Is the Olympus EP3L a good choice for 3D Macro?

Question

I'm interested in getting an Olympus EPL3 for amateur use.

In order of importance I'd like to be able to do the following:

1. Macro 3D
2. General purpose; portraits and panoramas
3. Time-lapse

Is this a good choice of camera? What lenses would you recommend?

At a later date (a year probably) I'd like to try astro-photography, will adapters for four thirds to telescope become available at some point, or will I have to convert from 4/3rds to SLR?

thanks

Asked by earcam

Answer

If my underwater macros with the PEN2 are anything to go by, I would think that the PEN3 is as good or better for macro - with the kit lens. The picture I linked is of a 1cm large pygmy sea horse, and it is cropped. The resolution is amazing and I am sure you can easily fit two of them into the picture with a 3D lens without loosing sharpness or too much resolution. They are even selling some LED lights for macros. That should be great for on-the-go use.

In general I would say that the PEN models are very good cameras for all-round photography. You might want to take a look at the Lumix Lenses to get a bigger variety. I am very happy with the 20mm 1.7 prime lens for example.

Regarding Timelapse you might need to buy an intervalometer to control the camera. There are many models that let you shoot timelapses until the memory card is full and have tons of features. I am using this one here which does everything that I need.

Answered by uncovery

Check more discussion of this question.

Why are MMF-1 / MMF-2 adapters so expensive?

Question

Why is it that MMF-1 / MMF-2 adapters (the ones that convert from 4/3 to Micro 4/3) are that expensive?! They seem to be at least $140 on eBay, $250 on Amazon!

Is this a way for Olympus to force you into buying new Micro 4/3 lenses? Or are they technically complicated to build? Isn't is just a metal ring and a bunch of contacts?

Are there cheaper alternatives out there?

Answer

It's partly because they can be. Yes, it is a bit of precision machining with tight tolerances, it is multi-part and multi-material by nature, but it's also the poster child for niche markets. It requires buyers who have a substantial investment in Four Thirds lenses (and by "substantial" I don't mean a huge collection -- just enough to make purchasing new lenses distasteful) and a Micro Four Thirds camera.

It's telling that other "names" in the adapter field, like Adaptimax and Bower, don't offer a 4/3-μ4/3 adapter; that's sort of a giveaway about the size of the potential market, isn't it? Given that the tooling, quality control, packaging, marketing and distribution are all non-trivial, it's not just a matter of weighing the materials and adding a reasonable mark-up. It costs money just to put the things in inventory, and if the low-enders aren't bothering, there's probably a reason for it: they can't make the things at a profit.

Check more discussion of this question.