[Mike.P®]

I would love to have something like the Canon MPE-65 macro lens with PK mount. It goes from 1:1 to 5:1, it seems with extraordinary IQ.

The MP-E65mm is the only reason I bought into Canon, really is a fantastic lens but it's a steep learning curve to get it right.


Fly Guy : Explored thanks by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr


Wasp by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr

I have the 180mm Sigma for my Pentax but would be interested to see what the Irix can do.

[Mistral75]

DFA is also WR, so yeah not sure about the attraction of this over a DFA 100.

A 27% longer working distance @1:1 (16.5cm vs. 13cm)?

[cyberjunkie]

A 27% longer working distance @1:1 (16.5cm vs. 13cm)?

This is the theory.
I mean, this is what happens following the law of optics, which apply to "simple" lenses.
When there are floating elements involved, and some optical trickery, the usual rules don't apply anymore.
See what Laowa has done with their 25mm Macro. It gives 4cm of distance from the front of the objective at 5x!!
Laowa Venus started as a joint effort of some chinese optical engineers (with previous experience working for some big brands), who shared the same interest for macrophotography.
Their recent macro lenses kick some of those big brands where the sun does not shine!

Regarding the link on savazzi.net, I had an email exchange with Mr. Savazzi.
I provided him with a few pics of a knock-off. It seems that there are four different copycats.
One interesting thing I found: the copy on AliExpress seems to be ALMOST identical to the original Laowa Venus lens, while the recent version portrayed on Laowa's site has a different mount, that differs from both the copy and their original lens.
Mr. Savazzi told me that apart from the mechanical differences, the optical performance is surprisingly similar.
I guess that with modern optical design programs it's rather simple to tweak a design, avoid lawsuits, and still retain a similar performance.

EDIT:
Laowa answered my email.
There is no scheduled release of any lens in PKA mount... but they are working on it!!

We already have Irix lenses. If Laowa Venus and Zhong Yi Mitakon finally decide to release PKA versions of their lenses, one of the main objections that Canikon users repeat ad nauseam would become baseless. The choice of easy to use lenses for the Pentax full frame would be much wider, and it would cover "niche" lenses. Pentax could continue to concentrate on the core market: AF zooms and some high-level AF primes. Their cameras would be more desirable because of a larger choice of specialty lenses that can be used with full aperture metering, any exposure mode, P-TTL flash, etc.

[beholder3]

A 27% longer working distance @1:1 (16.5cm vs. 13cm)?

For a mere 3,5cm more working distance loose all AF for normal portrait work and lug around a full pound more weight and use 77mm filters instead of 49mm?

That sounds like a very debatable trade-off.

[Mistral75]

Surprisingly it is internal focus. Might be the first 1:1 macro lens with IF. Or are there already such lenses around?

Cheers - Klaus

There are many such lenses around.

Canon

• EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
• EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
• EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM (2005)
• EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM (2009)
• EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM (2017)
• TS-E 50mm f/2.8L Macro (2017)
• TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro (2017)
• TS-E 135mm f/4L Macro (2017)
• RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro (2018)

Fujifilm

• Fujinon GF 120mm f/4 R LM OIS WR Macro (2017)
• Fujinon XF 80mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR Macro (2017)

Hasselblad

• XCD 120mm f/3.5 Macro (2017)

Leica

• APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60mm f/2.8 ASPH (2016)

Nikon

• AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR (2006)
• PC-E Nikkor 24mm f/3.5D ED (2008)
• AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED (2008)
• PC-E Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/2.8D (2008)
• AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR (2009)

Olympus

• M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm f/2.8 Macro (2012)
• M.Zuiko Digital ED 30mm f/3.5 Macro (2016)

Panasonic

• Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm f/2.8 ASPH OIS (2009)
• Lumix G Macro 30mm f/2.8 ASPH Mega OIS (2015)

Samsung

• NX 60mm f/2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA (2011)

Samyang

• 100mm f/2.8 Macro (2015)

Sigma

• 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM (2010)
• 180mm f/2.8 APO Macro EX DG OS HSM (2012)

Sony

• E 30mm f/3.5 Macro (2011)
• FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS (2015)

Tamron

• SP AF 60mm f/2 Di II LD IF Macro (2009)
• SP 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004, 2012)
• SP 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F017, 2016)

Venus Optics

• Laowa 15mm f/4 1:1 Macro (2015)
• Laowa 60mm F2.8 2x Ultra Macro (2015)
• Laowa 100mm f/2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO (2018)
• Laowa 24mm f/14 2x Macro Probe (2018)

[Mistral75]

This is the theory.
I mean, this is what happens following the law of optics, which apply to "simple" lenses.
When there are floating elements involved, and some optical trickery, the usual rules don't apply anymore.
(...)

A working distance of 165mm for the Irix Dragonfly 150mm f/2.8 Macro 1:1 versus 129mm for the smc Pentax-D FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR is not 'the theory', it's according to specifications and/or measurements.

[Mistral75]

For a mere 3,5cm more working distance loose all AF for normal portrait work and lug around a full pound more weight and use 77mm filters instead of 49mm?

That sounds like a very debatable trade-off.

Not for those who are into subjects (e.g. timid bugs) that require this extra bit of working distance. Obviously you are not: you are looking for a versatile lens (normal portrait work + macro work) easy to carry around. The Dragonfly doesn't meet your specifications, however it can meet those of other people.

[beholder3]

Not for those who are into subjects (e.g. timid bugs) that require this extra bit of working distance.

I'd like to see any evidence that "timid bugs" prefer 16cm away big 77mm front lenses to 13cm away 49mm front lenses. Sounds more like a matter of belief like feng-shui.
But hey, its an option.

---------- Post added 24th Sep 2018 at 16:52 ----------

If Laowa Venus and Zhong Yi Mitakon finally decide to release PKA versions of their lenses,

You are aware that Laowa has at least one PKA lens?

[cyberjunkie]

For a mere 3,5cm more working distance loose all AF for normal portrait work and lug around a full pound more weight and use 77mm filters instead of 49mm?

That sounds like a very debatable trade-off.

Assuming the figures are accurate, in practice the difference is not so small, because in practice 1:1 is not reached most of the times.
Anybody who has used in the field a 50mm and a 100mm has found that it makes a whole lot of difference.
From 100mm to 180mm it is almost the same. A 150mm offers a little less advantage, but still welcomed.
Few pictures are actually shot freehand at 1:1 in the field.
If a bulky tripod comes into play, then a bigger lens doesn't make a whole lot of difference, isn't it?
At high magnification the DOF is very thin, and to get some more the only option is stopping down.
A pity that traditional lenses suffer a lot from diffraction.
Professionals always use stacking if possible.
It is complicated in studio, in the field it's a nightmare.
This is why modern macro lenses stretch the optical limits a lot using floating elements.
The Laowa lens I mentioned does nor suffer too badly from diffraction even at the "real" aperture of f/128.
Let's not forget that at 1:1 f/11 becomes f/32.
To get the best performance with very high reproduction rate a serious macro photographer shoots wide open a lot of pictures and then stacks them.
Some old school micro lenses don't even have a diaphragm.
150mm and 180mm macro lenses are not made for this use. They are made for macro hunting, shooting subjects that rarely require more than 1:2.
Modern floating designs have and edge also in this case, each cm of distance you gain allows for better chances to picture the subject before it flies/runs away.
Compared to older designs, floating elements allow for more freedom. If it's important or not is left to our own judgement. What we shoot and how.
What I know for sure is that short focal optics (for higher magnifications) use the same tricks to gain a couple of cm, which are badly needed to avoid shading the subject with the front of the lens.
At home I still have a micrometric rail (Manfrotto), a microscope stage, a microscope ring light, micro objectives, etc, etc... well, even with some good equipment and lots of ingenuity it's NOT easy.
These chinese are doing a great job making it simpler, and more affordable. Both in the field and in studio.

---------- Post added 24-09-18 at 05:09 PM ----------

You are aware that Laowa has at least one PKA lens?

Just got their reply.
They say they don't.
It seems that sooner or later they will

---------- Post added 24-09-18 at 05:18 PM ----------

A working distance of 165mm for the Irix Dragonfly 150mm f/2.8 Macro 1:1 versus 129mm for the smc Pentax-D FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR is not 'the theory', it's according to specifications and/or measurements.

Sorry, I thought it was a figure derived from the MFD of Pentax, getting the Irix likely spec in a "theoretical" way.
I thought that the specs of the Irix were still not available.
My bad, I presumed a bit too much. I had a look a couple of days ago and no such data was available.

EDIT:
I wrote this post with the impressive Laowa macro achievements in mind.
It seems that Irix is a little behind under this point of view.
If the quotes are from the front of the lens, I would expect a little better from a modern macro lens with floating elements.
Maybe this was not the goal, maybe it shines in other ways... but under this point of view it could have done better, considering that the D FA 100mm uses the same old fashioned helicoid used by all other past Pentax macros.
A few more cm are useful, but it's hardly a miracle, considering the difference of focal. I would have expected more.
I wrote my post considering the 3.5cm difference only "theoretical", and I took for granted that in reality it should match Laowa's impressive achievements, especially considering how well Irix has done with their wide angles... I just hope the new lens will show other optical qualities.
I guess it's very likely to happen.
Whatever it is, I'm glad we have one more tele prime with 1:1 reproduction ratio that can work with P-TTL flashes.
Laowa's macro lenses, as impressive as they are, can't be used in P-TTL mode. It's a huge shortcoming for macro hunting.

[beholder3]

Just got their reply.
They say they don't.
It seems that sooner or later they will

Believe me, the Laowa 12mm F2.8 ultrawide is PKA.

[Klaus]

There are many such lenses around.

I know some of the lenses that you mention, and they are definitely not internal focus. They extend when focussing close.

Generally, internal focus lenses have an IF in their name. That is not the case with any of the lenses on your list, except:
SP AF 60mm f/2 Di II LD IF Macro (2009)
AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR (2006)

:-)

Cheers - Klaus

[Mistral75]

I know some of the lenses that you mention, and they are definitely not internal focus. They extend when focussing close.

(...)

Which ones?

[BruceBanner]

From their announcement:

"The Irix 150mm f / 2.8 Macro 1:1 lens has been sealed in key points (the front element, the Focus Lock ring, the focusing ring and bayonet), making it suitable for use in the harshest of weather conditions such as fog, rain or snow."

Plus, it has neutrino coatings, which is just high tech sounding.

Oh that's good news! Thanks

[cyberjunkie]

Believe me, the Laowa 12mm F2.8 ultrawide is PKA.

It seems they don't even know what they sell!
It's kind of comical...

Here is the quote from their email:
"Thank you so much for the email.
So far we have no schedule to launch the one with electric contacts, but we are working on it."

THE ONE... but I didn't ask about any specific lens, just if they were going to release PKA lenses...
Here is the quote from my original email:
"1) any of the present/future lenses has/will have PKA mount with electric contacts?"

Lots of thanks for the info, I didn't know there was a Laowa lens with PKA mount.
Good to know. I guess other members appreciate it too.

[Doundounba]

BTW, the greater working distance of longer macros isn't always an advantage. Given the same flash setup, you will get softer light and will be able to work at lower flash power with a shorter working distance, since the diffusion surface will be closer to the subject. I've used a Tamron Adaptall 90mm F/2.5 with the excellent adaptall 2X tele-converter as a poor man's 180mm 1:1, and though I got excellent results when adding a Raynox DCR-250 - this combo produced what is still one of my all-time favorite shots - I found the working distance a little too long for my flash setup when working without the Raynox. So you need to balance not scaring off the critter with getting good and abundant light. Just something to be aware of...

Few pictures are actually shot freehand at 1:1 in the field.

Well, I beg to differ...