[boriscleto]

I'll go ahead and point out that several different extremely well reviewed macro lenses are available used for $100-$250 ballpark.

I'll make a little list, probably missing some:
Pentax 50
Pentax 100
Sigma 50
Sigma 105
Vivitar/Tokina 90
Tamron 90
stretch a little further/get a good deal and there's Sigma 70.
Those are some really great 1:1 macro lenses for not a whole lot of money. It's not particularly cost prohibitive to get a top notch, conveniently designed macro lens these days.

Of course, that doesn't mean there's no reason to try other methods for macro. Extension tubes can do a whole lot of good work, too.
Just that budget isn't probably the huge dividing factor it once was.

Too many AF lenses...

The Adaptall 90 1:1 is the most expensive I would consider. Tamron SP MF 90mm F2.8 MACRO 1:1 (72B) Lens Reviews - Tamron Adaptall Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

The Adaptall 90 1:2 can be found for less than $100. Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 90mm f/2.5 (52B/52BB) Lens Reviews - Tamron Adaptall Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

The manual focus Sigma 50 1:1 is less than $100. Sigma 50mm F2.8 Macro Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

A 90mm 1:1 you can get for less than $100 Panagor 90mm f2.8 Macro PMC Lens Reviews - Miscellaneous Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

A 100mm 1:2 with a 1:1 diopter. The manual focus is less than $100, the AF was sold by Pentax as the FA 100/3.5. Cosina ( Vivitar etc) 100mm F3.5 MC Makro Lens Reviews - Cosina Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

[Thagomizer]

I've heard the basic DA 18-55 kit lens does well reversed, but haven't tried it myself.

I have, and it does! You can see some of my results here: 18-55 reversed macro | Flickr

The DA 35mm f2.4 Plastic Fantastic does very well reversed, too: Pentax DA 35mm f2.4 reversed macro | Flickr

[/COLOR]

It's always best to use a lens that can be stopped down via an aperture ring. As noted above, you try to compose and focus on a wider aperture, and then you shoot at the smaller aperture that gives you the best results.

Having said that I've used the DA 35 2.4 inverted, to some limited success. It was really hard to compose at f22 but every once in a while I'd get a very good shot...

If you're using a lens without an aperture ring, opening up the diaphragm must be done by other means, as closed down completely you're well into diffraction-softening territory. I used to just jam the aperture tab with something to keep it from closing down, but now I use one of these: https://fotodioxpro.com/collections/nikon-f-adapters/products/pkaf-nkf-p




Once the optical elements are removed (a very simple process), you've got a handy way of opening and closing the lens diaphragm.

[dmize]

Never got the chance. Still have 3 M42 35mm bodies and a dozen lens. My fear is trying to find an old bellows on ebay and having to repair light leaks.

[JohnI]

I bought one of these manual focus macro lenses a number of years ago, after reading a glowing review in Popular Photography. I think I paid <$50. I use it primarily for flowers, where the 1:2 maximum magnification really isn't a limitation. Without autofocus, it's not the best for insects, though I have gotten some good shots of spiders and praying mantises with it. For flowers, autofocus is almost superfluous. The attached photo of a rose is a 1200x900 pixel crop from a 6MP K100D image; the macro magnification was probably about 1:5.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[wadge22]

Too many AF lenses

Without autofocus, it's not the best for insects

I personally usually leave my macro lens focused at it's minimum-focus/maximum-magnification setting, and just move the camera/lens combo forward and back to get the flower or bug focused. That, for me at least, is why I wouldn't care if my macro lens were AF or MF.
The AF lenses are probably more versatile when using it for non-macro, though. I think a nice bonus of the ~100mm macros is that you also get a high quality short telephoto prime for portraits, telephoto landscapes, etc.
I really see it as a great 'first lens you're really proud of' for a learning photographer, although I'm probably biased because that's how my own gear timeline played out.

[lotech]

I think I had that 28/3.5 stopped down to f/8 mostly to get some more depth.

I forgot it was a 50mm or even a zoom I used to take that shot, I was very new to photography at that time, and I must have stopped down fully so diffraction limit kicked in to ruined the shot.

---------- Post added 11-24-21 at 09:11 AM ----------

... If you're using a lens without an aperture ring, opening up the diaphragm must be done by other means, as closed down completely you're well into diffraction-softening territory. I used to just jam the aperture tab with something to keep it from closing down, but now I use one of these: https://fotodioxpro.com/collections/nikon-f-adapters/products/pkaf-nkf-p
...

I've not used this kind of adapter, but wonder if it will cause vignetting, as the aperture is not placed exactly at the focal point of the lens.

[filmmaster]

Anyone have a how to use the macro lens guide somewhere? not the history, but a how to use guide.

I have macro lenses, and they dont work the way they are supposed too...

have a sears 202 60-300, but no clue what the 5 macro lines mean on it.

have a vivitar 35-75 macro lens for my FD
with both of them i can barely get the end label of a box of 35mm film to get inside the grid line on my camera before it distorts.

[Thagomizer]

I forgot it was a 50mm or even a zoom I used to take that shot, I was very new to photography at that time, and I must have stopped down fully so diffraction limit kicked in to ruined the shot.

---------- Post added 11-24-21 at 09:11 AM ----------



I've not used this kind of adapter, but wonder if it will cause vignetting, as the aperture is not placed exactly at the focal point of the lens.

I've never noticed any vignetting at all. It's just a ring once the optics are removed. Just to be clear, this adapter is not adding an aperture, but simply allowing you to open or close the lens's aperture. I've used it on a reversed 35, and a reversed 18-50 without trouble.

[lotech]

I've never noticed any vignetting at all. It's just a ring once the optics are removed. Just to be clear, this adapter is not adding an aperture, but simply allowing you to open or close the lens's aperture. I've used it on a reversed 35, and a reversed 18-50 without trouble.

Oh I got that wrong sorry !

[Thagomizer]

Oh I got that wrong sorry !

No worries. It's not always obvious what a given accessory actually does. I didn't know there were adapters like that out there until I saw someone else mention it. So I'm doing my part to spread the word for the benefit of backwards people like myself!

[BeeShooter]

When I started doing macro I used a kit lens with a cheap ($25) Opteka 10x diopter, and it worked great for anything that I could get close enough to. For coins or stamps that would probably work really well.

For insects it is pretty limiting, of course, so I got the 100mm Macro which made a world of difference.

[lotech]

When I started doing macro I used a kit lens with a cheap ($25) Opteka 10x diopter, and it worked great for anything that I could get close enough to. For coins or stamps that would probably work really well.

For insects it is pretty limiting, of course, so I got the 100mm Macro which made a world of difference.

I am more into flowers and bugs that need no very close macro, so that a short length of extension tube with a 135mm will do the trick.