The lens offers a good combination of features. One of the most useful controls at your disposal is a focus limiter, which is a spring-loaded, four-position switch on the lens barrel. As seen in the image above, the options are 0.4m to infinity, 0.19m to infinity (full range), 0.19m to 0.4m and 1:1, i.e. fixed at the close-focus point. The focus limiter is extremely useful for cutting down on focusing times and minimising focus hunting when working in a specific distance range.

As you can see, sharpness is not a real concern for this lens with the typical subjects that you’d use it for. Bokeh

Introduction

Both barrels are made of high quality plastic and feature a solid metal mount. However, only the 60mm is dust and splash proof, so while a few raindrops won’t hurt the 30mm, it is better to protect it in inclement conditions. All three offer smooth manual focusing rings, although of the three, the Leica 45mm felt smoothest to me. In terms of build quality, the Leica also felt a little more substantial to the Lumix 30mm, but of the three, the Olympus 60mm is the only one to claim dust and weather sealing. In terms of depth of field, the macro lenses with the longer focal lengths will deliver a potentially shallower effect, which may sway your choice when shooting at normal distances, but in a macro environment, the depth of field is already so small you may prefer to have all the help you can get.

The scale on the left side is an indication of actual image resolution. The taller the column, the better the lens performance. Simple. Sharpness is at its best at around f/4 on the 60mm but all values between f/2.8 and f/8 perform in a similar manner. As for the 30mm, it peaks at f/5.6 but f/3.5 and f/8 are also excellent. Both lenses begin to show signs of diffraction by f/11, while f/16 and f/22 are quite soft. In particular, here are what my autofocus speed tests showed. I tested the focusing speed of both lenses from 1x to 0.5x magnification. After 10 replications with each test, the OM System 90mm f/3.5 Macro IS PRO grabbed focus in 5.8 seconds on average, while the 60mm f/2.8 grabbed focus in 5.2 seconds on average. (I also wonder if a newer copy of the 60mm would be even faster, since as I’ve said, mine has seen some things.) Light transmission performance was the same for both lenses, with the Panasonic Leica lens also measuring 0.4EV lower than the manufacturer’s f/2.8 claim with a 3.2TStop score like the Olympus. The Distortion scores were similar as well with both lenses scoring below the 0.2% threshold, indicating that there was no noticeable distortion measured in either lens. Both lenses displayed slight chromatic aberration with scores of 8µm and 10µm respectively for the Olympus and Panasonic lenses. The 30mm is certainly the more specialised product. Its minimum focus distance of just 9.5cm is so short that the lens almost touches the subject, which can easily cast a shadow or scare off skittish living creatures. For this reason, it is best used on inanimate (or fearless!) subjects with an off-camera flash unit or ring flash. Bracelet – E-M1, 6s, f/8, ISO 200 – M.Zuiko 30mm (minimum focus distance)The one place I feel the OM System 90mm f/3.5 Macro IS PRO loses out to the M.Zuiko 60mm f/2.8 macro is the autofocus speed. Although I give OM System kudos for making a 2:1 macro lens which autofocuses at all, it is still on the slow side. And not surprisingly, it gets worse at 1:1 macro and stronger. Despite the use of plastic, I don’t doubt the lens’s durability. In particular, theweather sealing is advertised as dust-proof and splash-proof up to IP53, meaning extensive protection against dust and splashing water. It’s the same rating given to the rugged OM-1 itself. By comparison, I’ve used my M.Zuiko60mm f/2.8 for years of intense conditions. It doesn’t appear to have an official IP rating, yet has held up better than any of my other lenses. The new 90mm f/3.5 should improve on it even further. Next I tried a further shot. This was set up at a range where the 60mm macro was focused at about 0.6m. Again, the camera was moved to account for differences in focal length so that the two lenses framed the same scene identically.

I was excited to work with a 2:1 macro lens optimized for Micro Four Thirds cameras, because I believe it serves as a reminder that the Micro Four Thirds format should not be slept on. Despite having limitations due to the smaller sensor size, the format has its advantages, and macro photography is one of them. You can fill the frame with tiny subjects more easily with the OM System 90mm f/3.5 Macro IS PRO than any other camera + lens combo on the market today.This lens provides a great combination of great optical performance, lightweight, compact design and value for money. But arguably even more important is the long focal length of 90mm. That’s a 180mm full-frame-equivalent focal length, which makes it one of the longest macro lenses made today. This is important because it offers a huge working distance compared to most macro lenses (AKA the distance between the front of your lens and your subject). When you’re focused at the maximum magnification of 1:1, the in-focus subject will be about 3.1 inches or 8cm away from the front of the 60mm f/2.8 macro. This sounds small, but it’s really not bad for such extreme close-ups. Keep in mind that 1:1 magnification on M4/3 cameras fills the frame withsubjects that are just 0.7 inches or 1.7cm across. So, you will usually be able to put quite a bit more distance between the front of your lens and your subject. Lens configuration: 13 elements / 10 groups with 2 HR elements, 1 ED lens element and 1 E-HR element In some cases, the smaller MFD could actually be an advantage also. In certain positions like small insects on trees, I actually like to get a bit closer so I can brace the lens against the tree. In a few other awkward “bracing” situations, I find this smaller MFD to be useful also, which is why I think a larger MFD isn’t universally superior.