Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/20/19 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    In terms of lenses on the fisheye once you go past f/4 there are no differences For macro the Panasonic lens is better However while Panasonic bodies work well with Olympus lenses the opposite is less true so I would go with the Olympus fisheye and skip the 30 to go for the 60mm Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  2. 1 point
    Look my blog for the lx100 test there is also the dome and it stops focusing pretty soon The lx10 has only one port tho Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  3. 1 point
    I had a LX100 (the first model) for nearly 4 years before moving to a GH5s. While I love the GH5s, I sometimes miss that the LX100. LX100 is really nice for video, good at low light, but underwater you need to go the expensive Nauticam road if you want full control (Ikelite and other are partial with manual focus notably missing on Ikelite). And for macro work, you will need the flip holder and lens diopters. Therefore I wouldn't call that bundle a best value package. Also the first model of LX100 was good at getting some dust on the sensor at some stage through the lens barel. The repair is expensive. I don't know but hope the problem has been solved on the LX100II .
  4. 1 point
    I found some issues with purple fringing with the Pany 8mm, on my EM-1 MkII. Apparently the cut off filter for UV is different between Pany and Oly with the Olympus letting through wavelengths that the Pany lens does not fully correct for. Doesn't appear on all shots, most noticable with bright objects against dark backgrounds. The Capture One Pro purple fringing tool can remove much of it. If I was doing it again I'd get the Oly lens. I had a post on that here: I was also thinking the corners were quite soft but have since decided that is due to the corner in question being much closer and falling outside the DOF. The shot in question was along a wall and the wall itself was much closer than what I was photographing. I use the Pany 30mm macro, AF is quite snappy, noticably better than the 60mm macro, haven't used the OLy 30mm to compare. You can't take advantage of the extra magnification (1.25x) on the Oly as it focuses almost on the port glass. In fact I think the practical limit for lighting with the 30mm lenses is about 0.5x as you are getting so close to the port glass it is diffciult to light. Where they shine is for larger subjects - small fish size up to about a 300mm long subject. The working distance for such subjects is too great for the 60mm macro - too much water between you and the subject and much higher chance of backscatter, particulatlry in temperate waters where I shoot often. Some examples: Fish 20cm long: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Bony Fish/slides/Senator Wrasse 3.html Fish 12cm long: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Bony Fish/slides/Blotched Hawkfish.html Nudi 5cm long, 50% crop: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Nudibranches/slides/Hypselodoris bennetti.9.html Nudis 4cm long: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Nudibranches/slides/Goniobranchus tasmaniensis2.html
  5. 1 point
    My opinion... I have both Olympus and Panasonic 8mm. Still having it. And yes, the Oly glass is superior, but not by heaven and earth. But u got F/1.8 when u need to shoot sunray in a cave... Not a necessity, but something nice to have. And no, u don't have to remove the lens in order to remove it from your housing. That's only for M.Zuiko 7-14mm F/2.8 PRO. Macro, my choice is Olympus 60mm F/2.8. Good working range with great Image Quality. Sent from my SM-N975F using Tapatalk



  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
  • Create New...