Cosina  100 F3.5 macro  reviews

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Pirate   review date: October-10-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

SAL 18-70mm
Minolta 50mm AF f/1.7
Sigma 24-70mm EX DG

price paid:

$110.00 (used)

positive:

IQ (in 1:2 mode)
Weight

negative:

Noisy AF
Build Quality
Sloppy Zoom
Image Noise Excessive
Crazy Bokeh
DoF with 1:1 Adapter Suspect
Fall-off in IQ with 1:1 adapter towards edges

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 adpater 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 90mm Di 1:1 Macro (now on order).

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

£50

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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.

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 90mm/f2.8 SP Di

price paid:

£35 (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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Not tested any other macro lenses.

price paid:

£65

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70 F3.5-5.6 DT
Min 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D
Min 70-210 F4

price paid:

£100 (new)

positive:

Sharp
Colour & Contrast
Non-rotating front element

negative:

Cheap constrcution -> v. little dust protection.
The adapter's a bit fiddly
CA wide open
Slow AF (because it's a macro), esp. when it hunts
Average bokeh if not too unfocused (portraits)

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.

In portraits and other non-macro applications, bokeh is not that great, even wide-open. However, when you take macro shots where DOF is near / sub-millimeter, you don't see that.

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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 £50 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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

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.