The Essential Budget Lens Collection

TheMenWhoDrawSheeps

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2016
Messages
553
Does this (either 5E or F) affect minimum/maximum focusing distance? Meaning, how close do you need to be and how far can you be, and compared to a normal macro lens?

Definitely. You'll have near zero working room with reversed lens.

it relies on focal length, and distance to the sensor.
basically, you work with magnification - your magnification depending on a different distance to your subject, you get different magnification ratio. so if you want to work at a max magnification of 1:2 with 60mm f2.8, you still have to work at 10cm distance, or so.
I wouldn´t call it "zero working room" - yes, reversed primes have just 1 magnification, and as result only 1 focusing distance. but that what you would expect if you want to shoot at a specific magnification.
as Petrochemist mentioned helicoids, are kinda workaround. with moving the lens further away you change magnification, therefore the focusing distance.
another tool of changing magnification are doubler and speed boosters.
i usually get working distance between 10-25cm, with magnifications between 3:1 and 1:2, so i wouldn´t say it that much unpractical even for living subjects.

that guy barely exceeds 3mm in the length and 2mm in the height. so you can count magnification by yourself. i do not crop.

14125160_1065207933548839_5339558502066446304_o.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_ht=scontent-vie1-1.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


12901084_973918906011076_8865464391180056660_o.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_ht=scontent-vie1-1.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
1,762
Location
SW England
Real Name
Rob
Apologies if this is slightly O/T, but I think it's kind've relevant.

...I've not come across anyone else who's published an equivalent of the below....

OK, here's my equivalent. As you can see, I'm a big fan of the P20. I was a mostly prime shooter, P14, P20, P25, O45, S60 for a few years. Then I got an O12-40 a couple of years back and this (as can be seen from the chart) fits most of my FL usage. I've got too many lenses to easily list them on the chart, and tons of overlap (primes and zooms) in the 12-45mm range.

focal_length_usage.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Obviously nothing in this about "keepers" etc. But it's fun to create and think about (for me, anyway)

Cheers,

Rob
 
Last edited:

archaeopteryx

Gambian sidling bush
Joined
Feb 25, 2017
Messages
1,662
Obviously nothing in this about "keepers" etc.
Well, some of my contracts require 100% image retention. In that sense everything's a keeper and so there's no distinction between the probability of acquiring an image with focal length and the probability of a keeper. ;) In the more common sense of particularly artistically or technically satisfying images I've found that correlation generally still holds, but is subject to the constraint use of a focal length is measured more by time invested in the photographic process than in the number of images produced. If I'm running 6+ fps the reason's nearly always an expectation most frames won't be decisive moments. Conversely, if one spends an hour setting up a view camera shot one rather hopes its a keeper.

Since cameras don't keep uptime counters I'm not aware of an easy way to measure this, though with certain specific use patterns inference can be made from the EXIF timestamps.

Edit: Post below seems to focus on the catalog probability of a high rated image. That's distinct from the probability of a high rated image per unit of photographic time.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
1,762
Location
SW England
Real Name
Rob
@archaeopteryx re:keepers...

If I was any good at tagging and whatnot in Lightroom, this would be easy. I could just filter my pictures on starred ones, and then re-run the data trawl plugin. But unfortunately I'm terrible at that. Most of my photos in LR that I really like, have no metadata identifying them as such. Oh well...
 

Him-ch

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 30, 2018
Messages
118
Location
Switzerland
I love the idea of this thread but the 9-18 is still more than I'd class as budget - one of the reason's I've not got one yet :(
On a tight budget there are plenty of interesting adapted lenses to fill out the kit. I recently came across the Pentax auto110 range, sadly restricted to fully open without a rare adapter but make the 35mm c-mount look big and are free from it's distortions. (IIRC the 18mm/2.8 is only 12g & the 24mm/2.8 is 27g)
If you get a focal reducer to double the use of your 50mm, then one of the many 500mm mirror lenses will be handhold able mounted via the reducer.

Personally I'd go for the Raynox DCR 150 instead of the +4 diopter. It's only a little stronger at +4.8 diopter - but more highly corrected than most close up lenses & also quick & easy to fit.

Yes exactly on a budget I would buy the 12/25/45 to go with a Pen-F. If one could stretch the buget slightly I would add the 75mm. I think this is a budget kit would highly capable.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
1,762
Location
SW England
Real Name
Rob
I own quite a lot of lenses, way more than I "need". I feel that I have managed to grow my lens collection reasonably cheaply, by taking a long time over it (six years so far in m43), and very much playing a waiting game. I identified lenses I wanted which were affordable, and then kept a watch out for deals, cashback offers etc, and only ever bought when the price was right. I have only strayed into lenses I consider expensive (by my standards) like the O12-40 very recently (and that I managed to get for about half list price).

The very first lens I bought after the basic camera+kit zoom was the Panasonic 20mm/1.7, which I got for £150 new with a cashback. Until the O12-40 arrived, the P20 was by far and away my most used lens, so it was a good choice to buy first.

If I'm honestly self critical, the only flaw in my budget lens buying strategy is I can't bring myself to sell any. I own a few that are rarely or never used, which in theory could be sold to reduce the overall cost of the thing.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
1,762
Location
SW England
Real Name
Rob
Budget lenses continued. For quite a few years, my main lens kit became P14, P20, O45. I also used a few assorted old cheap MF lenses off ebay (for macro, and longer portrait length etc). But that threesome mostly filled my requirements. I also scored a P45-200 pretty cheaply very early on (also with cashback), but in fact it has seen very little use over the years.

If you are playing the long game, watching prices, then in the UK, the website Camera Price Comparison, Compare Camera & Camera Accessory Prices is very useful.
Also hotukdeals - Best Deals & Discounts » Your Shopping Community fairly often has some m43 stuff on it (usually followed by lots of snarky comments by people slagging it off - why is that?!)
I've also used automated search alerts on ebay, and just used ebay to track the *sold* prices of stuff over time. And I've picked up tips from the "deals" thread here on mu-43.com, and occasionally from other forums like DPR. I have also used automated search alerts in Google which can sometimes be useful.

In summary, it can become a bit of a time consuming hobby in itself (eg. checking prices on Amazon periodically, since they do vary quite a bit sometimes) but it has allowed me to save substantial cost over the years. It facilitated me this year to get an E-M10ii body for £240 new when they were flogging them off cheap during a cashback offer.

Enough.

Rob
 

Taz trooper

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
41
Location
Cambridge, UK
Interesting comments, as this pretty much matches what's in my camera bag. Anyhow, point by point my thoughts are as follows:

[1] Fast-focusing AF lens -
14-42mm on both bodies, Panasonic Lumix 14-42mm Mk II and Olympus ED 14-42mm f3.5-5.6. Agreed Panasonic lens is really good (my favourite), but my Olympus was a good deal.

[2] Portrait time – I have choices from three different manual lens - Olympus Zuiko 50mm f1.8, Olympus Zuiko Macro 50mm f3.5, and Pentax 50mm f1.7.
Hardly ever used though...

[3] Rectilinear ultrawide lens - mine's the Olympus BCL 9mm f8. I bought it before the Chinese Fish eye lenses were widely available, and it's diminutive, weighs next to nothing.
IMHO, you don't need a UWA/ fisheye very often, so I can live with the smaller f number.

[4] Nature and landscapes come next
– after using my Oly 4/3 40-150mm for a while, I've gone for the LUMIX G VARIO 45–200 mm/F4.0–5.6/MEGA O.I.S. Great lens, good reach, very fast to focus, fairly light for the performance at 380g. Very happy with this purchase.

[5] now a macro lens
- I'll buck the trend and suggest Auto extension tubes for the standard zooms (14-42mm.) They're lighter than a lens, and give you modern glass quality.

Alternatively I can add either the Olympus Zuiko 50mm f3.5 macro or the beast - my Tokina 35-105mm f3.5 PK, which cost me £25 with a set of PK extension tubes.

[6] Some fun to get you thinking visually to fill the last space in that camera bag -
Mine's the 7Artisans 25mm f1.8. A known quality compared to C mount CCTV lens. Small & light, pretty good optically.

And finally,
with all that weight I've saved, there's space for a second body, so I added to my GF6 an Olympus E-PL3.

Micro Four Thirds, putting the fun back in Photography.
 

mauve

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,561
Location
Paris, France
Budgets aren’t created equal .
If you can afford a Pen-F, I guess, 12/2 is within your budget.
Maybe, but for that kind of money, as I pointed earlier, in a money-conscious approach, I'd favour the 9-18 at the wide end for flexibility. The 12/2 is certainly fine, but it's nonetheless niche as well as expensive.

Cheers,
M.
 

pellicle

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
3,956
Location
Killarney, OzTrailEYa
Real Name
pellicle
Clearly to some budget means something different to what it means to me.
This is my essential budget (missing my 12-32 and 14-45 zooms) and light weight lens kit.
IMG_20181117_053915.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Nothing cost more than $300 (with the Olympus 45 being the dearest), including the camera body.

It covers 11mm to 45.

In the travel bag with a spare battery is a pixi tripod and the bag fully laden is 1.6kg
IMG_20181117_054543.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


If I wanted lenses to remind me of my EOS cameras I'd buy them, but personally for me the philosophy of micro43 is "compact without compromising quality of images" compared to similar format.

PS the astute will observe I have mounted a filter ring inside the GWC-1
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2017
Messages
1,941
Location
Salt Spring Island, British Columbia, Canada
Real Name
Jan Steinman
anyone into bellows?
Y'mean, like this?

There are only a few inexpensive tilt-shift bellows out there. They can be had for under $200 or so — I paid $125 for my Nikon PB-4. They can be a lot of fun!
pc149602-jpg.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom