunities. The 12-50 is a superb lens for the latter type of diving. I have ordered the Nauticam port/gear despite the cost because I think nothing else out there can touch it, in any format. At 12-18mm you have plenty of wide angle opportunities. As you zoom in, the focal lengths are excellent for fish portraits and head shots of larger fish. Close focus is good even in normal zoom mode.. This, of course, can be said of some other lenses in the 24-100 range (ff equiv). However, it is the macro mode that makes this lens really stand out. It is a "true" macro mode. The area covered in macro is roughly the area of a 35mm slide. While that is larger than 1/1 in the 4/3 format, it is roughly equal to 1/1 in 35mm, with no adapters needed. This is truly a remarkable capability. Deep closeups of feather dusters, head shots of jawfish, full frame blennies, all sorts of shrimp and arrow crabs are shootable in extreme closeup with very good quality. If you add a +5 or +10 diopter to the lens, you are now in ultra-macro territory, and with decent working distance (the macro mode focal length is 85mm ff equiv). I have not investigated, but plan to investigate, whether a wet mount wide angle adapter would also work to add wide angle reach if I cannot carry my wide angle lens/port for some reason.. The port is designed with the lens front element very close, and the lens does not change length when zooming, so this might be very feasable.

You can switch between all of these capabilities in mere seconds with the Nauticam port.

I also have the 7-14mm with dome, and the 60mm macro which also works in the 12-50 port. These are superlative specialty lenses that exceed the 12-50 in their respective areas.

BUT, If I could take only one lens? (for example a business trip where I might squeeze in a dive or two as opposed to a decicated trip), that is an absolute no-brainer for the 12-50.

Go for it!

Thank my god ,an american guy has written all that I think about the 12 -50 and 60 mm lenses , less work for me and my scolar english
I did try the 12-50 last week , and the 60 mm this morning . Undoubtfully the quality of the 60 mm is excellent , but you can also perform very good macro shots with the 12-50 in macro mode .
My other lense is mainly a 8 mm Panasonic fisheye that I like also very very much , I've used it during the summer where we have dove mainly on wrecks.
I'm very happy with the OMD , and don't regret my Nikon D90 .
Here are some shots taken with the OMD and 12-50


and here some taken with the 60 mm .



I apolozige as these pictures are are far from perfect , but it was the first time I did use these both lenses .I just show they as I know that many people are impatient to have an idea about these new lenses .The macro shots have not been cropped

[guyharrisonphoto]

Hey Dominique, nice stuff, wow.

[glee719]

Dominique, do you have these uploaded somewhere that I can see larger resolutions? I hate to be critical but I want to make sure the pictures I take with the 12-50mm is good enough for prints too. Thanks!

[girelle]

Dominique, do you have these uploaded somewhere that I can see larger resolutions? I hate to be critical but I want to make sure the pictures I take with the 12-50mm is good enough for prints too. Thanks!

You can find them on flickr , but you won't see them at more than 2048*1365 because my pictures are supposed to be protected on Flickr ,this size is probably not enough for your purpose .
Anyway the adress is:http://www.flickr.com/photos/7189548@N05/sets/72157631727209942/

Edited by girelle, 13 October 2012 - 09:50 PM.

[tobbe]

My OM-D Nauticam housing is finally on it's way :-)
I got all the other accessories except for the strobe arms.
I will use my two existing S&S YS110a strobes with fibers, but maybe the rig will be to negative under water with my standard ULCS arms?
What kind of arm set-up do you OM-D shooters use, floats?

/T

Edited by tobbe, 14 October 2012 - 10:58 AM.

[jlyle]

My OM-D Nauticam housing is finally on it's way :-)
I got all the other accessories except for the strobe arms.
I will use my two existing S&S YS110a strobes with fibers, but maybe the rig will be to negative under water with my standard ULCS arms?
What kind of arm set-up do you OM-D shooters use, floats?

/T

Four Styx floats will make the rig about 8 ounces negative underwater.

Edited by jlyle, 14 October 2012 - 11:52 AM.

[tobbe]

Looks good jlyle,
I have been looking at the ULCS Buoyancy arms, but the Styx floats could be another alternative.

Edited by tobbe, 15 October 2012 - 10:05 AM.

[Deep6]

Looks good jlyle,
I have been looking at the ULCS Buoyancy arms, but this could be Styx floats could be another alternative.

Be sure to check out if these arms add a significant amount of buoyancy. I don't think they do.

Bob

[Alex_Tattersall]

It is well worth checking our Stix own arms if you don’t own any arms already. They are significantly more lightweight than lattice style arms.

[Deep6]

OK, this is not for underwater use, but I thought some of you OM-D E-5 users might be interested. I added the side grip of HLD-6 battery holder to the camera. As mention, this gives a good handle. The tripod mount may be centered on the lens axis with this addition. Parallax test some time before spring may be! I have adapted the Olympus GS-4 grip strap to work with out the bottom battery holder. I used the RRS BP-CS plate from my D80. There is a small slot on the end for the bottom of the grip strap. Another bonus: I think the RRS D200 l-plate will be centered on axis for both landscape and portrait modes with the full battery holder installed.

Regards,
Bob

Edited by Deep6, 23 October 2012 - 05:54 PM.

[glee719]

Sorry Dominique I just saw your response and want to thank you for letting me see the larger-res pictures. I am pretty ok with the output, thanks!

You can find them on flickr , but you won't see them at more than 2048*1365 because my pictures are supposed to be protected on Flickr ,this size is probably not enough for your purpose .
Anyway the adress is:http://www.flickr.com/photos/7189548@N05/sets/72157631727209942/

[derway]

So I own an OMD, and feel screwed by olympus housing not being compatible with all the PEN ports. What were they thinking?

What ports are avaible for the oly pt-ep08? Are there any 3rd party ports out? Seems like it would be easy for someone to make an adapter for this larger size port, down to all the pen size ports, which would fit the m43 lenses...

Help!

The nauty housing is more than I want to spend.

I'm about to pitch it all, and buy the new oly epl5, same sensor as the omd, but no VF, and much less photog friendly. But the camera and oly housing are cheaper than the nauticam housing and port, for the omd, and 14-28 lens.

Curse them. Why the incompatible port system, for the omd housing???

Phil, have you had a chance to ask them this?

What about 10 bar?

Thanks!
Don

[Phil Rudin]

Hi Don,

First Zen underwater makes an adapter for three of the four PEN ports to the EM5 housing. The only port which would not work with the adapter is the 8mm fisheye so a new Zen port has been made for that lens. If you have a stock flat port from another Olympus PEN housing it will also work with the adapter for the 14-42 and 60mm macro. What does not work well with the Olympus EM5 housing is your ability to see into the outstanding EVF. If you are an owner of Olympus DSLR ports like the 170mm glass dome port you can also get an adapter from Olympus for that and use 43 DSLR lenses with adapter.

When you add up the cost of going with the Olympus housing and the cost of the Nauticam with ports and gears depending on lenses the cost difference is not that much when you consider the LARGE differences between the two housings. If you want to use the EVF the Nauticam housing is the only way to go. The number of lenses supported by Nauticam is larger and the housing quality differences is like night and day.

If you already have a large investment in Zen ports for PEN or DSLR ports for 43 the Olympus housing will be the most cost effectIve.

I would rather go with the Olympus housing and ZEN Underwater ports than to go10Bar.

Phil Rudin

Edited by Phil Rudin, 25 October 2012 - 07:10 AM.

[Alex_Mustard]

Phil, do you have a link for the Zen port for the 8mm fisheye. Alex

[Phil Rudin]

Hello Alex,

I have attached a link to the Zen Underwater page with the information. Also be aware that a ZEN adapter is near ready for the Nauticam mirrorless housings (including NA-EM5) which will allow the use of Subal type 3 ports like the ZEN DP-100-S3 port for the 8mm fisheye. I have used a prototype and it is quite good with the fisheye lens. I plan to test it with the Olympus 12mm F/2 as soon as I get the final product. I will also be interested to try a large type-3 poet for split images with the fisheye and 7-14 zoom.

Also will you be attending the show in Marseille next week?

http://www.zenunderwater.com/news.php

http://reefphoto.com...roducts_id=6013

Phil Rudin

[derway]

Thanks Phil! I didn't know about those zen adapters. At least, if I go oly, I won't be stuck with only 1 port, plus adapters for all the big and slow 4/3 ports.

Though once you add on a zen port, yes, the nauticam say with a 14-28 port, immediately makes more sense.

What is really attracting me is the oly epl5 and oly houing, which should be around $1500 all up. Same as the cheapest nauticam one port configuration.

[Phil Rudin]

The E-PL5 system with the 14-42 zoom Olympus housing and lens gear should run around $1575 as you say. No Nauticam housing for the E-PL5 has yet been announced to compare to but I would guess the price would be about the same as the NA-EM5 housing.

The issue is that to suggest that the E-PL5 and the OMD E-M5 are at all like cameras is a stretch just as the 14-42 and 12-50 "kit" lenses are not at all alike. You will be getting what you pay for in both cases. The E-M5 EVF is well worth the extra cost alone.

If cost is your biggest concern and you are happy to use the LCD you may want to look at the Sony RX100 and the Nauticam housing.

Phil Rudin

Edited by Phil Rudin, 25 October 2012 - 02:32 PM.