Moth

Images taken in a controlled environment or with a posed subject. All subject types.

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Moth

Post by Macrero »

Oly Pen F + Mitty 7.5 + 80mm tube lens at 3.2X approx.

Image

Bigger: https://images2.imgbox.com/1e/d7/gzGek7Qz_o.jpg

Best,

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

rolsen
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 1:21 am
Location: Finland

Post by rolsen »

This is awesome!
- Rane

zzffnn
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 1:25 pm
Location: Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Post by zzffnn »

Beautiful work, thank you for sharing! Which 80mm tube Len did you use? I am using Oly m4/3 camera (E-M1 mk1) too.

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Thank you, Rane!

@zzffnn: Thank you! This stack is with Rodagon 5.6/80 from Scitex scanner, though a regular 80mm enlarging lens (Rodagon, Componon, etc) would do just as well.

Note that tube lens was mounted on Bellows and was not reaching infinity at minimal extension, hence the higher magnification. I don't see any significant degradation in IQ though.

Small sensors have their drawbacks, but also advantages. I can't think of many (if any) 0.20-ish optics that would cover reasonably well a 35mm sensor at around 3X.

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21036
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Macrero wrote:Small sensors have their drawbacks, but also advantages. I can't think of many (if any) 0.20-ish optics that would cover reasonably well a 35mm sensor at around 3X.
I agree, but then at same magnification a 35mm sensor would cover almost 4 times the area. To capture the same size subject, your Mitty 7.5 would work well on 35mm fullframe with a proportionally longer tube lens.

Other than reduced size & weight, I'm not seeing the advantage of small sensor here. What have I missed?

--Rik

Lou Jost
Posts: 4583
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

For a given set of lenses, you get more pixels under a given FOV with smaller sensors than with large ones. That can be convenient sometimes.

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

rjlittlefield wrote: I agree, but then at same magnification a 35mm sensor would cover almost 4 times the area. To capture the same size subject, your Mitty 7.5 would work well on 35mm fullframe with a proportionally longer tube lens.

Other than reduced size & weight, I'm not seeing the advantage of small sensor here. What have I missed?

--Rik
I was trying to justify to myself the money I spent recently on the Oly. Thanks for ruining my attempt! :evil: :lol:

I bought it mostly for the Oly's pixel-shift, which I wanted to try, but it didn't convince me. It is stil a nice little camera with a great for the size sensor.
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Lou Jost
Posts: 4583
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I love the pixel shift. Though now we can get the same thing on FF with the Panasonic S1-R. I think both systems have their advantages. For fieldwork the lightness, pixel-shifting, and fast auto focus bracketing of the PEN F are huge advantages. For studio work the FF Panasonic will give better image quality, but will cost a fortune, and may not really have useful auto focus bracketing.

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

I am really tempted by the S1R. Maybe it will be my self-gift for Christmas :P Though launching price of high-end cameras nowadays is prohibitive... :evil:
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Harald
Posts: 615
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 10:33 am
Location: Steinberg, Norway
Contact:

Post by Harald »

Hi Macrero,
Great work!

Love the light and details :D

Thanks for sharing this great image 8)
Kind Regards
Harald

Lier Fotoklubb / NSFF
AFIAP / CPS
BGF / GMV
http://www.500px.com/blender11

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Thank you, Harald! Glad you like it.
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Lou Jost
Posts: 4583
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I am really tempted by the S1R. Maybe it will be my self-gift for Christmas
I am going to take the plunge in a few days, though I will have to sell some of my high-end lenses to pay for it. But without focus bracketing (as the term had been used by Olympus), it won't replace my wonderful PEN F.

I still can't believe that nobody has yet made a FF camera that does focus shifting and pixel shifting. Nikon Z does focus shifting but no pixel shifting, and it seems the S1-R (can do pixel shifting but not focus shifting (except for a 7-shot bracket).

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Lou Jost wrote: I am going to take the plunge in a few days, though I will have to sell some of my high-end lenses to pay for it. But without focus bracketing (as the term had been used by Olympus), it won't replace my wonderful PEN F.

I still can't believe that nobody has yet made a FF camera that does focus shifting and pixel shifting. Nikon Z does focus shifting but no pixel shifting, and it seems the S1-R (can do pixel shifting but not focus shifting (except for a 7-shot bracket).
Nice! I look forward to seeing your opinion and tests.

I'll wait a few months to see if price drops... :roll:

The pixel-shifted sample on DPR looks impressive, yet the "regular" 47-megapixel image looks great too.
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

MarkSturtevant
Posts: 923
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 6:52 pm
Location: Michigan, U.S.A.
Contact:

Post by MarkSturtevant »

That is exceptionally wonderful.
Mark Sturtevant
Dept. of Still Waters

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Thank you, Mark!
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic