Cosina AF 100 F3.5 MC macro  reviews

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: onsplekkie   review date: May-10-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 100 2.8 Macro

price paid:

65 euro

positive:

Sharp
Cheap
light & small (plastic)
1:1 macro possible with lens adapter

negative:

Plastic
rattling & Hunting AF
lens adapter on means: only 1:1

comment:

After my Minolta 100 2.8 broke down on me I wanted another Macro lens.
Short on money I decided to spend 65 euro on this baby.
Not as sharp as the Minolta, but pixelpeeping is not a hobby of mine, so no problem!
Happy with this lens!

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: kev777zero   review date: April-30-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SEL55210
SEL50F18
Minolta 100-300 F4.5-5.6 APO D
Minolta AF 135 F2.8

positive:

light weight, good for portraits too

negative:

autofocus sound, only 1:2 macro

comment:

I use this lens on NEX via the LA-EA2 adapter, and is one of the few lenses that fits nicely on that tiny body! So even though build may not be on par with lenses from that era, it definitely matches well to modern bodies.
Image quality is great. Perhaps a hair worse than other macro lenses, but still plenty above normal lenses. having only 1:2 macro is a con, but the accompanied matched macro adapter is usable on any other 49mm fiter ring lenses as well.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: ithinkso   review date: January-05-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta MD 50 f2 (manual focus) with reversing ring. (tested on film, Minolta XD7).
As above on macro bellows.
Minolta AF 50 1.7 (on film, Minolta 7000i and Dynax 7) and borrowed Vivitar AF extension ring.
Tamron SP 90mm macro and dedicated converter (first MF version used with film XD7, lens on loan from a friend.)

Canon FD 50mm f3.5 Macro (MF, with film on Canon T70).

All the above (save the canon) used (without much success) on A100 and film (7000i and Dynax 7) using a Kenko MD/MAF converter.

price paid:

£90.00 (used).

positive:

Sharp, good colour rendition. Light

negative:

"Wobbly". Rattles.
No "red spot" on barrel. (awkward when changing lenses - especially if you haven't got your glasses on!).

comment:

I joined this forum a few weeks ago, having purchased an A77 to replace my lost/stolen A100. This is my first lens review. The scores I've given are subjective and not based on any technical data.

I've had this lens for years (long before moving to digital) and I love it. I think I may have paid over the odds at the time but I don't regret it. Mine is labelled "Vivitar". The bottom line is, If you don't have a dedicated macro lens and you see one of these for sale used buy it. You will not regret it if it's in good condition (check the going rate first of course!). I wasn't aware of the 1:1 adaptor - I'll be keeping an eye out for one of those from now on (see earlier reviews).

Despite what the the other reviews say above, it really isn't that noisy, but it will hunt in low light. (I worked in photo retail 30 years ago, and I remember what the early AF lenses sounded like! The Maxxum/Dynax lenses were a revelation when they first appeared!) The lens has a metal mount, and three concentric barrels, the outer of which is metal - or at least has a foil coating. The lens rattles if you shake it - so don't shake it. I thoroughly recommend you don't drop any lens you own.

It has a flat front element, giving low distortion and good edge to edge sharpness, an 8 element iris which in theory should mean nice out of focus highlights. The front element is well recessed. I haven't noticed any particular problem with flare. I've never put a hood on it.

Best used with a slow focus option if your camera has it, or manual focus for macro. I haven't really used it much for portraits but planning to invest in studio flash and will be testing this lens out for portraiture if/when that becomes available. I suspect I might find it too long in focal length on APS C. Would love to try it out on full frame digital.

I gave a high score for construction to reflect the relatively low original retail price of this lens. The designers clearly put their main effort into the optical quality rather than construction.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Bob Maddison   review date: December-28-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 30mm f2.8 Macro
Minolta 50mm f1.7
Minolta 35-70mm f4 'macro'

price paid:

100GBP (new)

positive:

Cheap
Excellent Macro lens

negative:

nothing

comment:

I have the Vivitar version which I have owned for many years.

Much criticised as the "plastic Fantastic" but the plastic construction is little different to the modern Sony lenses. Although AF is slow and noisy, this is an inherent property of a 100mm macro lens with external focusing.

The supplementary lens to take it to 1:1 has also been criticised. What this does is to shorten the effective FL thus reducing the amount of lens extension needed for 1:1 and it does seem to work with minimal effect on IQ. More importantly, by reducing the FL, it has the effect of minimising the loss of light often associated with a macro lens on full extension. I have estimated that the supplementary lens has a power of about 2.4 Dioptre. I have also found it useful to add an additional +1 to allow it to go a little beyond 1:1 as this makes it easier to attain true 1:1 for critical applications.

The fact that this is macro lens sometimes detract from the fact that it is a useful 100mm lens in its own right. Its relatively simple optics guarantee good colour and contrast, something that is missing from its more expensive cousins.

If this lens were available new today, the maker's would be laughing all the way to the bank! Understandably, it seems to be one of the most sought after lenses!

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 3 

build: 1 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ryansholl   review date: November-30-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Dirt cheap

negative:

Broke after approximately 10 shots

comment:

The build here is fantastically cheap. I'm 7000 miles from home, have intense interest in photographing insects, spiders, reptiles, and flowers while during this rare time in the tropics, and have no macro lens. [sigh]

Ha. I just tried to submit this but was told "you must submit a build rating" - I did! Zero!

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: dizzyfun   review date: November-13-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

100 USD

positive:

Almost free for a 100mm macro
Good IQ

negative:

Build quality. I'm almost scared to use AF with this lens. I have to be sure to change the AF speed to slow on my A700 when using this lens.

comment:

Works great for product shots without the dedicated diopter which I had to pay extra for.
The build quality really is terrible but the IQ makes up for it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 2 

user: berlin steve   review date: October-14-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

50mm macro from Minolta and Sigma

price paid:

110

positive:

it's fantastic

negative:

it's plastic

comment:

The plastic fantastic, Shoddy feel build quality with surprisingly good optics. I have the Soligor version. It is an excellent performer I use it on my a55, and bought it after going SLT, and my Sigma 50mm macro refusing to work on SLT.

This is like a toy lens. Rattles, whirrs and feels flimsy and lightweight, but boy, will it blow you away on the unexpected great IQ.

Owners have no problem in forgiving the negatives when they actually see what this lens pulls out optically. Worth every penny- and some...

Sharp... yes, very
Colours... almost Minolta like
Price... no macro at this price gets close

it also makes a handy portrait lens if you need to pick out the details.

Try to pick it up with matching 1:1 adapter as these may be harder to get after the fact.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 1 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: rsf3127   review date: March-31-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 90mm Macro

price paid:

70 USD (used)

positive:

Sharpness
Price
AF speed

negative:

Build
Incredibly loud AF
Sticky focus ring

comment:

This oddly build lens has been a great surprise.
I have tested it against the Tamron (which I love) and the sharpness is on par when stopped down (the way macros are supposed to be used). It's AF hunts a lot less and is equally precise. Colors are the same.
If I could buy two more of it, I would, but it is not widely available.
Love this little gem and hope it will keep working for a long time in despite of the awful build quality.
A must have have for macro beginners.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: derekw   review date: October-07-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro

price paid:

86 GBP (used)

positive:

Sharpness (Close up)
Colour

negative:

Sharpness beyond 30 m
Build

comment:

Very sharp for close up work, but not so beyond 30 m. All my zooms set at 100mm are sharper at similar apertures beyond about 30 m. Maybe my copy had an AF problem.

That being said, not a bad lens for the price, an inexpensive introduction to Macro photography.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Berean   review date: October-06-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 70-200mm EX DG f/2.8

price paid:

95 GBP

positive:

Cheap
Image quality
Colour

negative:

Build Quality
Autofocus noise (sounds like an aircraft)

comment:

Wonderful colour and image quality, but the most dreadful build and autofocus. Infact, I don't use autofocus due to its noise and hunting, instead preferring manual (especially for macro). Easy to buy one without the 1:1 macro adapter, but luckily my came with it: should be easy to find a suitable adapter if it doesn't. I fully endorse buying this lens as it's fantastic for macro, but also wonderful for a portrait lens without the adapter. Incidentally, although the lens is quoted as f/3.5 on both cameras it was measured as f/3.2

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: gancho   review date: May-25-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-70 EX DC Macro, Sigma 105 EX Macro

price paid:

£60

positive:

sharpness, macro, light

negative:

poor built

comment:

Excellent cheap macro. You cannot get wrong for the price. Only the built quality is a problem.
If I am honest it is not as sharp as Sigma 105 2.8 Macro but it is real pleasure to take pictures with. I found that in most cases 1:2 magnification is enough. I highly recommend this lens because is cheap but with good quality.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: PeteMag   review date: April-07-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

no other macro

price paid:

80

positive:

Full macro with adaptor
sharp

negative:

Nothing for the price

comment:

Great bargain, especially if you either are not yet a hardcore macro enthusiast or on a tight budget or just want the option of a 1:1.

I felt the urge to try macro, without knowing whether I wanted to take it desperately seriously I got the cheapest lens I could find! build quality looks naff and feels worse - but... I don't see many reviews stating that its misaligned or misfocusses? so it can't be that bad a build. Shame that 1:1 is only possible with an adaptor becasue that gives you something to lose and something else to scratch.

All in all I'd recommend if you are on a budget and want to have a go at macro photography.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: jakubh70   review date: April-03-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 90, Sigma 105, Sony/Minolta 100

positive:

Good overall sharpness and geometry, matched achromat to 1:1 macro added

negative:

Cheap build,

comment:

I used to have this lens branded as Soligor. Really good optics, great sharpness, contrast is rather low, helping from overburning lights (you can add contrast in post-processing easily if you like).
This lens is low priced alternative to more expensive 1:1 macros. It may look cheap, autofocus works slow, but is sharp as a knife from edge to edge. Buy it for 100EUR and you'll be lucky. Watch out - there should be dedicated 1:1 macro achromat attached.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Metasynthese   review date: March-20-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

89,50.-€ (used)

positive:

-Great bokeh
-Very good sharpness
-Minimal distance
-Very low distortion
-Price
-Good color

negative:

-Build much worse than actual Sony plastic-lenses
-Very loud and slow AF
-Length when its used at
minimal distance
-Sometimes CA's

comment:

Bought the Vivitar labeled without achromat on Ebay.de
Very good macro for beginners!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: JeffB95   review date: January-26-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

No others used or owned

price paid:

110 GBP

positive:

IQ is great
Bokeh really useable
Also good for portraits

negative:

Plastic build
AF, but everyone knows that
Wobbly when extended

comment:

It really lives up to Plastic Fantastic!

Forget aboout AF for macros anyway, you'll always do better with MF!

Remember to set your camera to MF, to avoid reviewing a coffee grinder - but you have to love this lens for it's sheer brilliant IQ and it's foibles!

I read lots of reviews, and when by chance I found it BNIB in a local camera store - I couldn't resist!

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: minolta_mutley   review date: August-01-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

minolta 50 2.8 macro

price paid:

60€ (2nd)

positive:

cheap, sharp, no minolta colours but OK, did i say i got it nearly for nothing?

negative:

it seems like a cheap lens, makes a lot of noise - but it's ok, it's just the construction.
Slow AF

comment:

For the amount i paid, including the 1:1 macro add-on - i could've bought worse. It's absolutely fantastic plastic.

If you don't need a 100 macro often and you want one for the occasion - get it, you won't regret it. But try it out on your camera before buying (for the AF) - to see if you are feeling ok with the af-speed.

The AF is not fast, rather very slow - it makes lots of noise (i was warned it sounds like falling apart) - but it's ok - that's something i can live with - i'm not after the most spectacular macro fotographs & flowers don't run away...

For more than occasional use - there's better on the market - both the Tamron 90mm and the good ole 100mm 2.8 may be better suited.

It's wrong to compare it with a 50 f2.8 - but it's the only other macro i have. So it's a good thing to have - if you know what the limitations are.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: hpmickey   review date: February-14-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

100-200/4.5

price paid:

~ $150 (used)

positive:

- sharp
- very light
- neutral colors
- affordable

negative:

- extremely loud AF
- very slow AF at macro distances
- prone to collect dust inside

comment:

I have bought the lens used but like new. Although I did not use it extensively, one annoying dust particle has appeared inside after a month of usage. Fortunately it does not seem to affect the image quality.

Now after a year and half or so, I have found myself to use it more as a portrait lens. The AF is surprisingly fast in this case. I have shot several landscapes as well and the sharpness is very good even when focused at infinity.

Compared to 100-200/4.5, it is sharper at 100/4.5 but seems to have a little less contrast. At F5.6, I would say, the contrast is equal, and the sharpness still a bit better.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: JeremyT   review date: December-26-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- 50mm f/1.7 with extension tubes

positive:

- Sharp
- Fast
- I think it's really f/3.2
- 150mm equivalent fast prime in a tiny package

negative:

- Build feels horrible
- AF sounds like a coffee grinder
- only 1:2

comment:

This is the only real macro lens I own. I've used the 50mm f/1.7 with tubes so that's all I can compare it to for actual macro work.

For macro it seems absolutely fine except for the obvious limitation of 1:2. I bought mine from a forum member (Spada) and it didn't come with the adapter. I do have tubes which get it to 1:1 or beyond.

This lens is really some kind of joke. Its IQ is stunningly good coming from a lens of this class. Bokeh is great. It does double duty as a long portrait / short telephoto, but its sharpness wide open may not be flattering and you may be inclined to soften in post processing. The AF actually functions well enough, save for the noise.

And yet for all those good qualities it's built like total crap, and if you use the AF in public people are sure to think your camera is broken due to the gut-wrenching sound it makes.

Despite that this is probably the single best 'bang for the buck' lens purchase I've made, and unless I'm traveling super light I imagine it will always be with me. A 150mm equivalent f/3.2 prime of this quality in such a very tiny package for such a low price is just marvelous. It's really a shame that they don't make these any more.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Engreeks1   review date: December-02-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

110 incl. shipping

positive:

Small, light, extremely sharp when not using the close focus adapter. Cheap! Great bokeh.

negative:

Annoying having to keep putting the close focus adapter on and off. Noisy, inaccurate AF.

comment:

I'm not seriously into Macro so I mostly use this without the adapter on. It's spectacularly sharp (out resolving the a850 pixels) across the entire frame at f8, and pretty good at f3.5.

It is very annoying having to keep putting the 1:1 macro adapter on when ever you want to shoot closer than 1:2 because when it's on you can only focus between 1:1 and 1:2 which means your focus distance is limited to between about 3cm to about 10cm, a pretty narrow range.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: koprivakopriva   review date: November-24-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-70, 70-200

price paid:

$110USD

positive:

-Sharp
-3.5 is fine for Macro, don't sweat the 2.8 that much
-Light
-RIDICULOUSLY FUN
-True-to-life colors

negative:

-AF is garbage. It's actually humorous how bad it is.
-1:1 macro adapter is a bummer to use.

comment:

Have you ever stuck a fork in a garbage disposal? That sound is roughly equivalent to this thing autofocusing.

I really loved this lens. I sold it because I needed some quick cash, but I've missed her from time to time. It's a fun lens to use, it's pleasantly sharp, colors are fantastic.

The build is trash, but to the lens' credit it is quite light. The barrel extends really far when focusing close, so be aware of that. You also need a proprietary adapter to go down to 1:1 full macro, so if you buy one make sure it comes with the adapter.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Brendon   review date: November-12-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 50mm f2.8
Tamron 70-300mm LD Telemacro

price paid:

$110 (ship to India)

positive:

Extremely lightweight
Very sharp lens
1:1 magnification with the matched adapter
No CA when stopped down
Beautiful bokeh

negative:

Questionable build
Needs the adapter to get to 1:1 magnification
No focus limiter means AF hunts even in good light
CA when not shot wide open.

comment:

What can I say ? Its a good macro lens. Its sharp, allows you to get a 1:1 ratio with the adapter and its so light you dont think twice when throwing it into the carry bag. So all in all its a highly recommended lens.

However care must be taken not to drop it. I doubt it will survive a fall on a hard floor !

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: xinyang   review date: March-02-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

150

positive:

negative:

comment:

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Rusty   review date: December-07-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Sigma 70-300 APO
- Minolta 50/1.7

positive:

- Price
- IQ

negative:

- Separate 1:1 adaptor
- Build Quality
- Unuseable AF

comment:

I got a Phoenix copy

IQ is surprisingly good, considering the barrel wobbles a bit when focusing. AF mechanics make manual focusing a bit touchy, and the AF is borderline useless because of noise and inaccuracy.

Can't say much about the build quality. AF apart, I'd say not unlike the Sony 18-70 kitlens. Metal mount makes it feel mounted a bit more solidly.

Separate adapter for true 1:1 macro is a hassle to get on/off all the time, prone to get dirty/lost, but does not affect IQ as much as I thought it would, much better than generic macro diopters.

Plenty sharp when stopped down, an ideal starter macro lens if you don't have the budget. Doubles as a decent portrait lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: jfabrizio   review date: October-25-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 50mm AF f/1.7

price paid:

85 USD

positive:

Image quality
Sharpness
Bokeh pretty good

negative:

Build quality
AF noisy

comment:

Phoenix version... I stumbled across reviews for this lens when drooling over the Minolta 100mm macro. For the price, I'm happy to play around on this one. I'm still learning how to use it, but Ive been having a lot of fun with this lens so far. I rarely use the AF.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: RJay   review date: October-15-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

compared to my Sigma 24-70mm 2.8, I like the macro pics better on the Cosina/Pnoenix a little better. I tend to use my Sigma more for portriats.

price paid:

100

positive:

Not a bad lens. I bought this lens based on the reviews and price. I got some pretty good pics with this lens and don't regret buying it.

negative:

of course it is not auto focus on my Sony A100, but don't mind the control I have using manual.

comment:

Great starter lens for macro photography if you are watching the budget.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Pirate   review date: October-10-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di 1:1 Macro

price paid:

$110.00 (used)

positive:

IQ (in 1:2 mode)
Weight
Price

negative:

DoF with 1:1 Adapter Suspect
Fall-off in IQ with 1:1 adapter towards outer 1/3rd of image
Course sounding AF motor

comment:

UPDATED:

I had the Vivitar version of this lens. The bokeh is suspect (might've been due to camera set to DRO +2 and in RAW+JPEG mode) and I found images in general very grainy and rough on A700 @ ISO 200 (A Mode - again, may have been as a result of my settings - NR=off). With 1:1 adapter lens, I found a fall-off in detail toward the edge of the image and a general lack in DoF, though sharp at the centre.

The 49mm 1:1 adapter lens is the same thread size as the Minolta 50mm AF f/1.7, so I tried that combination with surprisingly nice results.

All in all, a budget macro/potrait/general lens which has great IQ in decent light. A tough plastic body with an AF motor/zoom that sounds like a bag of spanners. I couldn't afford a high-end dedicated macro prime (at the time of this review), but this budget version earns my respect when it delivered. Otherwise, consider a Tamron AF 90mm Di 1:1 Macro.

My A700 reported a minimum F/3.2 as opposed to f/3.5 with shutter speed to match in A Mode (also in EXIF).

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 1 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: mikethelaserman   review date: September-27-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Great lens for occasional use.

negative:

Plastic bits barely support the quality glass inside!

comment:

For a long time I enjoyed my Plastic Fantastic and could see no reason to pay more for a "name" lens, until....

I took approx. 3000 shots of archaeological finds, tripod and cable release, manual focus and lens pointing straight down. I was bracketting the exposure and found that the lens barrel was so loose that the focus shifted because of the vibration from the shutter!

Never had problems with the lens horizontal, but if I had to do another big macro session, I'd get a mechanically superior lens to do it with.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: clipped   review date: September-22-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

L50

positive:

Cheap, lightweight

negative:

can hunt in low contrast situations, rickety build

comment:

I like the plastic fantastic - before my girlfriend picked me one up on e-bay I was fiddling around with a MD50mm reversed onto my 70-210 so so this was a delight. It's a good lens to start learning about close up work but I'm already looking to upgrade to the minolta 100 f2.8. On film its colours seem a little flat and it sometimes picks up a bit of flare which must be from the 1:1 adapter.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: madecov   review date: August-21-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Nothing else I own

price paid:

$80.00 USD (new)

positive:

Light weight, sharp, metal lens mount

negative:

Cheap feeling build,loud AF, Slow wide aperture (wish it was f2.8) No external raised mount orientation indication (bump). Loudest AF of any lens I've ever handled, sounds like a major manufacturing machine without lubricant

comment:

Mine is the VIVITAR variant. I've wanted a macro lens for a while and was starting to search for a used one of these. I happened to stop into a local camera shop that sells SONY and seems to get a fair amount of used Minolta lenses. I happened to see the lens box in the counter and to pleasure and surprise this one was new old stock unopened with papers and the adapter lens. I managed to get two of them new in the box and traded one towards a mint XX beercan so I have under $150.00 in the beercan.

One strange thing is on my A-200 this copy registers f3.2 wide open rather than f3.5. All in all I agree with all the other reviews.

(edit) I've plaid with this lens quite a bit, it gives incredible image quality. The build quality could be better, but for the price you can't go wrong. This is a fun prime lens with decent performance that exceeds the price. AF sound like a old worn out coffee grinder.

(edit II) The more I play with this lens the more fun it is. In normal photographic distances it focuses fairly quickly. In Macro range the lens is slow and AF hunts. Even when I manage to pick up a "real" macro lens I will keep this one for the fun it provides.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: dreamlandd   review date: February-06-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

50 f1,7

price paid:

40usd

positive:

sharp, cheap

negative:

build, af speed, noisy, 1:2

comment:

i like bokeh, sharpness and colours. build quality is terrible.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: dilettante   review date: February-04-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 90mm/f2.8 SP Di

price paid:

L35 (used, like new)

positive:

Excellent image quality for the price.
Light and very 'packable'.

negative:

Looks and feels cheap (because it is!)
Screw-on adapter for 1:1

comment:

I bought this lens (actually the Phoenix variant) for macro work, and that's what I use it for, even though I'm sure it's a capable long portrait lens.

The image quality is amazing for such a low-price lens. I had a brief opportunity to compare it with a Tamron SP 90 Di, and I could see no difference in sharpness or bokeh, even viewing at 100%.

If you're looking for a first macro lens, I'd wholeheartedly recommend this one.

On the downside:
- It's very plastic and a little creaky and wobbly. I suspect the gearing is all plastic, so longevity may be an issue. The focusing action is not particularly smooth. Autofocus is noisy, but I use mine almost always with manual focus.
- For 1:1 macro, you need to screw on the matched adapter (so make sure this is included if you're buying used)

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Blunderstein   review date: January-07-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 50 /2.8 macro

price paid:

SEK 1500 (€157) used

positive:

-Sharp
-Inexpensive, considering the quality
-Very light-weight

negative:

-Build
-Needs an adapter to reach 1:1

comment:

When writing this review I realized that I have not used this lens for quite a while, and not on my A700. It has been replaced by the Minolta 50/2.8 macro, almost entirely because the Minolta does not require an adapter for macro photography.

Note: I rarely shoot near strong light sources, and know very little about flare. I haven't seen any flare in my shots, but this might just be my lack of knowing what to look for.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: JohnnyW   review date: December-18-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro , Minolta 35-70mm f4.0. Minolta 28-85mm f3.5.

price paid:

149 USD (new)

positive:

Exceptional sharpness and color for the price.

negative:

needs the adapter for true 1:1, but the image quality does not suffer because of this.

comment:

I was looking for a nice entry level Macro lens. The photo quality surpasses my minolta 35-70, and 28-85 lenses, and matches my sigma 50mm macro. I notice these aren't for sale (new) anymore. I think it is well worth the price!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Wayne   review date: December-16-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 50mm f2.8 macro
Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4

price paid:

75 USD (used)

positive:

Inexpensive
Exxtremely sharp
High Contrast
Light weight

negative:

AF is very noisy
AF is a bit slow - to be expected with a macro lens
Needs a close up lens for 1:1

comment:

The images you can get are tack sharp, excellent color, and good contrast. It works well as a standard 100mm lens - and is fast to focus without the noise at the close end. As a macro, this lens is one of the sharpest. The downside is the noisy AF, but that can be reduced significantly by adding a metal (read heavy) lens hood, or better yet, using one of the original Minolta close up lenses (the No. 2 is pretty close to 1:1). I cannot say how well the Vivitar adapter is as my lens did not come with it. However, the Minolta close up lenses (mine are 52mm so I had to use a step up adapter), give excellent results (the Minolta lenses are multi-element - the added weight also reduces the AF noise). If you can find one, get it. The 100mm focal length works well for field uss as it provides greater lens to subject distance (not to mention it is easier to light the subject too).

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Tue Romanow   review date: December-08-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

The only macro I've tried...

price paid:

50 Euro (used)

positive:

Cheap. Actually a lot sharper than I'd hoped for.

negative:

AF is slow and very noisy!

comment:

For the price you can't go wrong and the quality is not bad at all. It's best used MF I think. One odd thing: It says f/3.5 on the lens but in the EXIF-file it says f/3.2...

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: MG1968   review date: December-01-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

KM 28-85/3.5-4.5
KM 35-70/4

price paid:

140 USD (new)

positive:

Light weight, excellent price, great colors, fun factor

negative:

Light weight gives it a somewhat flimsy feel, 1:1 macro adapter isn't permanently attached

comment:

I have the Vivitar version of this lens. 1:1 macro at this price can't be beat. Very good colors (see my shots in the open views section). Has potential as a portrait lens, although I've not taken very many shots without the adapter mounted.

AF on a film body is reasonably fast, if a little noisy. 1:1 adapter mounts like a filter, and for the unwary it has great potential for getting lost or scratched.

Lens is smaller than I expected.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: blueshift   review date: October-01-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

70-210 f4
28-75 2.8 D

price paid:

S$ 100

positive:

price
colour
sharpness

negative:

wondering if the lens has macro switch

comment:

good lens, compared to all the lens i have currently, its the best..
Some people may dislike the plasticky build, but for me its a good thing since i dun like to cary heavy lens around..
I just wondering, since this lens sharp, produce good colour, and while not taking macro focus also pretty fast just if it has macro switch, so can be used while not intending to shot macro, it would be a ultra lovely lens..

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: vsldk   review date: June-30-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

69 € (new)

positive:

very sharp
low weight
cheap

negative:

plastic build
noisy

comment:

Good value for money
Make very good pictures
I like this lens

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: kapuxino   review date: June-28-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70 Lens kit
Minolta AF 35-70 1:3.5(22)-4.5
Minolta AF 75-300 D

price paid:

150EUR (new)

positive:

Sharp!!
Nice colors
A great CHEAP macro!
Good bokeh
Great for portraits

negative:

Build quality
Very slow AF
Noisy while focusing
Need the adapter for 1:1

comment:

Great macro with fantastic IQ for the price. It's also a nice lens for closeups portraits without the 1:1 adapter.

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ickle97116084   review date: June-04-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Not tested any other macro lenses.

price paid:

L65

positive:

Light, sharp, very cheap and capable lens.

negative:

1:2 unless used with the 1:1 adapter however this significantly reduces image quality.

comment:

I purchased this lens on a whim and have loved it. Coupled with a decent flashgun it really does do a good job. However it is only a 1:2 lens so your subject is half life size in the viewfinder.

It is very light but not so well built which is evident from the feel of the lens, this doesnt detract from its useability though since it doesnt break the bank or your arms.

All in all a great budget lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Thoppa   review date: June-04-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-50 f2.8, Tamron 70-210 f3.5/4.5

price paid:

85 USD (used)

positive:

Cheap
Good image quality
Very light

negative:

None for the price

comment:

My lens is a Vivitar and it's a bargain. I've no complaints about the image quality at all and I am quite impressed given its price. The AF is a bit slow and noisy, but not that bad. Macro focusing is more easily done manually especially using the adapter. The AF noise is a function of the weight - adding weight to the focusing barrel kills the noise. So I'm happy to have a little noise and less weight.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ChrisH   review date: May-04-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

€ 100 second hand

positive:

Good but cheap

negative:

Good but cheap

comment:

See my review of Voigtlander 100 3.5

A good lens, cheaply build but fun to use and with great pics as a result. Use it often in our garden for flower macros.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: macroman   review date: May-03-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta maxxum 100mm macro, Sigma 105mm macro, Tamron 90mm macro.

price paid:

140 US new

positive:

As sharp as a macro costing 3 times the price! High quality metal lens mount.

negative:

Yes, definitley plasticy lens barrels.

comment:

While the lens barrels are plasticy, this lens should be evaluated with it's price in mind. It only has 5 lens elements in 4 groups, which, with the assistance of the multicoatings, very visibly contributes to the highest contrast lens I have ever seen. I continue to be impressed with this lens. Optically, it excellent - no difference between it and my other high priced lenses - except the Vivitar has higher contrast!! Buy one if you can.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: stickbreitling   review date: March-19-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300/4.5-5.6

price paid:

95GBP

positive:

Very sharp and crisp macro
Light
Great for portraits as DoF is well controlled
Cheap

negative:

Feels like a toy!
Screw on diopter for 1:1 is a hassle to use

comment:

Very sharp, clear pictures. I ended up taking a lot of portrait shots with this lens that came out really well.

This is a good lens for those who want to have a dabble in macro photoghraphy but don't want to blow big money on one of the other established 90/100/105mm lenses

If I end up doing more macro work, I'd probably swap this for the Sony 100mm.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: eldonito   review date: March-08-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D
Minolta 70-210 F4 (beercan)
Sigma EX DG 85 F1.4 HSM

price paid:

100 GBP (new)

positive:

Sharp
Colour & Contrast
Non-rotating front element

negative:

Little dust protection
The focus ring is slow and staggered.
Needs adaptor for 1:1
CA wide open
Slow AF (because it's a macro), esp. when it hunts

comment:

Very *FUN* lens to use. Excellent as a macro, but also great as a portrait lens. Colour & contrast are both excellent; I very rarely adjust jpegs taken with this lens on my computer afterwards. I've taken some great portrait shots at f/3.5; the lens delivers a lot of resolution (such as at a subject's irises) wide-open.

Despite having a mainly plastic body, the mount is made of metal.

There is a couple of shortcomings: I mainly tend to focus by MF'ing to shortest distance and then moving the camera. MF'ing the ring itself is far from ideal, as the AF mechanism provides awkward, uneven resistance. AF is slow (to be expected) and not always on the mark -- also to be expected, given the sub-mm-thin DOF you get with 1:1 macro.

The 1:1 adaptor is fiddly and very easy to get dirty unless you're careful with it. Also it is very easy for dust to get inside the barrel, which can then move on to your sensor, so be careful with this one.


In a nutshell: The optics are supreme. Perfect. Fantastic. Lets you take brilliant close-ups and portraits. But what's around the glass is mostly junk :-) Still, great value and lots of fun.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: 3rd time lucky   review date: February-09-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tokina AT-X AF Pro 17 f3.5
Minolta 35 f2
Minolta 50 f1.7
Minolta 28-80 kit lens

price paid:

110 USD (new)

positive:

Sharp, sharp, sharp.
Great value.
Good length for portraits.

negative:

Noisy AF.
Cheap build, but at least it has a metal mount.
AF hunts a lot.
Screw on adaptor for 1-1 macro work

comment:

Great bargain. Sure I'd rather have a Minolta or Tamron 100 f2.8 but this is so much cheaper, I don't do anywhere near enough macro to justify the extra.
Like others mine reads f3.2 wide open but it still exposes as for f3.5.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Turerkan   review date: January-23-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

€70

positive:

negative:

comment:

see http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10539 for my full review

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: almassengale   review date: December-27-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

125 (new)

positive:

Great pictures for next to nothing.

negative:

Loud AF and cheap feeling body. Have to use an adaptor to get to 1:1.

comment:

A nice value. It takes some great pictures with good sharpness and nice bokeh. Hard to belive it only costs $125. The downside is that the body is super cheap, the AF is slow, and the manual focus isn't well damped. But you really can't beat it for value. Having to use an adaptor to get to 1:1 isn't fun though.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Drluap   review date: November-18-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 24-135, Vivita 70-210, Sigma 70-300, Tamron 28-300

price paid:

134 usd (new)

positive:

Sharp, Low Price, Light

negative:

The build quality is not bad for the price

comment:

Great lens for the price (Henry's) hardly use the supplied 1:1 as you have to get very close to the bugs with it on - portrait lens as well. I don't think the build quality is that bad, although I've only had it just under a year & haven't dropped it yet. Only use it in Manual Focus as others righly point out it makes enough noise to wake the dead in AF.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: HotDuck   review date: August-02-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 100 macro, Tamron 90 SP DI macro.

price paid:

$50 US

positive:

Cheap 'n cheerful. Good sharpness.

negative:

Cheap feel, wobbly barrel, AF noise. 1:1 adapter.

comment:

Bought the Plastic Fantastic to give to a 5D owning friend in open but unused condition for $50US including a Tiffen UV filter. Spent some time playing with the lens and had so much fun that I may buy another one for myself.

The one I bought was sold as the Phoenix and is as plasticky and wobbly as the others. At least it has a metal mount. I think with careful use, the lens should hold up ok. The loud AF is what worries me. I wonder if the interal gearing are plastic as well. That may not bode well for long term reliability but at this price and performance, who cares? For 1/10th the price of the Minolta 100 macro, you get easily 75% of its performance. Good sharpness and color (not as vibrant as the Minolta or Tamron 90). Useable sharpness wide open. Bokeh is decent but not in the league of the top tier macros. AF speed is also a bit slower than others but what really hampers it is the lack of a focus limiter switch. At least focusing is accurate. Having to use the 1:1 adapter for macro work is clumsy at best even if it doesn't seem to detract from the lens' optical performance. Without the adapter, it makes a fine but longish portrait lens but the 3.5 max aperature may not be sufficient for some needs.

If you can look past its cheap construction quality, the lens is one of the best bargains available. Easy to find new and often available used, I highly recommend the lens for those needing a macro without wanting to spend too much. Also makes a fine backup to your primary macro lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Aleq   review date: June-05-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70 kit lens, 100/2.8

price paid:

75 EUR (new)

positive:

- cheap
- reasonable IQ

negative:

- F3.5
- 1:1 with adapter
- Focus hunts a lot when in low light (noisy, slow)

comment:

Recommended for macro beginners and those, who don't want to spend a lot of money on macro lens...

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Bob5D   review date: May-21-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 18-70mm DT kit

positive:

Very sharp.
Light.

negative:

Very ugly.
Needs adaptor for 1:1.
Noisy AF.

comment:

Bought the Cosina version for L50 on e-bay as my introduction to macro photography.
Very impressed with image quality.
Excellent value for money.
Best used on MF as AF sounds like a coffee grinder.
Also makes a good 150mm portrait lens on 5D.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 1 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: kanzlr   review date: May-15-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Sharp, cheap, light, small

negative:

loud and very very slow AF
builtquality

comment:

Very good lens. i dont have the 1:1 lens that belongs to it, but in 1:2 its very very sharp. the bokeh is pleasing (as it should be with a macro lens, just because there is a hell lot of bokeh in most macro shots).

i paid € 85,-- with shipping.
its a very good entry to macrophotography i think. i use it together with a kenko 1,5 SHQ DG TC and it works very well.

the only two things negative (besides of beeing only 1:2) is the bad builtquality and the extremely slow and noisy AF.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 1 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: recnahne   review date: May-11-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 2.8/105

positive:

Sharpness, low price, low weight.

negative:

Horrible build quality!

comment:

This lens is really what I would call a good deal - you'll do hard finding a better 100 mm macro at this price. Image quality is very good, but the Sigma 2.8/105 seems slightly sharper. The lens comes without a lens hood, but I never observed any flaring issues. An adaptor is necessary for 1:1 (included).
The major drawback is build quality. I never saw a lens that felt cheaper! AF is slow (OK for a macro) and very noisy. Manual focussing feels strange, not comparable to any of the more expensive macro lenses.
While this lens represents an acceptable intermediate solution for me, I plan to get myself a Sigma 2.8/105 or a Minolta 2.8/100 - as soon as I can afford it! :-)

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ronin   review date: May-11-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

tamron 90mm

positive:

Cheap, Light

negative:

plasticy, rattles

comment:

For what you pay this lens is good. Its small, light and relatively robust. It looks very cheap though and it rattles but I’ve had it for a very long time and it still works fine.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: jdrandall   review date: January-19-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Nikon 200mm f4 macro
Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro
Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro

positive:

sharpness
value/cost

negative:

only 1:2 without aux lens

comment:

I have owned and used all of the lens listed in the "Compared to" list. IMHO all macro lenses are sharp. I am not a big macro shooter, but wanted a macro lens for my collection. I bought the Vivitar 100mm on ebay for $50 because I didn't want to invest a lot of money in a macro lens (been there..done that). I was very much surpised at how extremely sharp the images were (even wide open). My 7D shows a wide open aperture, for this lens, of f3.2. I use the lens for product shots mostly. I would recommend this lens to anyone wanting close-up macro shots but not if you want 1:1 macro images.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: jaquoval   review date: December-21-05  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

KM AF 35-105

positive:

Very crisp
Excellent colour

negative:

Need to use adapter to get to 1:1.
Very cheap feel.
Autofocus noisy and somewhat slow

comment:

I wasn't expecting much from this lens, but have been very pleasantly surprised. Somewhat awkward to do macros as you have to use (supplied) adapter to get 1:1, but results have been good. Also works great as a portrait lens.

Very cheap, plasticky, rattly feel to it but it's tougher than it looks - survived a 4-foot drop onto a linoleum floor with no ill effects.