News New Panasonic S 100mm 2.8 Macro Lens

[RBecker]

The size, weight and first reviews of the Lumix sounds very promising, but I just got a great offer for a second hand Sigma: 2 month old, perfect condition and only 550€. With this offer I don‘t think about the lumix again. And because I own the Sigma 1.4x converter, I can use it also with the macro to get better distance and max 1.4:1 magnification.

BTW: Sigma raised the MSRP (in Germany) from the original 749€ (incl VAT) to 829. I saw now other lens with raised price, but I did not check the whole product line…

 

[Oíche]

The size, weight and first reviews of the Lumix sounds very promising, but I just got a great offer for a second hand Sigma: 2 month old, perfect condition and only 550€. With this offer I don‘t think about the lumix again. And because I own the Sigma 1.4x converter, I can use it also with the macro to get better distance and max 1.4:1 magnification.

With a 1.4x you're losing a stop, make the DOF even narrower needing further stopping down and the subject could be inside the lens itself at max magnification, I don't think it's suitable but you'll find out yourself very quickly.

BTW: Sigma raised the MSRP (in Germany) from the original 749€ (incl VAT) to 829. I saw now other lens with raised price, but I did not check the whole product line…

The big selling point of the Lumix 100mm macro is the design, lightweight, and size doubling up as as a videography lens with controlled focus breathing matching the other S primes for easy swapping in gimbals. Your Sigma and any other conventional macro is far from this.

 

[RBecker]

With a 1.4x you're losing a stop, make the DOF even narrower needing further stopping down and the subject could be inside the lens itself at max magnification, I don't think it's suitable but you'll find out yourself very quickly.

sorry for beeing harsh, but you are totally wrong::
1. The 1.4 converter „produces“ a 4/140 lens. Using converters could be a big topic for final quality, but the lens has great quality and this converter is the best I used in 30 years. So this combo should give good results, but that is something I will test in the next time.
2. The depth of field is in short a function of the final magnification and the used aperture. Using 1:1 with both variants and open aperture (to compare) will produce a larger DOF with the converter combo, because it is 4 and not 2.8. But in general using open aperture works only in special situations, because the DOF is extremely small at all…
3. The converter extends the focal length, but the minimum focus distance stay the same. There could be small changes and you have to reduce the length of the converter itself (the minimum distince is counted from the body, not from the front lens). So using 140mm of focal length extends the distance to the object at 1:1, using the minimum focus distance with converter will result in 1,4:1, which is not possible without the converter.
4. Taking pictures of insects or other small animals which fly away quite quickly, the 2x converter would be even better (if the quality is fine): it would give us a 5,6/200 and 200mm is a great focal length to take macro shots of insects. The 5,6 is ok, because you need to stop down for living insects anyway…

The lumix is great option for the l-mount system and I‘m very happy that Panasonic invented something new! But the price is also quite high and I bought the Sigma because of that and because the final quality is even a little bit higher than with the Lumix. I think, If someone had offered me the Lumix for the same price, my decision would be different…

 

[Quentinquirelino]

sorry for beeing harsh, but you are totally wrong::
1. The 1.4 converter „produces“ a 4/140 lens. Using converters could be a big topic for final quality, but the lens has great quality and this converter is the best I used in 30 years. So this combo should give good results, but that is something I will test in the next time.

Some guys I know from a german forum using the Sigma 105/2.8 macro even with the 2x TC all the time and are perfectly fine with the image quality. And as far as I know them, there are everything but uncritical in terms of image quality. So I think the Sigma with 1.4x will be very good as well.

And here we have one of three main flaws, I see with the Panasonic 100mm macro. You don't have the option to get a even higher magnification, up to 2:1 wit 2x TC.
The second would be the short minimum focus distance. Maybe you would getting to close to insects sometimes. But more important therefore would be the working distance and the difference in that regard to the Sigma is smaller because the Panasonic is much smaller. However, again there is no possibility to extend the distance for 1:1 magnification via TC for the Panasonic.
The third is the price.

But all in all, I think the Panasonic would be the better option for me, personally. For casual use the wight advantage, the smaller size, the faster and quieter AF and the capabilities for portrait photography are more important. The Sigma has probably more advantages for extensive macro use. Still, I will wait for a good deal.

 

[Oíche]

The more I think about this lens and after a few YT videos I realise how brilliant this lens is. Those of you in pure stills mode can offer valid short-comings but as a macro capable videography lens it sounds brilliant.

This lens in particular with a S5ii/S5iiX PDAF can lock onto to an insect, point or object and track it and move the perspective to create some excellent video in skilled hands. With the AF motors in this it should do a better job than the Sigma or adapted macros and clearly Panasonic have designed it for this? Yes it is a pity TCs can't be used but maybe they could make a compatible AF extension mount if there is demand for getting more magnication?

 

[Richard Wong]

Yes it is a pity TCs can't be used but maybe they could make a compatible AF extension mount if there is demand for getting more magnication?

The existing 3rd party macro extension tube works well with the Lumix S 100 macro, i did a bit of testing using the Viltrox extension tube and it works quite well. I believe i have talked about it in my review as well (hopefully i didn't cut that part away in the final version i uploaded)

 

[Oíche]

The existing 3rd party macro extension tube works well with the Lumix S 100 macro, i did a bit of testing using the Viltrox extension tube and it works quite well. I believe i have talked about it in my review as well (hopefully i didn't cut that part away in the final version i uploaded)

Thanks Richard, I didn't know about it. I'll look up your YT video, by this stage my OLED has got a burnt in image of you from watching your all your reviews

 

[Babylonia]

A macro lens using floating elements is optimized to give the best quality in relation to the distances within its focus range.
In case of using extension tubes (Viltrox), the position of these floating elements can be placed in such a position,
that it doesn't match the particular "macro close focus" position at all. Depending if the floating elements are in "front" or "rear" position.
And that depends to the macro distances itself "including" the extension ring.

By that it can declining the optical quality by a huge amount.
A well known issue as for using macro lenses in general, in case floating elements are used.

So be aware of that.

E.g. users of a Fuji GFX camera and using the Fuji macro lens, complain about this issue.
And even look for other lenses they can use, for greater magnifications.

 

[RBecker]

This is not directly related to floating elements, but the general objective design. There are designs (also often with special optics in astronomy) that require an exact distance between the last lens and the sensor. This length needs to be very exact in difficult designs within 0,5mm or better! By changing the focus of an objective the last lens inside these objectives will not change and now we want to put extenders from 15 to 30mm in between…
So if the last lens inside an objective will change the distance to the sensor the use of extension rings should be ok. If the last lens is fixed inside the mount and will not move by focus or zoom change, I would test a lot before using extension rings…

 

[CharlesH]

Sorry, the image attachments from the prior post were deleted. Here they are.

Starting to look at the 100mm f/2.8 macro for non-macro shooting with the S5II. Here is a shot at the trail entrance sign for some local hiking trails. It was shot on a tripod, with high resolution on, Mode 1, so I could look at with both 6000x4000 pixel and 12000x8000 pixel images. Then I cropped the shot down to a close up in the same small region for both high res and normal.

This is the shot.

• Panasonic - DC-S5M2
• LUMIX S 100/F2.8 MACRO
• 100.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/125 sec
• Pattern
• Manual exposure
• ISO 100

This is the crop with normal resolution. It is about 666 pixels wide (from the original 6000 pixels.)

• Panasonic - DC-S5M2
• LUMIX S 100/F2.8 MACRO
• 100.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/125 sec
• Pattern
• Manual exposure
• ISO 100

Here is the crop from the Hi Res shot, it is about 1332 pixels wide (from the original 12000 pixels).

• Panasonic - DC-S5M2
• LUMIX S 100/F2.8 MACRO
• 100.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/125 sec
• Pattern
• Manual exposure
• ISO 100

The Hi res shot is much sharper than normal resolution. Of course is shows that Hi res works as expected, but it also shows that the lens is capable of resolving beyond the 24MP S5II. It should be very sharp on the S1R, or on a next generation higher resolution S series camera.

From my perspective this shot shows the 100mm f/2.8 macro is a very sharp lens for non-macro shots, and I'm not going to worry more about it's inherent performance.

 

[CharlesH]

Mistletoe with Panasonic 100mm f/2.8.

• Panasonic - DC-S5M2
• LUMIX S 100/F2.8 MACRO
• 100.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/320 sec
• Pattern
• Manual exposure
• ISO 100

 

[Babylonia]

( As an answer to my more early message ).

This is not directly related to floating elements, but the general objective design. There are designs (also often with special optics in astronomy) that require an exact distance between the last lens and the sensor. This length needs to be very exact in difficult designs within 0,5mm or better! By changing the focus of an objective the last lens inside these objectives will not change and now we want to put extenders from 15 to 30mm in between…
So if the last lens inside an objective will change the distance to the sensor the use of extension rings should be ok. If the last lens is fixed inside the mount and will not move by focus or zoom change, I would test a lot before using extension rings…

The Lumix 100mm macro lens contains two independent and different lens focus groups to be moved "internally".
The outside dimension of the lens, as well the front lens- and backside lens elements are at fixed positions.
(So a fixed distance of the back lens element to the sensor).

It can be seen just a short moment, on a YouTube video at about 5 second from start.
(Immediately starting at that point - as I have set the link to start at 5 sec. - an just stop at that point).

Where you can see that the electronic contacts are part of the rear element lens mounting ring.
Of-course these electronic contacts don't move during focusing. By that also not that rear lens element.
(A comparable construction as from e.g. a Lumix 85mm/F1.8 lens I have, and I guess all other Lumix F1.8 primes).


-

 

[Babylonia]

Capture of the YouTube video. Not a sharp image, but details of the rear can be seen good enough.

 

[dirk]

No matter whether the Lumix 100/2.8 macro is better or worse than the Sigma 105/2.8, it is a perfect fit for the L-Mount system.

The beauty of the L-Mount system is, that you have 3 lead-brands (Leica, Sigma and Panasonic), which try to focus their lens-lineup on different user needs without too much overlap. They solved this better than in the MFT alliance between Olympus and Panasonic.

Panasonic created with the F1.8 FFL series and now with this 100 macro lens the best compromise for video-centric users. Besides their other zoom lens offerings, Panasonic seems to target videographers a lot. Same with the bodies (except S1R).

Sigma on the other hand is more for the photography-oriented user. From extreme high demanding users (Art series) to the more casual users (contemporary series) or sport users (sport series).

Additionally, Sigma created within the contemporary line the i-series, which is targeted at the casual user, who wants to have the best compromise between size, weight, image quality plus the classic feeling with aperture ring on the lens and metal finish. It seems that Sigma likes to experiment a lot more with lens designs and also with bodies (fp/fpL). But they can afford to do that just by the amount of lenses they sell in various mounts for different systems.

And Leica has its own target group obviously.

Therefore I do not see the Lumix 100/2.8 macro as a "competition" for the Sigma 105/2.8 Art. I do not think that Panasonic wanted to create something similar to the Sigma Macro lens. I see it as a logical complementation of the Lumix FF video lineup and the L-Mount lens system as a whole.

This is great for the L-Mount community. No matter what you are planning to do, thanks to these different players with their different focus, you will find the right lens for your own needs. No matter what your needs are.

I still believe that the L-Mount system is by far the best fullframe system available on the market outside of sport photography. And it is still growing with a very fast pace. Sooner or later, even sport photography will be no problem anymore. It is just a matter of time.

 

[Oíche]

No doubt the Panasonic 100mm is the best for macro videography and it will focus faster than Sigma.

As for Sigma 'Sports', those don't necessarily have faster AF over native Panasonic lenses, I'm led to believe are what you want for fastest AF.

 

[CharlesH]

No doubt the Panasonic 100mm is the best for macro videography and it will focus faster than Sigma.

I'm struggling to understand why the 100mm would be best suited for macro videography. As I've mentioned a time or two, fast autofocus is not a virtue in video - it can be a distraction. This is as with a snap focus from one object to another; the snap should not be instantaneous. Smooth autofocus and focus tracking are good. It seems to me the Sigma should have this. Do you have a video application in mind where the Panasonic is better?

 

[Oíche]

I'm struggling to understand why the 100mm would be best suited for macro videography. As I've mentioned a time or two, fast autofocus is not a virtue in video - it can be a distraction. This is as with a snap focus from one object to another; the snap should not be instantaneous. Smooth autofocus and focus tracking are good. It seems to me the Sigma should have this. Do you have a video application in mind where the Panasonic is better?

I meant the size, low weight, silence and tracking AF with a S5ii in mind... The continuous AF performance not snapping from one object to another. Somebody will be doing comparisons soon enough, maybe it makes no difference.

 

[Jonathan-Mac]

No doubt the Panasonic 100mm is the best for macro videography and it will focus faster than Sigma.

As for Sigma 'Sports', those don't necessarily have faster AF over native Panasonic lenses, I'm led to believe are what you want for fastest AF.

I don't think Panasonic lenses are faster at focusing than Sigma ones, I certainly haven't noticed it and I have three Lumixes and five Sigmas. Where Panasonic's lenses are better is in AF-C, where they maintain focus on the subject much better than Sigmas do, giving a higher hit-rate of in-focus images for photography (and better AF for video I imagine).

 

[Oíche]

I don't think Panasonic lenses are faster at focusing than Sigma ones, I certainly haven't noticed it and I have three Lumixes and five Sigmas. Where Panasonic's lenses are better is in AF-C, where they maintain focus on the subject much better than Sigmas do, giving a higher hit-rate of in-focus images for photography (and better AF for video I imagine).

In relation to the other that's what I really meant... speed of the AF motors to maintain the focus. If it is indeed related to the motor speeds or other lens design.

 

[Jonathan-Mac]

In relation to the other that's what I really meant... speed of the AF motors to maintain the focus. If it is indeed related to the motor speeds or other lens design.

I wish I knew why Sigma lenses can't keep up with subjects the way that Panasonic ones can. It could be motors or it could be firmware I suppose.