Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-21-2011, 02:36 PM   #1
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 32
DA* 50-135mm vs Macro 100mm 2.8

I never had a macro lens... so i was wondering what will be the difference between a 50-135 (at 100mm) and a macro 100mm wr...

Thanks

Ben

03-21-2011, 02:50 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
I used to have a DFA 100mm Marco WR, before I sold it for personal reasons. I just purchased a 50-135mm about a month ago, so I do have some experience with both lenses, while not at the same time.

Besides the obvious fact that the 50-135mm can't do macro at 100mm, here's my list of difference.

DFA 100mm f2.8 Macro WR
*Sharper, without a doubt
*AF struggles depending on the subject and if it is handheld or not.
*Less vibrant colors
*Less CA
*Less distortion (but really unnoticeable)
*Similar contrast
*Better bokeh from my experience (rounded blades)

DA 50-135mm f2.8
*Better color reditions in my opinion
*Similar contrast
*Warmer colors
*More vibrant

The DA 50-135mm is a really nice portrait lens, the 100mm is good too, but the coloring i thought was not was as vibrant as the zoom. But it compensate for being sharper, better CA, better distortion, and better bokeh wide open.

Hope this helps.
03-21-2011, 03:16 PM   #3
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,654
I'm personally not a fan of the 50-135mm. It's heavier than the macro, focuses slower (but more quietly), and not as sharp (duh, primes almost always win). It does give you a zoom range, but again, IMO, it's not that handy (I prefer 70-200mm, as it's more of a telephoto).

Again, this is just my opinion, but I wouldn't use a macro lens for anything other than macro. So if you're looking to do macro, get it. If not, there are plenty of better short-tele prime choices out there, such as the FA 77mm.

With that said, the IQ of the 50-135mm is very good compared to other non-star zooms. See it compared to the 18-135mm.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

03-21-2011, 03:40 PM   #4
axl
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
I used to have DA*50-135 and FA100/2.8 macro.
Out of those two I'd pick the FA any time.
The colours are better, AF is faster and it's definitelly sharper.
Shame the FA100 is so bulky and heavy. But it's one fantastic lens IMO.

PS: I'm begining to think I'm a real sucker for FA series lenses

03-21-2011, 03:50 PM   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Photos: Albums
Posts: 493
I like both my 50-135 and DFA 100 Macro (non WR version). Some good points made here though I am not sure I feel all the points made apply to the DFA (e.g. I certainly must say the focusing is not always quick with my non-WR DFA, unlike the pretty snappy 50-135).

One point to bear in mind that has not been mentioned is that the minimum focusing distance of the 50-135 is approx 1m which presents some limitations. The DFA 100 WR Macro will focus down to 30cm.

I have to say I do not notice a huge difference in sharpness between the two, the 50-135 is a hugely capable lens (at some expense in weight). As pointed out previously, there is really something great about the colours rendered by this lens and it really does earn it's place in my bag.
03-21-2011, 04:24 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
Overall though, i prefer the 50-135mm for its versatility and quality. The 100mm is a pretty difficult range to use in everyday situation, but when the composition is just right, it lends itself to incredible pictures. I just haven't gotten the opportunity to unitize the lens enough to warrant a place in my line-up.
03-22-2011, 09:51 AM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,935
For close shots, lighter weight, and shots at 100mm the macro would be the best choice. At other focal lengths from 50-135, the zoom is the better choice :-).

As most macro shots are manually focused, the AF performance may be a non-issue. Same for "color" which is quite variable and adjustable in PP software.
03-22-2011, 11:10 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
Whilst the 50-135 is not macro, at a pinch one can always use a macro filter:


Saves carrying a separate macro lens for non critical macro shots.

Another picture taken using the macro attachment - taken roughly 30cm from the subject:


03-22-2011, 09:12 PM   #9
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 32
Original Poster
What does the "1:1 image magnification ratio" means???

Does it means that the lense magnify more than a normal lenses???
03-22-2011, 09:16 PM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,935
QuoteOriginally posted by ben_leg Quote
What does the "1:1 image magnification ratio" means???

Does it means that the lense magnify more than a normal lenses???
It means the image is life-size on the sensor. "Normal" lenses can not get close enough.
03-22-2011, 09:20 PM   #11
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
It means the image is life-size on the sensor. "Normal" lenses can not get close enough.
don't forget to mention higher resolution as well.
03-23-2011, 03:03 PM   #12
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 32
Original Poster
So if i understand correctly the magnification come only from the fact that the 100m could take a picture from a distance 3 time shorter than the 50-135....
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
100mm, k-mount, macro, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: SMC Pentax-F Lenses. 28mm/2.8, 100mm/2.8 Macro, 135mm/2.8 arpaagent Sold Items 15 08-15-2010 11:06 AM
For Sale - Sold: SMC-M 135mm 1:3.5 and SMC-M 100mm Macro 1:4.0 SOldBear Sold Items 12 08-07-2009 03:43 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K 100mm f/4.0 1:2 Macro, Schneider 135mm f/3.5 (m42), Pentax M 50 f/1.7 hinman Sold Items 13 10-13-2008 11:14 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:21 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top