OM SYSTEM OLYMPUS M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm F2.8 Macro For Micro Four Thirds System Camera, Weather Sealed Design, Focus Limit Switch Bright

> Comparision with Leica – Lumix Macro; especially use on Lumix cameras
PRICE, QUALITY, AND PERFORMANCE> PRICE: about$ 500 for the Zuiko vs $1000 for the Leica.> QUALITY: The fit and finish of both lenses in very good, maybe a little higher for the Leica. The Leica is “prettier”, but on the camera the Zuiko is more impressively “techy”.>> A number of reviewers report manufacturing flaws in the Zuiko. Quite a few Leica purchasers (including myself) report that the autofocus system fails and the first Lumix 14-42mm PZ lens I received had a heavy haze on internal lens elements. I suggest purchasing only from Amazon, because return postage is free on defective items, and they will ship a new item even before you return the defective one.> PERFORMANCE: Professional reviews based on exhaustive tests rate the Zuiko as sharp or sharper than the Leica.LENSHOODS> The optional Zuiko lenshood is exceptional–the best lenshood I’ve ever used. When you want to use it, you just slide it forward. When you want to stow the lens, you just slide the lenshood back, where it protects the lens.> The supplied Leica lenshood is totally inadequate, and as far as I can tell, there are no suitable lenshoods available which are specifically sold for this lens.SIZE AND SHAPE–(and in-camera flash)> The Zuiko does not get in the way of the in-camera flash (albeit you may have to retract the lenshood at the highest magnifications). Like all Panasonic Lumix/Lieca lenses, the Lieca is unnecessarily fat, as fat as a comparable 35mm film lens. It is so fat that it gets in the way of the in-camera flash (of my Lumix GX7).> The Zuiko is tall and skinny, and will probably rattle around in a compartment by itself. The Leica is short, and easy to store in a gadget bag, e.g., it can be stacked in a compartment with another short lens.FOCAL LENGTH AND WORKING DISTANCE> The Zuiko is 60mm (=120mm 35mm equivalent). The Leica has a focal length of 45mm (=90mm 35mm equivalent). So, the Zuiko is 1 1/2 times “longer” focal length, which basically means that your subject is 1 1/2 times farther away.–> The greater working distance is a benefit for true macrophotography; but often a hindrance for larger subjects. With the Zuiko a 12″ high subject is ~6′ away; with the the Leica is ~4′ away–> When working with the Zuiko, when I want to photograph a cluster of flowers (say 12″ in diameter), I often find myself wishing for a shorter focal length lens–indeed, I usually switch to my Lumix 14-42mm PZ. Other effects of the longer focal length of the Zuiko are:–> Increases the effect of shake–so tripods, flashes, etc. are more necessary with the Zuiko.–> Photographing objects larger than about 12″ tall, the greater distance requires a more powerful flash, and it is harder to position the flash at 45 degrees to the subject (which is ideal for most subjects).–> You can waste a lot of time switching to a shorter focal length lens, and back to the Zuiko macro, etc.–> In a pinch, the Leica can be used as a copystand lens, say to copy a page from a book; practically speaking the Zuiko cannot.–> The relatively short working distance of the Leica means that arranging lighting at the best angle may often be impossible at high magnifications (say for subjects less than 1″ tall) because the lens body is in the way. Indeed it is often difficult to properly light some subjects, say 1/2″ tall, even with the Zuiko.> Neither lens is suitable for high magnification work (meaning magnification greater than 1:1 with bellows or extension tubes), because of their long focal lengths and therefore the large amount of extension needed to achieve greater magnifications. For example the 

This review is for: Olympus M. Zuiko 60mm F/2.8 LensThis is a great lens. Handling is weird.I have both this lens as well as the Panasonic 30mm macro lens. Optically, they are both absolute jewels. The 30mm get the nod from me for copy work where the shorter working distance doesn’t matter but (slightly) sharper corners matter. For nature and non-flat objects, the 60mm gives more room for lighting and is blisteringly sharp.I wish the 60mm handled like the 30mm (simple) but it doesn’t. This is where it gets weird. It has a focus limiter switch (pictured) with 3 ranges. Beyond those, the limit switch is spring loaded. It took me awhile to figure out what it was doing: It takes the lens to 1:1. Okay, ‘weird’ all of a sudden becomes ‘genius’! lolOptically, the lens is superb, sharp already at f/2.8.For single-image capture of skittish objects, the greater working distance wins out over the 30mm macro lens.Combined with pixel shifting and the m4/3 sensor, I can obtain crisp images of small objects.With focus stacking, the results are equally satisfactory for small objects (although I still rely on bigger format cameras for larger subjects).This lens and micro four thirds are meant for macro photography.Great lens. Worth considering. Recommended without — okay, maybe with one! — reservation!

Great macro lens if that is your only criteria for it. My only complaint when used on a Lumix G9 camera was a softness on distant landscapes. A tripod and remote shutter release might help but it was very hard to get a sharp result hand held. Even in good light at f5.6. I did set the setting on the lens to infinity.

Macro de gran calidad.