Can an M4/3 setup be as versatile as TG6 for macro & wide?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

a solution is to use the 30 macro lens (olympic) and then use the

KRAKEN KRL-09S WIDE ANGLE CONVERSION LENS​

that gets you about 155 degree wide angle. It costs $1000, The Nauticam equivalent MWL 1 is not $2200, it is only $2196. I suspect the Nauticam has "better corners" but if it is only for the occasional big thing that swims by while you are shooting macro then I would go with the Kraken. Both are big and heavy; make sure you have a sturdy flip adapter.
Bill
 
a solution is to use the 30 macro lens (olympic) and then use the

KRAKEN KRL-09S WIDE ANGLE CONVERSION LENS​

that gets you about 155 degree wide angle. It costs $1000, The Nauticam equivalent MWL 1 is not $2200, it is only $2196. I suspect the Nauticam has "better corners" but if it is only for the occasional big thing that swims by while you are shooting macro then I would go with the Kraken. Both are big and heavy; make sure you have a sturdy flip adapter.
Bill


This appears to work only with the 30mm lens, not the 12-50mm as the Nauticam works with both, is this correct?
 
This appears to work only with the 30mm lens, not the 12-50mm as the Nauticam works with both, is this correct?
I used an inexpensive closeup lens (UCL-165m67) lens with the 12-50 for a while for macro at the 50mm end, it worked OK. 12mm was wide enough most of the time for me at the wide end, but I mainly used that for portraits of turtles and sharks.
 
This appears to work only with the 30mm lens, not the 12-50mm as the Nauticam works with both, is this correct?
Even if it works with the 12-50, why would you. At 30 mm the 12-50 is decidedly not macro. My remembrance of the specs (it is no longer available) is that the magnification was like 0.35 or so.

Bill
 
Even if it works with the 12-50, why would you. At 30 mm the 12-50 is decidedly not macro.
Bill

But not wide angle enough for certain subjects. You can use the MWL-1 with the 12-50mm but you can't with the KRAKEN KRL-09S?
 
I don't know, I suspect that field of view is field of view, but the original goal was macro plus wide. With the 12-50 you get not wide enough at 12 mm, no macro and most likely pretty good wide angle with either.
Bill
 
no macro and most likely pretty good wide angle with either.

No, it has a 43mm macro mode. I can also get very close to the subject through almost the entire range especially > 35mm.

It is a great lens to use when you are jumping in a location not knowing what's there or when, for me, I am in a competition and I have to do macro/WA photos.
 
As I'm thinking about getting back in to underwater photography (and diving) in general, this thread is a good read. I shot M4/3. What always bothered me about underwater photography was having to choose between macro and WA before jumping in the water, plus I didn't enjoy lens port swaps or air travel with all the associated gear. It seems that things haven't moved on very much.

No underwater photograph makes me happier than a good WA shot, but opportunities are limited and when the opportunities present themselves, especially in the form of wildlife, pulling off a good shot is the next challenge. In contrast, it's not hard to find attractive subjects for macro and I find it technically easier to take good photos. A conundrum!

Picture34-2.jpg


Picture5-2.jpg
 
As I'm thinking about getting back in to underwater photography (and diving) in general, this thread is a good read. I shot M4/3. What always bothered me about underwater photography was having to choose between macro and WA before jumping in the water, plus I didn't enjoy lens port swaps or air travel with all the associated gear. It seems that things haven't moved on very much.

No underwater photograph makes me happier than a good WA shot, but opportunities are limited and when the opportunities present themselves, especially in the form of wildlife, pulling off a good shot is the next challenge. In contrast, it's not hard to find attractive subjects for macro and I find it technically easier to take good photos. A conundrum!

Picture34-2.jpg


Picture5-2.jpg


These are your images??
 

Back
Top Bottom