I’m conflicted whether I should buy an Olympus TG-6 or a Canon 60mm f2.8 macro for my R7. I might be going to the Solomons this year, and I can get just one of these. I want to do underwater and terrestrial inatting. I recently learned that the TG-6 isn’t too bad at macro, so I’d like y’all to help me here. Long-term, I doubt I’ll use the tg-6 often, but then, I don’t know.
1 Like
I used Olympus TGs for about 8 years before upgrading to a mirrorless with a 60mm macro lens. I rarely use the TGs now because the mirrorless quality (with the macro and a 12-100mm zoom) is much better.
However, the TG’s macro quality is definitely good enough for iNaturalist. Its real strength is the unique package: very compact, rugged, waterproof, and decent macro – great for fieldwork.
My take:
-
If you plan to use the R7 with other lenses anyway, get the R7 macro lens for better quality long-term (but remember you’d need underwater housing).
-
If your main focus right now is the Solomons trip (underwater) and terrestrial macro for iNat, the TG-6 might be the more practical choice due to its versatility and built-in water resistance.
3 Likes
I used to have an Olympus TG-6. In terms of macro quality, any (not even macro but a regular 70-300 lens) with a Raynox 250 macro lens is better than the Olympus. And with the 70-300, you can do not only macro, but also birds and other animals. Regarding underwater shooting with the Olympus TG-6, I did not like it, the autofocus worked very poorly and I could not achieve acceptable results.
Here is a comparison of Olympus and Raynox 250:
TG-6
70-300 + Raynox
1 Like
If you want to try underwater still photography without spending a lot, the TG 6 (7 is actually the latest model) is the way to go. It is by far the most popular low-cost camera for such purposes. If you went with the Canon macro lens the only way to do underwater photography would be to purchase a housing, which would also require other accessories such as lights that would easily be many times more expensive than the lens and TG 6 combined.
But if you’re regularly going to be going to any depth (say more than 7 m), you would also probably want to consider a housing for the TG 6. This would be to guard against the camera being flooded – which does sometimes happen.
Above water, as others have indicated, the TG 6 is okay for macro, but not great. So I’d also bring another camera as an option if you have it.
1 Like
I’m very thankful for all your replies. I think I will be spending much more time on land than in the water.
How expensive is a flash for the TG-6 for night macro?
Since you already have an R7 100% go for the macro lens the image quality of the tg series doesn’t have a bar on aps-c and full frame cameras.
2 Likes
Any chance you could buy a used TG-6 for the trip to take underwater photos, sell it again afterwards, and buy the macro lens then?
Of course, there’s a risk involved (TG breaking, or no one buying it from you, etc.), but it might be the best compromise between short and long term benefits… ^^
I’m gonna spend much more time taking photos of terrestrial stuff rather than marine stuff though.
TGs I would recomend for anyone getting into macro without the cost burden of getting deeper into things like bodies and lenses.
Since you already have a body, I would focus on gear which allows you to use that in different settings, rather than using different systems.
Of course, for something small and water based, the TG will do the job. I would more ask whats your focus in the long term, and what gear do you see helping the most for that.
I would personally lean on building around the body, keeping in mind that if you upgrade the body you can still likely keep using the lenses assuming you stay in the same ecosystem.
3 Likes
I will mostly be focusing on terrestrial for most of this year and probably next, so I guess the macro lens would be better.
1 Like