[KC0PET]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I have been keeping my eye out for a 50mm macro lens for Pentax. I have a copy of the manual focus Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro lens in Olympus OM mount that I bought new a long time ago. One of these showed up on ebay in PKA mount recently, but I am trying to decide between spending my dollars on the Sigma or a Pentax-A 50mm macro.

The Sigma is a fine lens, but it is somewhat large. Although it has 1:1 macro capability I find this difficult to use; most of my macro photos are "in the field" and hand holding at 1:1 with a 50mm lens is just not very doable.

So the limitation of a 1:2 with the Pentax lens is not a big deal. The Pentax lens looks to be more compact and the reviews are very good. But it tends to sell for quite a bit more money.

Also there has been a copy of the Pentax-A on ebay for a while that has an obvious blemish on the rear element, but the price is good:

SMC Pentax-A 50mm F2.8 Macro Lens K Mount "Excellent++" From Japan 68835

Any input is appreciated.

Rick

[boriscleto]

I love my manual focus Sigma 50. 1:1 is tough but it is doable...

I bought it the first year I had my K-x, so this is from many moons ago...handheld.



I have other macro lenses now, but the Sigma still gets used.

[jatrax]

I'm not aware of any 'bad' macro lenses . I have the A 50mm f/2.8 and would certainly recommend it, but I doubt you will see much difference in IQ between the two. How it looks, feels, handles is likely more important. As well as price of course. I use only Pentax lenses, not because they are always the best or the only choice, but because I like the consistency of how they handle.

[jeffshaddix]

I've had the Pentax 50/2.8 for a long time, and it works wonderfully wide open for portraits as well as macros. The bokeh is great imo, and I like the hexagon oof highlights when stopped down.

Most of all the color and rendering is just fantastic.

[MJSfoto1956]

I'm not aware of any 'bad' macro lenses

+1 -- pretty much all macro lenses even from the 1970s are excellent.

M

[manntax]

Both lenses are great. I had sigma in the beginning, then got SMC 50mm f2.8 macro from pentax and after battling a bit I decided to sell the sigma and buy SMC-F pentax 100mm for better working distance. I mean IQ wise all these lenses are great, but 1:1 at sigma was just too difficult for me so for me it was a natural choice to got with two options, one small light portable A 50mm f2.8 with 1:2 capability and then 100mm f2.8 for longer reach and 1:1 macro. Also SMC-F version of this macro is super useful for normal photography thanks to focusing limiter... just a few things to consider

[Rupert]

I have been keeping my eye out for a 50mm macro lens for Pentax.

I happen to have an excellent like new A-50 1:2.8 that I haven't used in ages. I almost never use anything but my Bigma and a few other zooms...I'm a zoom shooter.

If you are interested, I'd probably sell it...it is perfect, no scratches, no wear, like new. Send me a PM if you are interested. I am not trying to sell it....I just happened to see this thread and there it sits unused in my lens cabinet not doing anything but getting lonely.

Regards!

[Giklab]

Avoid that Pentax listing. The combination of "fungus spot" and "Excellent++" is a big fat nope.

[Not a Number]

Of course you don't need to crank the magnification out to 1× if you don't need it.

[fwcetus]

+1 -- pretty much all macro lenses even from the 1970s are excellent.

Both lenses are great. I had sigma in the beginning, then got SMC 50mm f2.8 macro from pentax and after battling a bit I decided to sell the sigma and buy SMC-F pentax 100mm for better working distance. I mean IQ wise all these lenses are great, but 1:1 at sigma was just too difficult for me so for me it was a natural choice to got with two options, one small light portable A 50mm f2.8 with 1:2 capability and then 100mm f2.8 for longer reach and 1:1 macro. Also SMC-F version of this macro is super useful for normal photography thanks to focusing limiter... just a few things to consider

I have found that the F and FA 50/2.8 Macro lenses are a bit sharper than the A 50/2.8 Macro lens. However, while I still have my A 50/2.8 for my "compact travel macro lens", I long ago sold the F and then the FA lenses -- the A is so wonderful to use, I'm willing to sacrifice just a wee bit in sharpness in order to ~enjoy~ using the A (and I dislike the "R2D2" mechanical whirring manual focus feel of the F and FA lenses).

Similarly, there are several 90-105-ish macros that I've tried (VS1, Tamron SP, and Pentax A and F), that I've used and then passed on, and ~all~ were bitingly sharp. However, it is the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 Macro ("Bokina") that remains as my "greater working distance even if not quite as compact macro lens".

Both the A 50/2.8 and the Bokina (without the 1:1 Extender) do not reach 1:1, but I hardly ever (hand holding for flower pix) need to get that close anyway. (My Bokina Extender is almost never used).

I did have the A* 200/4 Macro for a while, too, but I found that it actually had ~too much~ working distance for "handholding for flower pix" shooting sometimes, in that, if I wanted to get a shot looking somewhat downward at a flower, say, I would have needed a stepladder to stand on to get the shot, to prevent getting too close. (IMHO, the A* 200/4 Macro is a better "bug lens" than "flower lens".)

So, for me, my favorite macro workhorses (pr "playhorses") are the A 50/2.8 and the AT-X 90/2.5. Both are mechanically and optically absolutely wonderful lenses (for non-macro uses, too), even though the A 50/2.8 may garner "only" a straight-A for sharpness (instead of an A+).

[KC0PET]

Thanks for the info. and input! Of course if money were no object, I would buy one of each and some of the other lenses mentioned (-: Probably will lean to the A 50...

Similar to fwcetus my workhorses back in the day of film shooting were a 50 macro (had both the Sigma and an Olympus) and a 90 macro. I have a beautiful Olympus 90mm F2 macro lens. But since Olympus abandoned the OM mount that is about $800 worth of glass sitting on the shelf. A little while back, my daughter and I shot a couple rolls of b & w film, but I just can't get motivated to do much film work. Anyway I hope to replicate both the 50 and the 90 in pentax mount versions of some sort.