Jump to content

Venus Optics Laowa 65mm f/2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO

Nikkon

By Nikkon
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nikkon Rookie

Nikkon

Posted
Posted

Hi community,

I have a question about this lens in particular. I plan to buy this manual lens for my xt5 or xpro3 for some macro and mostly portrets - street photography.

did anyone had the chance to test this lens? should I buy it?

thanks 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Heccie Thump Contributor

Heccie Thump

Posted
Posted

I bought the Laowa 65mm macro lens last year after discovering I enjoy taking macro photographs and I found the image quality is top notch.  It is quite a small lens with a relatively narrow body and blue markings on it so it sort of clashes with the retro style silver body, but hey ... function over form.  The only downside from my point of view is that the lens is fully manual and as such you can't make use of the automatic focus bracketing function in the body of the camera - you have to do any image stacking manually.  Which isn't all that much of a problem - the auto bracketing function might take 100 images where you can achieve the same effect with 15-20 images taken manually if you use the focus peaking to overlap them.

However, only two weeks ago I bought the Fuji 80mm macro lens and have been getting some wonderful images with it and I can clearly see the difference in the images I get.  You gets what you pays for, I suppose.  The downside with this lens over the Laowa, apart from the cost, is that the Fuji 80mm is only x1 magnification compared to the x2 of the Laowa.  I plan on keeping the Laowa for the short term as it will still come in handy for studio/product shots where that closer detail is needed, but I suspect that I might be selling it in the not-too distant future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Blue Zurich Enthusiast

Blue Zurich

Posted
Posted (edited)

I am marveled by this little gem. I used the EF 100 1:1 macro extensively for over 12 years and now that I am on Fuji and using a 2:1 it is blowing my mind. fwiw, I just cannot fathom using anything less than 100mm FF equiv for macro, wider is just a strange perspective imho. The Laowa is available dirt cheap used in Like New condition at MPB btw. Tack sharp, great smooth focus ring, nice clicking aperture ring as well. Can double as a wonderful MF portrait head shot lens. It's my only non Fuji lens and since it's macro I do not mind MF, it's all I use for it in fact. Do it.

 

The last 7 images on my flickr are with that lens, check them out...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/197762654@N07/?fbclid=IwAR23rQGxxiUP26smxLdr1q4KSRQik_MTmWvgI6S_vj9i5eCjWfzB0lldWGg

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Edited by Blue Zurich
Link to post
Share on other sites
BobJ Community Regular

BobJ

Posted
Posted

I couldn't agree more. I bought the Laowa to copy slides and negatives and take the occasional macro. It's pin sharp. Totally manual though. I used to own the Fuji 60mm. Beware though that it doesn't go to 1:1 and it loses its sharpness if you try an extension tube. Very sharp within its range though but focus is a bit slow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C film simulation LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 film simulation LUTS because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then you are not getting the correct results.
    • PoorAlchemist
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By PoorAlchemist · Posted

      I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • George_P
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By George_P · Posted

      I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
×
×
  • Create New...