Camera lenses still filled with elements. Perhaps too many?

[RichA]

Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source

[Alan Browne]

On 2023-02-19 17:34, RichA wrote:
> Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.
>
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source

I suspect it has a lot to do with making a very flat field image which
is desirable in macro.

The f/3.5 is a bit underwhelming, however, esp. at that price.

Odd that its prowess at portraiture is not mentioned.
(Forehead slap! f/3.5!).

--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee

[David Taylor]

On 19/02/2023 22:34, RichA wrote:
> Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.
>
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source

A little difficult to hand-hold at 2:1, perhaps, but lovely lens, though!

I've been very pleased with the Olympus 60mm f/2.8 macro with just 13 elements
which offers excellent performance up to 1:1 at a third of the weight and a
third of the price of its 90mm big brother. Great working distance. Should
satisfy many users' needs.

--
Cheers,
David
Web: https://www.satsignal.eu

[Alfred Molon]

Am 19.02.2023 um 23:34 schrieb RichA:
> Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.
>
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source

There will be a reason for all these elements.

I'm just wondering if this is a native micro 4/3 design, or perhaps an
adapted APS-C design, due to all that weight and bulk.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

[geoff]

On 20/02/2023 11:34 am, RichA wrote:
> Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.
>
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source

Clearly you know more about lens design than them. Maybe send them your
suggestions and they'll hire you on contract ...

geoff

[Incubus]

On 2023-02-19, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2023-02-19 17:34, RichA wrote:
>> Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.
>>
>> https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source
>
> I suspect it has a lot to do with making a very flat field image which
> is desirable in macro.
>
> The f/3.5 is a bit underwhelming, however, esp. at that price.
>
> Odd that its prowess at portraiture is not mentioned.
> (Forehead slap! f/3.5!).

Fast lenses for macro photography are only useful for optical
viewfinders to allow a brighter view of the subject. For mirrorless
cameras or DSLRs with live view, it's pointless.

Macro lenses aren't designed for pleasant bokeh so unless it's a happy
coincidence that one provides it, there are often much cheaper lenses
that will perform better at portrait photography.

[Alan Browne]

On 2023-02-21 10:43, Incubus wrote:
> On 2023-02-19, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-02-19 17:34, RichA wrote:
>>> Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.
>>>
>>> https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source
>>
>> I suspect it has a lot to do with making a very flat field image which
>> is desirable in macro.
>>
>> The f/3.5 is a bit underwhelming, however, esp. at that price.
>>
>> Odd that its prowess at portraiture is not mentioned.
>> (Forehead slap! f/3.5!).
>
> Fast lenses for macro photography are only useful for optical
> viewfinders to allow a brighter view of the subject. For mirrorless
> cameras or DSLRs with live view, it's pointless.

Having taken many macro shots wide open, I'd have to disagree.

> Macro lenses aren't designed for pleasant bokeh so unless it's a happy
> coincidence that one provides it, there are often much cheaper lenses
> that will perform better at portrait photography.

And yet the Tamron 90mm, Minolta 100mm, Canon 100mm and Nikon 105 macros
(pre-digital days) are all very good to excellent at portraiture.

I also had a 120 Makro-Planar f/4 (Cark Zeiss) for a while but never
tried it for portraits. A tad short FL for that on 6x6, but likely
suitable.

[Alfred Molon]

Am 21.02.2023 um 17:25 schrieb Alan Browne:
> Having taken many macro shots wide open, I'd have to disagree.

But usually the problem with macro is that you don't have enough DOF.
That's why people do focus stacking.

[nospam]

In article <QY6JL.241796$82jd....@fx13.ams1>, Alfred Molon

<alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> But usually the problem with macro is that you don't have enough DOF.
> That's why people do focus stacking.

that's a function of aperture & subject distance, not the type of lens.

[Alan Browne]

On 2023-02-21 12:13, Alfred Molon wrote:
> Am 21.02.2023 um 17:25 schrieb Alan Browne:
>> Having taken many macro shots wide open, I'd have to disagree.
>
> But usually the problem with macro is that you don't have enough DOF.
> That's why people do focus stacking.

Indeed they do. But often the shallow DOF wide open is also desirable
in itself.

[Incubus]

On 2023-02-21, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2023-02-21 10:43, Incubus wrote:
>> On 2023-02-19, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>>> On 2023-02-19 17:34, RichA wrote:
>>>> Look at the cut-way for this Olympus macro lens. 18 separate optical elements and it's not even a zoom. Remember when ED glass and aspherics were going to "cure" lenses of this? Never happened. Lenses have definitely gotten better, thanks to those two things, but they are still not free of element overkill.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.dpreview.com/news/0100604000/om-digital-solutions-releases-om-system-m-zuiko-digital-ed-90mm-f3-5-macro-is-pro?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source
>>>
>>> I suspect it has a lot to do with making a very flat field image which
>>> is desirable in macro.
>>>
>>> The f/3.5 is a bit underwhelming, however, esp. at that price.
>>>
>>> Odd that its prowess at portraiture is not mentioned.
>>> (Forehead slap! f/3.5!).
>>
>> Fast lenses for macro photography are only useful for optical
>> viewfinders to allow a brighter view of the subject. For mirrorless
>> cameras or DSLRs with live view, it's pointless.
>
> Having taken many macro shots wide open, I'd have to disagree.
>
>> Macro lenses aren't designed for pleasant bokeh so unless it's a happy
>> coincidence that one provides it, there are often much cheaper lenses
>> that will perform better at portrait photography.
>
> And yet the Tamron 90mm, Minolta 100mm, Canon 100mm and Nikon 105 macros
> (pre-digital days) are all very good to excellent at portraiture.

The only one I am familiar with (Nikkor 105) has much cheaper
alternatives.

[RichA]

Their inexpensive 35mm macro lens was capable of focusing within less than an 1 inch, even though the manual claimed 4 inches for closest focus.