Buying a macro (WIP) |
Page 123 5> |
Author | ||||
brettania
Admin Group Dyxum factotum Joined: 17 July 2005 Country: New Zealand Location: Auckland Status: Offline Posts: 20649 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: Buying a macro (WIP) Posted: 07 January 2009 at 09:09 |
|||
The impetus for starting to write this item came from Anssisa, who both suggested it and came up with some notes to get the ball rolling which are included along with my own observations: a big thanks to him. Naturally this leads to some duplications, which we hope readers can forgive. One of the most-often asked questions in this and other forums dealing with A-mount lenses is “Which is the best macro lens?” The answer, in a simplified form, is “All of the ones you can afford, plus the few that you think you can't afford.”
Nearly all contenders from the main stable of A-mount lens makers can be rated as being in a narrow band between very good and excellent. Check our reader reviews for macros and you will see nearly all have an overall rating that is over 4.5 out of 5. Basically the choice comes down to a mix of new and second hand lenses that includes: 50, 100 and 200mm lenses by Minolta and Sony; 50, 70, 105 and 180mm lenses by Sigma; 90 and 180mm lenses by Tamron; and the Cosina 100mm “plastic fantastic. Even the latter would have a reader rating over 4.5/5 were it not for its somewhat light-weight build. One of the first independent surveys of a group of macro lenses I ever read (it's no longer on the web unfortunately), began with the statement that no manufacturer makes a bad macro. Maybe the author had not encountered the Voigtländer AF Macro Dynar 100mm or the Tokina 100, but these are the only major exceptions to his rule that come to mind, going from their reviews. One of my “qualifications” for writing about macro lenses is that I have owned five and still have three. At one time I had in my possesion a Minolta 50 (RS)*, a Tamron 90 (72e)*, a Minolta 100 (Orig), a Sigma 105 DG and a Sigma 180 f5.6 APO*. The asterisks indicate those still in my kit. The Tammie is my second, since I sold my first and then began to regret that decision so much that another was needed to quench lens lust. I have also read and contributed many threads about macro photography at DPR and here in Dyxum.
If you are looking for your first true macro lense and have an APS-C dSLR then focal length becomes your first consideration, with that 1.5x crop factor – the 50mm lenses become 75s, the 90s become 135s, the 100s become 150s and the 105s become 157s. There's actually an advantage from being able to stand back a bit from your subject, particularly if it is an angry bee, or a wasp. But portraiture can still be accomplished successsfully with anything in the 135 to 157 equivalent focal length. So the “safe” recommendation for focal length is a “true” 90-105mm. You should also note that the 150 and 200mm macros are normally significantly more expensive and they are normally f3.5-f4.
Some recommendations Based on my personal use of five macro lenses, I have no hesitation in recommending three “best of class” in the 90 to 105mm category, and I place then in the following order – the Tamron 90mm (from the 72e model on); the Minolta 100mm (from the RS version on), or its Sony equivalent; and the Sigma 105mm (EX and DG EX). The Minolta 100 original model does not have circular blades. Their introduction with the RS model helped to provide the top-quality bokeh that narrowly separates this lens from the Tamron and Sigma lenses – both of which, it needs to be noted, also have good bokeh. To this three, add the Cosina 100mm f3.5. OK, so to get 1:1 it needs to be fitted with an adaptor, but it is actually rare to use any macro lens in the field at less than 1:2. On a “bang for buck” scale it should be seriously considered by anyone looking at a dedicated macro for only occasional use. Other focal lengths At the shorter focal length end, I can heartily recommend the Minolta/Sony models (again from the RS model on) and the results I have seen from the Sigma 50s show that they warrant the high scores given in our user reports. Some say that the Minolta 50 macro (RS) is the sharpest lens in the 100mm and under category ever to come from the mind of Minolta. A relative newcomer in that category is the Sigma 70mm f2.8 EX DG – it is well worth investigating and some may find appeal in a focal length with the obvious dual-use application of portraiture. At the longer end things can get rather expensive, but many swear by their 180mm macros and the 200mm f4 APO macro by Minolta is considered to be one of the “greats”. Provided you can bring plenty of light to bear on your subjects, and provided you can find a secondhand example, the Sigma 180mm f5.6 APO maco is a surprise package in the same way as the Cosina 100. It's about the same length and weight as the Tammy 90 and Sigma 105, crisps right up at f8 and has very good bokeh. TBC EDITED: I have rearranged my order of preference in the 90-105 class in favour of the Tamron because its bang for buck tips the balance in its favour, especially now that used Min 100s are going for ridiculous prices. Edited by brettania - 13 June 2012 at 05:48 |
||||
DavidB
Senior Member Joined: 26 March 2007 Location: Canada Status: Offline Posts: 2469 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 January 2009 at 18:39 | |||
An excellent summary Brettania and Anssisa! I have and love the original 100 Minolta macro, and the only criticism I have of it is the non-circular aperture. Still a most versatile workhorse that I couldn't do without unless I replaced it with a successor!
Edited by DavidB - 08 January 2009 at 18:40 |
||||
davidbannister.zenfolio.com
a900, a77, RX100 III, 16-50 2.8, 20 2.8, 24 2.8, 28-135, 50 1.7, 100 2.8M, 200 2.8G, 1.4 & 2x TC. |
||||
DaveK
Senior Member Knowledge Base Contributor Joined: 08 October 2006 Country: Netherlands Location: Center Status: Offline Posts: 3960 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 January 2009 at 19:14 | |||
!!
|
||||
groovyone
Senior Member Joined: 27 November 2006 Country: United States Location: Denver, CO Status: Offline Posts: 4114 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 January 2009 at 20:21 | |||
Thanks, guys. Now I want to go home and get my Minolta 100mm Macro D out. What are your thoughts on extension tubes?
|
||||
A99|A900|A100IR|A7|Maxxum 7|Maxxum 5|Polaroid
|
||||
brettania
Admin Group Dyxum factotum Joined: 17 July 2005 Country: New Zealand Location: Auckland Status: Offline Posts: 20649 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 January 2009 at 20:32 | |||
For further reading we suggest chthoniid's Getting More from Macro which looks at tubes, reversing, etc.
Edited by brettania - 08 January 2009 at 20:34 |
||||
Minoltista
Senior Member Joined: 18 August 2008 Country: Italy Status: Offline Posts: 1700 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 January 2009 at 20:56 | |||
Great thread!
Should be create an exclusive sub-forum for these kind of argumentation, don't you think so? Thanks Thanks Thanks, Ciao, MP |
||||
nitrosyl
Senior Member Joined: 05 October 2008 Country: United States Location: United States Status: Offline Posts: 1002 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 02:40 | |||
AF speed is a potential concern if a macro lens is to be used for portraiture. I found that the AF speed of Minolta 50mm/2.8 RS Macro is acceptable, but the 100mm/2.8 is way too slow and hunts very often. Of course we can always switch to MF, but it would be nice if Sony can make it faster.
Would SSM help in this case? Canon 100mm/2.8 USM Macro seems to be praised a lot for its focusing speed. |
||||
brettania
Admin Group Dyxum factotum Joined: 17 July 2005 Country: New Zealand Location: Auckland Status: Offline Posts: 20649 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 03:15 | |||
I think the Sony brand would have to be far more of a market player before that company developed an SSM macro. Even then the long travel of a macro is still needed AFAIK to give accurate focus at larger magnifications (say bewteen 1:4 and 1:1), and this is the main reason for the slow focus speed.
Focus speed is not so much of an issue with formal portraits, but is with informal ones. |
||||
glass-hoper
Senior Member Joined: 03 April 2008 Country: United States Location: New York Status: Offline Posts: 894 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 04:46 | |||
nice spiel bretannia & anssisa!- just when I had forgotten about longing for the tammy 180 (that can actually be had for 560USD new with shipping these days....) anyways great info - wished I had that available when I was looking for a macro
|
||||
mehr licht!
|
||||
revdocjim
Moderator Group Joined: 11 September 2006 Country: Japan Location: Mt. Akagi Status: Offline Posts: 8607 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 08:20 | |||
Great info. My only thought is that the Minolta 50/3.5 and Minolta 3X-1X deserve special mention too. The former because it is a much more modern design than the 50/2.8 and is often said to be sharper and have better colors too. The latter just because it is such a special and unusual lens.
|
||||
brettania
Admin Group Dyxum factotum Joined: 17 July 2005 Country: New Zealand Location: Auckland Status: Offline Posts: 20649 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 08:26 | |||
Thanks and your point is taken Jim -- it will be used in the update.
|
||||
spedmunki
Groupie Joined: 09 January 2009 Location: United States Status: Offline Posts: 69 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 20:25 | |||
I'm a total noob to photography and lenses. I was looking at macro's and my friend recommended the Sigma 105 F2.8 EX DG Macro because it was good quality and price. Is that lens compatible with the Sony a300?
|
||||
dd001
Senior Member Joined: 16 August 2006 Country: France Location: Bordeaux Status: Offline Posts: 2140 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 20:53 | |||
Great article Brettania, and great advices!
Thanks for the work |
||||
David - My Gallery
|
||||
brettania
Admin Group Dyxum factotum Joined: 17 July 2005 Country: New Zealand Location: Auckland Status: Offline Posts: 20649 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 14 January 2009 at 20:59 | |||
@ spedmunki
The Sigma 105 is mentioned in my recommendations. Just specify that you want it in A-Mount, or to fit a Sony. |
||||
> Forum Home > Dyxum Community > Knowledge Base | Page 123 5> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.
Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania
Feel free to contact us if needed.