📛 Become a channel member: ua-cam.com/users/thomaseislphotographyjoin ☕ Donate a coffee to support this channel: ko-fi.com/thomaseislphotography ❓📩 Direct support: thomaseisl.photography/shop/p/support-ticket
Another great video. Having recently added the TG-7 to my arsenal, what you said correlates with my experience so far. I'm relatively new to macro photography, only picking it up less than three years ago; coincidentally when I returned to Olympus digital cameras. The size/weight advantage on M4/3 was immediately evident, as was the extra DoF and magnification, especially as fungi are my favourite subject and they tend to be found in places that a larger camera/lens set-up won't fit. And this is where the TG-7 has been truly amazing, as I can fit in places where even the my EM-1iii and 30mm macro won't fit, and with the LED diffuser, lighting is less of an issue too. To get some of the really tiny mushrooms with the EM-1 needs extension tubes, a tripod and extra lighting, which isn't always possible, but the TG-7 just fits in and is light and easy to hold. The obvious lack of a flip screen can make it tricky in some places, and I've yet to try using it with the app on my phone to get around that problem. The image quality is surprisingly good, and for print and online use I bet most people wouldn't know it came from such a small sensor. I've yet to experiment with focus bracketing or stacking, but I suspect it will improve the overall image quality beyond the increased in-focus area. I still need to play with the TG-7 more and figure out its quirks to get the best out of it, but it's an amazingly capable and versatile little camera. My old Canon 6D is now just relegated to digitising 35mm film, where the 1:1 ratio excels.
Thank you very much for sharing your experiences! You've added so many valid points, that is great. Sometimes the small size of the TG-7 is what gets the job done, completely agree! Best, Thomas
This is a most interesting and thought-provoking presentation. I've never considered this and the more I thought of it, the more that what you presented makes complete sense! I gave up doing macro on my D750 because it was so difficult to get 1:1 reproduction and used my E-M5ii instead. I probably should be getting a TG-7 instead for macro! Great stuff Thomas and keep at it.
Thank you very much for sharing your personal experiences and the kind comment! The TG-7 is truly a macro expert - I plan on sharing a dedicated video on macro 📸
Thanks, you have explained technically what I found out in reality. I was diving in the Red sea and my dive buddy was using an Olympus TG6 in a case. Note the TG6 is almost identical to a TG7 with a different USB port. I saw one of his photos of a very small fish. It blew my mind. I had not seen any macro that good and I have dived with the world champion of underwater photography Fred DeMiglio. I had to have that so I bought a TG6, equipped it with underwater case -60m Strobe and LED. The results are Stunning. I can hit not just a small creature in Macro but the eye of a small fish in MICRO. My friends with DSLRS in huge cases cant do that. At the same time I can go wide and do the background views and 4K videos. They can't do that if they set up for Macro. Now I raise a subject that you have not covered. In underwater I need the camera to hit focus FAST, the little beasts are moving. None of the reviews on TG6, TG7, OM5 say they calculate their autofocdus very fast. However I have a suspicion that a small sensor may make it easier to auto-focus?
That is very interesting and thanks for a great question. You are right, as the smaller physical apertures deliver more DOF, the camera has more room for error. In terms of speed, the TG is tuned for precision - it uses a contrast detection based system. In my upcoming video, I talk about that in more detail. All in all, it is excellent for what it is supposed to do, I'd say! Best, Thomas
Always a good channel to watch run by a guy who really does know what he is talking about and is capable of passing a subset of his knowledge on to other people.
Great video Thomas. As usual, your analysis is technically sophisticated but clear. It seems to me that much of the argument in favour of larger formats is driven by marketing as much as technical considerations. Your practical experiment reminds me of the old saying that the proof is in the pudding. The voice in my head prompted me to purchase the Nikon Z 105mm for my Nikon camera. A couple of months later, OM announced the 90mm macro for my OM1!!
Brilliant summary Thomas. I’m a recently retired photography photographer trainer, when conducting field based macro workshops I invariably found that those students using M4/3 and high-end compacts achieved the best and most consistent results. Those using FF always struggled to get reasonable results because so many technical issues conspired against them. Additionally many people obtained brilliant results using iPhones shot in raw once we added reflectors and supplementary lighting. You definitely have nailed this issue, though it may upset some FF users.
Another excellent video, thanks Thomas. Your explanation about the relationship between image quality and sensor size reminds me of the demise of the SACD audio format, a case of wonderful specifications but to human hearing, ordinary CDs are more than good enough.
Ok Thomas, I share your enthusiasm about TG series in OM System selection. But, what about the set of OM-1 + 60 mm or 90 mm macro lens in comparison with TG-7 camera? I'm crazy carrying 1 kg as 250 gr.? (It could be!) Anyway, thank you Thomas for your encouragement to use TG. Bravo! Sergio from Milano
I'd say you definitely are not - I'd say MFT is ideal for professional macro photography. The TG cannot compete in that regard, even though it is really good. Your OM-1 + 60 + 90 kit is the natural choice for the demanding photographer - and it is still relatively compact! Many thanks for your kind comment, feedback and continued support of the channel, Sergio
Excellent video again, Thomas. I remember doing some reasonable macros/close ups with a 3 (or so) MP camera that focused down to 1 inch. Really crazy. 2007 or so it was.
Well, 3MP is enough if you know what you are doing (although I personally like 6 MP as a minimum nowadays). Thanks for sharing - would be cool to see these old images on your Instagram! I bet no one could tell the difference.
I scan my 35mm film pictures with Lomography's Digitalizer max, an MFT camera (Panasonic G9) and the Olympus 30mm macro lens. I get great results fast. Recently I got the new Pentax 17 halfframe camera, and this my only solution to scan films from this camera as my FF macro lens won't get close enough without extenders (and forget about flatbed scanners for this format).
Well, Thomas, this is an excellent video about this topic. I might add that I have really enjoyed doing macro with the Olympus XZ-1. At the time my first digital camera that could do RAW images (which are required for me to do digital. Only jpeg will not work for me. Also: cameras that produce raw images, also have better OOC jpegs. My observation at least.) I have the Zuiko Digital 35 mm 3.5 and it's by far the sharpest lens. The reason why the Olympus (m)FT system really outputs amazing images is because of the high resolution. Having said that, I still am very happy with my Nikon D750 (and D600) because 24 megapixel is the ideal amount for me. Considering file size, signal to noise ratio and resolution. This last item is also very important to me, because using a 36 megapixel will only benefit if I'd be doing a lot of studio work on a sturdy tripod. Just a little shake could easily reduce the 36 megapixels to 24 (or less) - resolution wise. This has nothing to do with the fact that I use a bunch of vintage (manual focus) lenses, because their resolution is good enough to match a 36 mp sensor. But still: for macro, I find the result of my Olympus E-5 images is more easily achieved than the same result with my D750. These days the E-M10III gives me even better and faster results and is definitely my gear for macro, even with Nikkor or Zuiko OM lenses.
Thank you very much for your feedback! I agree, I also need RAW. Thank you very much for sharing your insights regarding the Nikon and the E-5. I completely agree on the resolution as well. I prefer lower MP cameras as well. The excessive resolution is just not needed. Best wishes, Thomas
Thank you again master Thomas for this excellent tutorial on this subject matter (which I still haven't immersed myself into yet) . Superb structure, clarity and sense yet again. I see you are sitting offset (against your background grid) the other way this time! 😄
First and foremost - thanks a million! Second, now you are triggering an obsessive compulsive disorder in me regarding centering myself haha - or I just switch to a green screen next time 😆
@@ThomasEisl.Photography Yes sir, I think you have it - green screen and all that! At least it will help me out! I am also looking forward to an in depth ED 150-400 F4.5 TC1.25 IS PRO (the expensive lens) review from you when you get time. I know it's a little early to be making demands.
@@ThomasEisl.Photography Also you might want to place yourself on one of the rule of thirds intersection lines in your background (you choose) That could be a pleasing result? I look forward to reviewing more of your informative work in the near future.
Another wonderful clip that truly adds to a person's knowledge - I had never considered some of the perspectives that you raised, but now can and will. Your closing remark about overcompensation did not go unnoticed either! (Perhaps this was directed at Dodge Ram drivers! 😉) But also near the end was your comment about using a ring flash diffuser, which I think would be a mandatory purchase.
Only last night i was writing to a friend that i was lost as to what i could do with a couple of 4/3 cameras i've had lying around for years, but like too much to sell. For starters... i won't rush out to buy a macro lens for my K-1. Thanks very much for an excellent tutorial. Cheers.
i thought about this too, the deeper depth of field and crop factor should be an advantage, but there's rarely any camera that focuses on this aspect. I want to see a multi shot feature on micro sensor cameras.
Thanks for an excellent video. I have a TG5 and its macro capability is amazing especially when using the LED Light Guide.. It's drawback has been that the rear screen is fixed often making positioning and seeing the screen difficult. .
Thank you very much! I agree - the fixed screen is a bit of a downside, so I connect the camera with my phone and use it to remote control it. Works quite well, you should give it a try!
Your tutorials are really useful for users of OM System equipment. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. It would be very helpful if you included, if possible, the OM System OM-5 (I think it is a great tool due to its size and lightness), because it has certain differences with respect to the OM1. Thank you and congratulations for your videos.
Thank you very much - that is great to hear. Spoiler: I already got an OM-5 and I'm testing it extensively behind the scenes so I can produce videos on it in the future. So far, I'm really impressed and I like it a lot.
There is something that has made me very curious. I have seen that when rating the DXO Mark sensors it turns out that they give a higher score to the OM5 than to the OM1 (specifically it wins in the aspect of sensitivity in low light), and of course in that rating the OM5 surpasses the E-M1 MarkIII (despite of theoretically sharing the same processor and sensor) in color depth, dynamic range and low light sensitivity. So I'm wondering if that means OM System has made improvements to the circuitry or software over the M1 Mark III (although I haven't seen any serious comparisons between the OM5, OM1 or M1MarkIII)😅@@ThomasEisl.Photography
@salgado_fotos that is a very interesting question! As I'm a proud owner of the OM-5 since recently, I can test that. One thing is for sure - the extreme speed and AF performance the OM-1 is capable of is a commendable engineering feat, especially as the IQ output / ISO range did not take hit. Anyway, thanks for the hint! Please leave a separate comment next time, as I can miss replies to old comments because of how the notifications work here on YT
Another great video, thanks! Sorry if you have already done a video on diffraction, but aren’t smaller sensors more restricted at smaller apertures? Which obviously affects macro photography.
bislang hatte ich immer problem scharfe Bilder zu bekommen mit der OMTG7 bei Landschaftsbilder, da ist oft der Hintergrund unscharf Makros gelingen meistens gut .
Agreed I have a Canon EOS 750D and a Canon EF-S 60 mm F=1:2.8 Marco lens. Great result till about F=1:11 I sometimes use it at F=1:14 for a little extra DOF. Always on a sturdy tripod with remote control and on ISO 100 (sometimes 200) And dark-field-compensation on. All this rubbish about full-frame being better is just nonsense. The 60 mm EF-S lens is lightweight and was only Euro 200 secondhand.
Excellent setup - thanks for sharing! All you need to get outstanding, professional results. It is those little things like a remote or a tripod which really make the difference in practice, not the sensor format. Can't fix sloppy technique and lack of skill by purchasing a new camera.
Thanks for the good video? do you think TG 7 can be good enough for macro video? I m doing mainly macro photography with Em10 MkII with 60 mm macro lens plus diffuser, Raynox 250 and flash but need some good tool for video. Any comment will be much appreciated
Thanks for asking! I would definitely consider the camera for that - in fact, I'm doing exactly that. Take a look at my new video, where I talk specifically about the accessories available for the TG, some of which are very useful for macro videography: ua-cam.com/video/O5jB_sW6oGk/v-deo.html One important question before I can make a definitive recommendation: What type of macro subjects are you planning to film?
It is an interesting approach, but I think the truth is in the middle. The real magnification of a lens is strictly dependent on its optical characteristics, not on the sensor size of the camera. What matters is the combination between the reproduction ratio of the lens and the pixel density of the sensor. You presented examples for still life, but for real life (let's consider wildlife macro), we need larger working distances.
Thanks for your contribution. Consider the following: 1) The real magnification is irrelevant - it is about the picture on the sensor. I'm pretty sure you are framing a subject the same with the same size in the frame regardless of camera sensors size. 2) Pixel density does not impact the magnification. 3) larger working distances can be useful indeed. It is a separate metric which I intentionally did not include. I'd be interested in a follow up by you and elaborate your points. Maybe there is a misunderstanding. Best, Thomas
Thank you for the feedback! The pixel density of the sensor is very important. The combination lens/pixel density of the sensor controls how much we can crop an image and how large we can print that image. Make a test with Fujifilm X-H2 and OM-1 mk2, with the same lens, for instance Nikon 60mm f/2.8 D (there are adapters). You will see the X-H2 image can be croped with 12% more than the OM-1 one, just because of the pixel density difference of the two sensors. Kind regards!
@gabrielion7045 Also thanks for the reply. Just a perspective : Pixel density alone is not necessarily indicative. The photon transfer characteristic, MTF of the system and so on are what I prefer to examine, as those are basically "what comes out of a system". I really appreciate our conversation, I hope you do as well. Thanks again!
There could be a lot of issue, please feel free to send me your questions via the support ticket system, I'm sure I can help you out: www.thomaseisl.photography/shop/p/support-ticket
Your argumentation on the crop party don't convince me. You crop too strong, so the comparaison have no sens here in my point of vue.. But i'm just a beginner. Congratulations for you work here, pragmatic and smart, very useful.
The argument is about achieving maximum magnification and if that is the goal, it is important to use the right tool. That is the point I was trying to make. Thanks for your kind feedback, best, Thomas 📸
Apsc is the smallest sensor I use for macro. And the voice in my head says I have to buy some camera gear again. No matter what. But this is another topic of course😅😅😅😅
📛 Become a channel member:
ua-cam.com/users/thomaseislphotographyjoin
☕ Donate a coffee to support this channel:
ko-fi.com/thomaseislphotography
❓📩 Direct support:
thomaseisl.photography/shop/p/support-ticket
I love the way you put all the concepts onto order, instead of randomly invoking various ideas.
Thank you very much for the much appreciated, positive feedback!
You are quickly becoming one of my favorite photography channels. You have a really systematic way of explaining these topics! Keep it up!
He is a very smart cookie! 🙂
Thank you very much - I'll do my best to keep it up!
This is the best photography channel on UA-cam, period. Another great video, Thomas :)
Wow, thank you very much, Samuel! I'm honored!
Another great video. Having recently added the TG-7 to my arsenal, what you said correlates with my experience so far. I'm relatively new to macro photography, only picking it up less than three years ago; coincidentally when I returned to Olympus digital cameras. The size/weight advantage on M4/3 was immediately evident, as was the extra DoF and magnification, especially as fungi are my favourite subject and they tend to be found in places that a larger camera/lens set-up won't fit. And this is where the TG-7 has been truly amazing, as I can fit in places where even the my EM-1iii and 30mm macro won't fit, and with the LED diffuser, lighting is less of an issue too. To get some of the really tiny mushrooms with the EM-1 needs extension tubes, a tripod and extra lighting, which isn't always possible, but the TG-7 just fits in and is light and easy to hold. The obvious lack of a flip screen can make it tricky in some places, and I've yet to try using it with the app on my phone to get around that problem. The image quality is surprisingly good, and for print and online use I bet most people wouldn't know it came from such a small sensor. I've yet to experiment with focus bracketing or stacking, but I suspect it will improve the overall image quality beyond the increased in-focus area. I still need to play with the TG-7 more and figure out its quirks to get the best out of it, but it's an amazingly capable and versatile little camera. My old Canon 6D is now just relegated to digitising 35mm film, where the 1:1 ratio excels.
Thank you very much for sharing your experiences! You've added so many valid points, that is great. Sometimes the small size of the TG-7 is what gets the job done, completely agree! Best, Thomas
I don't understand why you don't have over a million subscribers. You make the BEST videos! And you are such a class act. Thank you for doing these.
Many many thanks! That is really amazing feedback, thanks for your words, Larry
This is a most interesting and thought-provoking presentation. I've never considered this and the more I thought of it, the more that what you presented makes complete sense! I gave up doing macro on my D750 because it was so difficult to get 1:1 reproduction and used my E-M5ii instead. I probably should be getting a TG-7 instead for macro! Great stuff Thomas and keep at it.
Thank you very much for sharing your personal experiences and the kind comment!
The TG-7 is truly a macro expert - I plan on sharing a dedicated video on macro 📸
Thanks, you have explained technically what I found out in reality. I was diving in the Red sea and my dive buddy was using an Olympus TG6 in a case. Note the TG6 is almost identical to a TG7 with a different USB port. I saw one of his photos of a very small fish. It blew my mind. I had not seen any macro that good and I have dived with the world champion of underwater photography Fred DeMiglio. I had to have that so I bought a TG6, equipped it with underwater case -60m Strobe and LED. The results are Stunning. I can hit not just a small creature in Macro but the eye of a small fish in MICRO. My friends with DSLRS in huge cases cant do that. At the same time I can go wide and do the background views and 4K videos. They can't do that if they set up for Macro. Now I raise a subject that you have not covered. In underwater I need the camera to hit focus FAST, the little beasts are moving. None of the reviews on TG6, TG7, OM5 say they calculate their autofocdus very fast. However I have a suspicion that a small sensor may make it easier to auto-focus?
That is very interesting and thanks for a great question. You are right, as the smaller physical apertures deliver more DOF, the camera has more room for error. In terms of speed, the TG is tuned for precision - it uses a contrast detection based system. In my upcoming video, I talk about that in more detail. All in all, it is excellent for what it is supposed to do, I'd say! Best, Thomas
Always a good channel to watch run by a guy who really does know what he is talking about and is capable of passing a subset of his knowledge on to other people.
Thank you very much!
Expertly done! Very clear!
Thanks, again!
Great video Thomas. As usual, your analysis is technically sophisticated but clear. It seems to me that much of the argument in favour of larger formats is driven by marketing as much as technical considerations. Your practical experiment reminds me of the old saying that the proof is in the pudding. The voice in my head prompted me to purchase the Nikon Z 105mm for my Nikon camera. A couple of months later, OM announced the 90mm macro for my OM1!!
Many thanks!
So did you get the OM 90mm? I'm curious 🙂
Thank you for all those information s 👍🏽
Most welcome!
I always learn something watching your videos. Thank you!
Glad to hear it!
Brilliant summary Thomas. I’m a recently retired photography photographer trainer, when conducting field based macro workshops I invariably found that those students using M4/3 and high-end compacts achieved the best and most consistent results.
Those using FF always struggled to get reasonable results because so many technical issues conspired against them.
Additionally many people obtained brilliant results using iPhones shot in raw once we added reflectors and supplementary lighting.
You definitely have nailed this issue, though it may upset some FF users.
Thank you very much, that is just great to hear from a fellow professional with more experience than I have. Best, Thomas
Tag#2: Second listening provided more tidbits! Thanks!
Great to hear! Many thanks for your support, Jeff!
Another excellent video, thanks Thomas. Your explanation about the relationship between image quality and sensor size reminds me of the demise of the SACD audio format, a case of wonderful specifications but to human hearing, ordinary CDs are more than good enough.
Many thanks - that is a great analogy, I completely agree!
Thank you, you have confirmed my decision to buy the OM1 for macro instead of using my Nikon Z8. Wonderful bit of education.
Many thanks for the kind feedback - I'm sure that the OM-1 will be the ideal tool for your macro work.
Ok Thomas, I share your enthusiasm about TG series in OM System selection. But, what about the set of OM-1 + 60 mm or 90 mm macro lens in comparison with TG-7 camera? I'm crazy carrying 1 kg as 250 gr.? (It could be!) Anyway, thank you Thomas for your encouragement to use TG. Bravo! Sergio from Milano
I'd say you definitely are not - I'd say MFT is ideal for professional macro photography. The TG cannot compete in that regard, even though it is really good. Your OM-1 + 60 + 90 kit is the natural choice for the demanding photographer - and it is still relatively compact!
Many thanks for your kind comment, feedback and continued support of the channel, Sergio
Excellent, informative video Thomas: thansk a lot.
Thank you very much!
Interesting and entertaining video Thomas, as a TG-5 and m4/3 shooter I already was familiar with the advantages of these systems. Thanks for sharing.
Many thanks for the feedback!
Excellent video again, Thomas. I remember doing some reasonable macros/close ups with a 3 (or so) MP camera that focused down to 1 inch. Really crazy. 2007 or so it was.
Well, 3MP is enough if you know what you are doing (although I personally like 6 MP as a minimum nowadays).
Thanks for sharing - would be cool to see these old images on your Instagram! I bet no one could tell the difference.
@@ThomasEisl.Photography I will try to find them back.
@Martin_Siegel notify me in case you find them 😌
@@ThomasEisl.Photography Will do but maybe on IG. UA-cam is acting up with my VPN, I fear.
@Martin_Siegel yes, insta is better for that!
The TG series I read somewhere, has been the go to choice for insurance investigators when going about their forensic macro work in the field.
I can imagine that! Perfect tool for such work!
This was great. It’s so enjoyable to see these photographic myths get busted so comprehensively.
Thank you very much!
I scan my 35mm film pictures with Lomography's Digitalizer max, an MFT camera (Panasonic G9) and the Olympus 30mm macro lens. I get great results fast. Recently I got the new Pentax 17 halfframe camera, and this my only solution to scan films from this camera as my FF macro lens won't get close enough without extenders (and forget about flatbed scanners for this format).
thank you for this amazing video!
Thank you very much for the amazing feedback!
Great stuff... I love how you say you have a lab. rather than a studio.
Haha, well - it is actually the same place - but believe me, once you start testing lenses and cameras, you feel like working in a lab.
Well, Thomas, this is an excellent video about this topic.
I might add that I have really enjoyed doing macro with the Olympus XZ-1. At the time my first digital camera that could do RAW images (which are required for me to do digital. Only jpeg will not work for me. Also: cameras that produce raw images, also have better OOC jpegs. My observation at least.)
I have the Zuiko Digital 35 mm 3.5 and it's by far the sharpest lens. The reason why the Olympus (m)FT system really outputs amazing images is because of the high resolution.
Having said that, I still am very happy with my Nikon D750 (and D600) because 24 megapixel is the ideal amount for me. Considering file size, signal to noise ratio and resolution. This last item is also very important to me, because using a 36 megapixel will only benefit if I'd be doing a lot of studio work on a sturdy tripod. Just a little shake could easily reduce the 36 megapixels to 24 (or less) - resolution wise. This has nothing to do with the fact that I use a bunch of vintage (manual focus) lenses, because their resolution is good enough to match a 36 mp sensor.
But still: for macro, I find the result of my Olympus E-5 images is more easily achieved than the same result with my D750. These days the E-M10III gives me even better and faster results and is definitely my gear for macro, even with Nikkor or Zuiko OM lenses.
Thank you very much for your feedback!
I agree, I also need RAW.
Thank you very much for sharing your insights regarding the Nikon and the E-5. I completely agree on the resolution as well. I prefer lower MP cameras as well. The excessive resolution is just not needed.
Best wishes, Thomas
YES! Pick the right tools for the right job! 💪🏻🔥
Yes!
Thank you again master Thomas for this excellent tutorial on this subject matter (which I still haven't immersed myself into yet) . Superb structure, clarity and sense yet again. I see you are sitting offset (against your background grid) the other way this time! 😄
First and foremost - thanks a million!
Second, now you are triggering an obsessive compulsive disorder in me regarding centering myself haha - or I just switch to a green screen next time 😆
@@ThomasEisl.Photography Yes sir, I think you have it - green screen and all that! At least it will help me out!
I am also looking forward to an in depth ED 150-400 F4.5 TC1.25 IS PRO (the expensive lens) review from you when you get time. I know it's a little early to be making demands.
@karllelliott681 noted!
@@ThomasEisl.Photography Also you might want to place yourself on one of the rule of thirds intersection lines in your background (you choose) That could be a pleasing result?
I look forward to reviewing more of your informative work in the near future.
@karllelliott681 😂 don't get me started haha
Thanks for the encouragement! I'll do my best!
Another wonderful clip that truly adds to a person's knowledge - I had never considered some of the perspectives that you raised, but now can and will. Your closing remark about overcompensation did not go unnoticed either! (Perhaps this was directed at Dodge Ram drivers! 😉) But also near the end was your comment about using a ring flash diffuser, which I think would be a mandatory purchase.
Thank you very much! Yes, the FD-1 is really a great accessory to get! I'll talk more about it in a future video.
Astounding, this video has really made me think about future kit choices.
Ok wow! That is really exciting to read, to be honest!
Only last night i was writing to a friend that i was lost as to what i could do with a couple of 4/3 cameras i've had lying around for years, but like too much to sell. For starters... i won't rush out to buy a macro lens for my K-1. Thanks very much for an excellent tutorial. Cheers.
Great to read. You should definitely try MFT for macro, it feels almost like cheating. And the lens selection for macro is excellent.
Wieder einmal eine wundervolle Demonstration
Vielen Dank!
Very interesting video. Thank you I used my TG 6 today to take pictures of forest mushrooms. I love what you can do with that camera
Great to read!
i thought about this too, the deeper depth of field and crop factor should be an advantage, but there's rarely any camera that focuses on this aspect. I want to see a multi shot feature on micro sensor cameras.
True - the TG-7 is an exception to the rule!
Thanks for an excellent video. I have a TG5 and its macro capability is amazing especially when using the LED Light Guide.. It's drawback has been that the rear screen is fixed often making positioning and seeing the screen difficult. .
Thank you very much!
I agree - the fixed screen is a bit of a downside, so I connect the camera with my phone and use it to remote control it. Works quite well, you should give it a try!
Really excellent video. Eye opening
Glad to hear it - thanks!
Your tutorials are really useful for users of OM System equipment. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
It would be very helpful if you included, if possible, the OM System OM-5 (I think it is a great tool due to its size and lightness), because it has certain differences with respect to the OM1. Thank you and congratulations for your videos.
Thank you very much - that is great to hear.
Spoiler: I already got an OM-5 and I'm testing it extensively behind the scenes so I can produce videos on it in the future. So far, I'm really impressed and I like it a lot.
There is something that has made me very curious. I have seen that when rating the DXO Mark sensors it turns out that they give a higher score to the OM5 than to the OM1 (specifically it wins in the aspect of sensitivity in low light), and of course in that rating the OM5 surpasses the E-M1 MarkIII (despite of theoretically sharing the same processor and sensor) in color depth, dynamic range and low light sensitivity. So I'm wondering if that means OM System has made improvements to the circuitry or software over the M1 Mark III (although I haven't seen any serious comparisons between the OM5, OM1 or M1MarkIII)😅@@ThomasEisl.Photography
@salgado_fotos that is a very interesting question! As I'm a proud owner of the OM-5 since recently, I can test that. One thing is for sure - the extreme speed and AF performance the OM-1 is capable of is a commendable engineering feat, especially as the IQ output / ISO range did not take hit. Anyway, thanks for the hint!
Please leave a separate comment next time, as I can miss replies to old comments because of how the notifications work here on YT
Good job
Thank you very much!
Another great video, thanks! Sorry if you have already done a video on diffraction, but aren’t smaller sensors more restricted at smaller apertures? Which obviously affects macro photography.
Interestingly, this is not the case - I recommend watching this video: ua-cam.com/video/NAMxTN3vzRA/v-deo.html
superbe vidéo merci pour cette mise au point
Merci beaucoup!
bislang hatte ich immer problem scharfe Bilder zu bekommen mit der OMTG7 bei Landschaftsbilder, da ist oft der Hintergrund unscharf Makros gelingen meistens gut .
Ah, interessant! Vielleicht etwas camera shake im Spiel.
Big thanks
Most welcome!
So good its excellent 👍
Thanks a lot!
Agreed
I have a Canon EOS 750D and a Canon EF-S 60 mm F=1:2.8 Marco lens.
Great result till about F=1:11
I sometimes use it at F=1:14 for a little extra DOF.
Always on a sturdy tripod with remote control and on ISO 100 (sometimes 200)
And dark-field-compensation on.
All this rubbish about full-frame being better is just nonsense.
The 60 mm EF-S lens is lightweight and was only Euro 200 secondhand.
Excellent setup - thanks for sharing! All you need to get outstanding, professional results. It is those little things like a remote or a tripod which really make the difference in practice, not the sensor format. Can't fix sloppy technique and lack of skill by purchasing a new camera.
Thanks for the good video? do you think TG 7 can be good enough for macro video? I m doing mainly macro photography with Em10 MkII with 60 mm macro lens plus diffuser, Raynox 250 and flash but need some good tool for video. Any comment will be much appreciated
Thanks for asking!
I would definitely consider the camera for that - in fact, I'm doing exactly that. Take a look at my new video, where I talk specifically about the accessories available for the TG, some of which are very useful for macro videography:
ua-cam.com/video/O5jB_sW6oGk/v-deo.html
One important question before I can make a definitive recommendation: What type of macro subjects are you planning to film?
Thanks for your comment, I am basically doing insect photography, mostly ants, flies, bees, etc. Details of small flowers but mostly insects
It is an interesting approach, but I think the truth is in the middle. The real magnification of a lens is strictly dependent on its optical characteristics, not on the sensor size of the camera. What matters is the combination between the reproduction ratio of the lens and the pixel density of the sensor. You presented examples for still life, but for real life (let's consider wildlife macro), we need larger working distances.
Thanks for your contribution. Consider the following:
1) The real magnification is irrelevant - it is about the picture on the sensor. I'm pretty sure you are framing a subject the same with the same size in the frame regardless of camera sensors size.
2) Pixel density does not impact the magnification.
3) larger working distances can be useful indeed. It is a separate metric which I intentionally did not include.
I'd be interested in a follow up by you and elaborate your points. Maybe there is a misunderstanding.
Best, Thomas
Thank you for the feedback! The pixel density of the sensor is very important. The combination lens/pixel density of the sensor controls how much we can crop an image and how large we can print that image. Make a test with Fujifilm X-H2 and OM-1 mk2, with the same lens, for instance Nikon 60mm f/2.8 D (there are adapters). You will see the X-H2 image can be croped with 12% more than the OM-1 one, just because of the pixel density difference of the two sensors. Kind regards!
@gabrielion7045 Also thanks for the reply.
Just a perspective : Pixel density alone is not necessarily indicative. The photon transfer characteristic, MTF of the system and so on are what I prefer to examine, as those are basically "what comes out of a system".
I really appreciate our conversation, I hope you do as well. Thanks again!
My macro pics look foggy. Sharp image detail but nearly no color. With or without light, same thing.What am I doing wrong?
Pew, there could be many issues. Maybe you can send me a few images so I can take a look. Best, Thomas
There could be a lot of issue, please feel free to send me your questions via the support ticket system, I'm sure I can help you out: www.thomaseisl.photography/shop/p/support-ticket
How long can the full frame delusion live on? However, surprised by the results from TG7, but still happy with my zuiko 60mm.
As long as there is marketing, I'd say.
The 60mm is excellent, an awesome macro lens!
The smartphone is proof that small sensors can take beautiful photos!
Completely agree!
🙏
Your argumentation on the crop party don't convince me.
You crop too strong, so the comparaison have no sens here in my point of vue..
But i'm just a beginner.
Congratulations for you work here, pragmatic and smart, very useful.
The argument is about achieving maximum magnification and if that is the goal, it is important to use the right tool. That is the point I was trying to make.
Thanks for your kind feedback, best, Thomas 📸
Apsc is the smallest sensor I use for macro. And the voice in my head says I have to buy some camera gear again. No matter what. But this is another topic of course😅😅😅😅
Ha, I know this voice very well haha. We have much in common ;-)
You sound like my wife. She always tells me I'm compensating when I whip out my big sensor.
;-)