A couple of years ago, I was on the hunt for bluebells to photograph. Native bluebells, not the invasive Spanish species which are threatening British woodland.
Although the Olympus f/1.8 45mm was very good for getting a nice blurred background, the close-focus distance of the lens was a disappointment. In addition, shooting wide-open usually meant focusing issues: either mis-focus or not enough of the subject in focus.
I soon found that the Lumix 14-140mm Mk2 at 140mm was very good for these types of shot. A minimum aperture of f/5.6 means that you're getting a large chunk of the plant in-focus, and the extra focal-length usually produces a relatively pleasing bokeh despite the slow-aperture and zoom.
The travel-zoom has effective in-lens stabilisation, yet despite this it can still be tricky to get sharp hand-held shots in the middle of a sparsely lit wood. The answer of course is a tripod, but most of the time I'm spotting bluebells whilst on a pleasant walk with my partner so not ideal!
Then, during one of my adapted-lens-frenzies, I looked into a lens of legend - known for its buttery bokeh, the Pentacon 135mm. I've yet to shoot any bluebells with it, and being a fully manual lens manufactured in what-was-at-the-time East Germany, has no modern things like stabilisation, but in good light it can produce lovely results. This is due to its fast-aperture of f/2.8 and the fifteen aperture blades (on the first version at least).
But what is best for flower photography? I've three lenses which cover the 135-140mm range for Micro Four Thirds (the other is the Lumix G VARIO 100-300mm telephoto). Time for a shoot-out!
Although the Olympus f/1.8 45mm was very good for getting a nice blurred background, the close-focus distance of the lens was a disappointment. In addition, shooting wide-open usually meant focusing issues: either mis-focus or not enough of the subject in focus.
| Picture info: Lumix GH4, Olympus f/1.8 45mm, ISO200, f/1.8, 1/1600 sec |
I soon found that the Lumix 14-140mm Mk2 at 140mm was very good for these types of shot. A minimum aperture of f/5.6 means that you're getting a large chunk of the plant in-focus, and the extra focal-length usually produces a relatively pleasing bokeh despite the slow-aperture and zoom.
| Picture info: Lumix GH4, Lumix G VARIO 14-140mm @ 130mm, ISO800, f/5.6, 1/200 sec |
The travel-zoom has effective in-lens stabilisation, yet despite this it can still be tricky to get sharp hand-held shots in the middle of a sparsely lit wood. The answer of course is a tripod, but most of the time I'm spotting bluebells whilst on a pleasant walk with my partner so not ideal!
Then, during one of my adapted-lens-frenzies, I looked into a lens of legend - known for its buttery bokeh, the Pentacon 135mm. I've yet to shoot any bluebells with it, and being a fully manual lens manufactured in what-was-at-the-time East Germany, has no modern things like stabilisation, but in good light it can produce lovely results. This is due to its fast-aperture of f/2.8 and the fifteen aperture blades (on the first version at least).
| Picture info: Lumix GH4, Pentacon f/2.8 135mm, ISO200, f/3.5, 1/1250 sec |
But what is best for flower photography? I've three lenses which cover the 135-140mm range for Micro Four Thirds (the other is the Lumix G VARIO 100-300mm telephoto). Time for a shoot-out!
Edit: Britain is in the midst of a cold-snap, and it is just too damn cold to head outside and take photos at the moment. I'll get around to this when it warms up a bit, and link back here from a separate post.
Comments
Post a Comment