Which macro lens would you pick if you only had one choice?

ViS · 11-04-2008, 05:09 AM

I've read a few of the threads here about the 35 / 50 / 100mm macro lenses, and there seems to be pros and cons with each.

I'm mainly interested in bug macros (thinks like praying mantis & caterpillars) and fish / coral etc through aquarium glass. Which focal length would suit my needs best?

Bear in mind I don't have unlimited funds

I'd be looking at something that would cost around US$400 - $500 at the most. I've seen some awesome results from a guy with a Canon 40D with 100mm macro lens, but it may have been as much the skill of the photographer as the choice of lens.

Cheers

soccerjoe5 · 11-04-2008, 05:24 AM

For bugs you'd want the longer macros for more working distance

**germar** · 11-04-2008, 06:17 AM

I dunnow, I've heard you have rather large bugs in your part of the world, perhaps you might not need a macro!

Actually, I reference you to this thread:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/40742-calculat...rsed-lens.html

I had great success using an adapter ring that married the front of a 50mm f2 to the front of a 85mm f2 and got some really high magnification images. Some examples are posted on that thread. You might already have suitable lenses for this in your kit.

best,

germar

Wheatfield · 11-04-2008, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by ViS

I've read a few of the threads here about the 35 / 50 / 100mm macro lenses, and there seems to be pros and cons with each.

I'm mainly interested in bug macros (thinks like praying mantis & caterpillars) and fish / coral etc through aquarium glass. Which focal length would suit my needs best?

Bear in mind I don't have unlimited funds

I'd be looking at something that would cost around US$400 - $500 at the most. I've seen some awesome results from a guy with a Canon 40D with 100mm macro lens, but it may have been as much the skill of the photographer as the choice of lens.

Cheers

If I had to choose only one? The A100mm f/2.8 or similar focal length and aperture.
It would be a manual focus lens though, not AF.

beaumont · 11-04-2008, 07:24 AM

If it turns out that you are interested in a 100mm macro, there was a used one for sale on the site that I think was a pretty good price (although I'm not sure about it's condition, exchange rate etc...)

Igilligan · 11-04-2008, 09:16 AM

For larger bugs like mantis and caterpillars I think the 70mm sigma (highly rated) would be a good choice. but for the aquarium fish thru the glass you may need something a bit shorter...

There are so many good macro lenses... tamron 90, sigma 70, DA 35.... and even old MF classics like the vivitar series 1.

How big are the fish and how close to them would you be trying to focus.

John Kovarik · 11-04-2008, 10:56 AM

The macro lens I'd like to pick is the FA* 200 like the one that just went up on eBay for $3400 BIN..................

Mike Cash · 11-04-2008, 11:05 AM

Only one and limited funds? You'll get the most focal length versatility (though not the greatest ease of use) out of a bellows unit rather than a single lens.

Transit · 11-04-2008, 01:00 PM

The macro setup I'm enjoying using atm is a 135mmf3.5 super takumar on 16 mm extension tube

I have a lovely Tamron SP90 2.5 if I'm feeling really keen

pete

Mike.P® · 11-04-2008, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by John Kovarik

The macro lens I'd like to pick is the FA* 200 like the one that just went up on eBay for $3400 BIN..................

Ahh, you saw it as well did you

Buddha Jones · 11-04-2008, 01:58 PM

For $500, I have the best kit that you can buy!! Check my sig.

Votesh · 11-04-2008, 01:58 PM

Although I've never used one, I'd probably choose a FA* or A* 200mm macro.
On the other hand, I've got a Lester A. Dine 105mm 2.8 macro and it takes beautiful photos and only cost $315.

**rparmar** · 11-04-2008, 02:34 PM

Vivitar Series 1 105mm f/2.5 macro

It rocks. Even when not used for macro.

Buddha Jones · 11-04-2008, 04:40 PM

Yeap, it is pretty damn sweet lens, but I don't shoot macro as much as I thought I would, and it overlaps my DA*50-135mm so at this point its expendable. But if I don't sell it I know that I will put it so some use during the spring.

**Lowell Goudge** · 11-04-2008, 04:50 PM

I have an SMC-M 100F4. It is a nice little lens, except that to go 1:1 needs extension tubes (no big deal). I would truely love to have a 200mm Macro, but not at the cost.

for me, it is all about working distance, the longer the better in that respect.

Keep in mind however, that is for field applications. for inside work, especially on a copy stand, longer is not always better.

11-04-2008, 05:09 AM	#1
ViS Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Brisbane, QLD Posts: 69	Which macro lens would you pick if you only had one choice? I've read a few of the threads here about the 35 / 50 / 100mm macro lenses, and there seems to be pros and cons with each. I'm mainly interested in bug macros (thinks like praying mantis & caterpillars) and fish / coral etc through aquarium glass. Which focal length would suit my needs best? Bear in mind I don't have unlimited funds I'd be looking at something that would cost around US$400 - $500 at the most. I've seen some awesome results from a guy with a Canon 40D with 100mm macro lens, but it may have been as much the skill of the photographer as the choice of lens. Cheers

11-04-2008, 06:17 AM	#3
germar Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: North Palm Beach, Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 728	don't forget reversed lens trick... I dunnow, I've heard you have rather large bugs in your part of the world, perhaps you might not need a macro! Actually, I reference you to this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/40742-calculat...rsed-lens.html I had great success using an adapter ring that married the front of a 50mm f2 to the front of a 85mm f2 and got some really high magnification images. Some examples are posted on that thread. You might already have suitable lenses for this in your kit. best, germar

11-04-2008, 09:16 AM	#6
Igilligan Guest	tough subject range For larger bugs like mantis and caterpillars I think the 70mm sigma (highly rated) would be a good choice. but for the aquarium fish thru the glass you may need something a bit shorter... There are so many good macro lenses... tamron 90, sigma 70, DA 35.... and even old MF classics like the vivitar series 1. How big are the fish and how close to them would you be trying to focus.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I need one more lens.....help me pick!!!	vmax84	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	01-13-2009 11:09 AM
Help me pick a lens...	maxwell1295	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	04-06-2008 07:28 PM
macro choice	nostatic	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	02-18-2008 06:36 PM
Macro Lens choice	squarerigger	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	06-01-2007 02:36 AM

11-04-2008, 05:24 AM	#2
soccerjoe5 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,343	For bugs you'd want the longer macros for more working distance

11-04-2008, 06:31 AM	#4
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by ViS I've read a few of the threads here about the 35 / 50 / 100mm macro lenses, and there seems to be pros and cons with each. I'm mainly interested in bug macros (thinks like praying mantis & caterpillars) and fish / coral etc through aquarium glass. Which focal length would suit my needs best? Bear in mind I don't have unlimited funds I'd be looking at something that would cost around US$400 - $500 at the most. I've seen some awesome results from a guy with a Canon 40D with 100mm macro lens, but it may have been as much the skill of the photographer as the choice of lens. Cheers If I had to choose only one? The A100mm f/2.8 or similar focal length and aperture. It would be a manual focus lens though, not AF.

11-04-2008, 07:24 AM	#5
beaumont Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 505	If it turns out that you are interested in a 100mm macro, there was a used one for sale on the site that I think was a pretty good price (although I'm not sure about it's condition, exchange rate etc...)

11-04-2008, 10:56 AM	#7
John Kovarik Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: West Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 338	The macro lens I'd like to pick is the FA* 200 like the one that just went up on eBay for $3400 BIN..................

11-04-2008, 11:05 AM	#8
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	Only one and limited funds? You'll get the most focal length versatility (though not the greatest ease of use) out of a bellows unit rather than a single lens.

11-04-2008, 01:00 PM	#9
Transit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Whanganui NZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,624	The macro setup I'm enjoying using atm is a 135mmf3.5 super takumar on 16 mm extension tube I have a lovely Tamron SP90 2.5 if I'm feeling really keen pete

11-04-2008, 01:44 PM	#10
Mike.P® Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Milton, Hampshire, UK Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,154	Originally posted by John Kovarik The macro lens I'd like to pick is the FA* 200 like the one that just went up on eBay for $3400 BIN.................. Ahh, you saw it as well did you

11-04-2008, 01:58 PM	#11
Buddha Jones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,587	For $500, I have the best kit that you can buy!! Check my sig.

11-04-2008, 01:58 PM	#12
Votesh Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 817	Although I've never used one, I'd probably choose a FA* or A* 200mm macro. On the other hand, I've got a Lester A. Dine 105mm 2.8 macro and it takes beautiful photos and only cost $315.

11-04-2008, 02:34 PM	#13
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,823	Vivitar Series 1 105mm f/2.5 macro It rocks. Even when not used for macro.

11-04-2008, 04:40 PM	#14
Buddha Jones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,587	Yeap, it is pretty damn sweet lens, but I don't shoot macro as much as I thought I would, and it overlaps my DA*50-135mm so at this point its expendable. But if I don't sell it I know that I will put it so some use during the spring.

11-04-2008, 04:50 PM	#15
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	I have an SMC-M 100F4. It is a nice little lens, except that to go 1:1 needs extension tubes (no big deal). I would truely love to have a 200mm Macro, but not at the cost. for me, it is all about working distance, the longer the better in that respect. Keep in mind however, that is for field applications. for inside work, especially on a copy stand, longer is not always better.