Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

old4570 · 08-25-2014, 03:11 AM

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.

So many options ...

Sigma 105 ....

I own a few lenses , and if you can find one , try the Pentax A 100mm F4 Macro ( 1:2 ) , + a Pentax No1 close focus filter ..
If you want Auto focus , and $$ is not the issue , Sigma 105

Pentax lenses have a good rep overall .. + Plenty of used ones on Ebay
Tamron 90mm is certainly good enough , if the price is right .

I wish I owned them all ,

But my sharpest results have come from 50mm lenses combined with Tele macro converters ...
And soon ( come summer ) I will run all my lenses through a K20D to see whats what ... And after that , ill be selling stuff on Ebay ...

kentishrev · 08-25-2014, 08:23 AM

Originally posted by Kozlok

I agonized over this for months, and ended up going for the Sigma 70mm. I thought the image samples from it were just slightly nicer than the longer lenses. I also like the it has a 62mm thread, same as my Sigma 30/1.4 and my DA18-135. Only shot with it a couple of times, but so far, I love it.

I already had the Pentax 100mm WR and it is a great lens. I then had the chance for a very well-priced Sigma 70mm. I did not expect to keep both, but the rendering and bokeh on the Sigma are, to my eyes, very different to the Pentax. Both are lovely, and both are keepers. Another point to consider with the Sigma 70mm is the metal hood, which is quite short and very robust, allowing very close manual focus.

The Sigma 70mm has been discontinued, but there are plenty around at the moment.

vagabond79 · 08-25-2014, 04:49 PM

I totally got macro LBA a while back and bought the FA 100mm 2.8 and a Lester A. Dine 105mm 2.8 at the same time. I found that both gave me high quality images but the Dine just felt so good in my hands that I stuck with it. The FA line feels a bit plasticky while the Dine is built like a rock. I'm also of the ilk that believes auto-focus is pretty much useless for a macro lens (as an aside, I have used the Dine for plenty of photos that were not macro). However, the 'A" setting is definitely desirable especially if you are going to be shooting things that move.

So I would at least consider the Vivitar/Kiron/Dine macro lenses. I think they are going in the mid $200's these days. Worth it IMO.

A link to the reviews: Kiron/Dine Reviews

Na Horuk · 08-25-2014, 05:38 PM

Since many of us have mentioned that manual focus is allright for macro, I would like to point out that this is where Quickshift really comes in handy. The DFA 100mm WR has QS, which means you don't have to switch the camera AF/MF switch. You can have it in AF, and as soon as the motor stops, you can focus manually. (you should remove AF at shutter half press btw, and relocate it to the AF-L button) This is one of the advantages of the DFA 100mm WR (the previous 100mm versions don't feature QS, as far as I know)

markl62 · 08-26-2014, 01:22 AM

thanks everyone for their comments. decisions decisions and more options

**beachgardener** · 08-26-2014, 06:34 PM

Anyone have the FA 50mm macro or F 50mm macro and the D FA 50mm macro?
I have been looking at getting a 50mm macro lens in fact eyeing off the D FA version, and i have been doing lots of reading, but some real world help would be nice. Lots say that the FA and F versions are sharp, sharp to the corners, will the D FA show the same characteristic?
Thanks. Hope it is ok to add to this thread

markl62 · 08-26-2014, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by beachgardener

Anyone have the FA 50mm macro or F 50mm macro and the D FA 50mm macro?
I have been looking at getting a 50mm macro lens in fact eyeing off the D FA version, and i have been doing lots of reading, but some real world help would be nice. Lots say that the FA and F versions are sharp, sharp to the corners, will the D FA show the same characteristic?
Thanks. Hope it is ok to add to this thread

I was more interested in the 100 / 105 to be able to get a bit further away from the subject, particularly insects etc.

**beachgardener** · 08-26-2014, 07:21 PM

Yes, definitely, i am aware of the needs there. For me I want the 50mm, mainly for flowers but also art work reproduction, the 100mm would do both of those for sure, and basically I want to replace the Canon 60mm with the Pentax 50mm

I might need to start a thread, but hoping some more comments here if allowable.

**TER-OR** · 08-27-2014, 05:36 AM

Quickshift would come in handy in the field. Right now I'm getting good at switching the body to manual. I have the FA100 2.8 which has performed very well while wading through prairie plants searching for bees.

Na Horuk · 08-27-2014, 06:15 AM

Originally posted by beachgardener

Anyone have the FA 50mm macro or F 50mm macro and the D FA 50mm macro?

I thought they were optically identical, except that the DFA might have newer lens coatings, for digital sensors? I doubt the DFA would be optically worse than the F or FA version. The main differences are in build and features (focus limiter, focus clamp, quickshift, filter size, WR, weight, hood). Filter size is important if you already have filters for 49mm (DFA) but not for 52mm diameter (F, FA). WR is important if you have WR camera and expect to be taking photos in wet environments (lots of macro photographers go crawling in wet grass for those dew photos). Focus limiter is a nice feature, so you can use the lens as a regular 50mm without any AF slowdowns. Focus clamp might not be that important (this just prevents focus from being moved accidentally. Might be good for studio work). Quickshift is a very nice feature in my opinion. I think the DFA 50mm is also the smallest and weighs the least. This can be important, but some people prefer the heavy build of older lenses.

**beachgardener** · 08-27-2014, 01:37 PM

Thank you both for your answers, i am leaning toward the D FA

8540tomg · 08-27-2014, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by old4570

So many options ...

Sigma 105 ....

I own a few lenses , and if you can find one , try the Pentax A 100mm F4 Macro ( 1:2 ) , + a Pentax No1 close focus filter .. [snip]
them all ,

I have the Pentax A 100/2.8 macro. It gets you 1:1 without any closeup filters. A little rare and a tad expensive but brutally sharp.

In any case I think, after you use a 50mm macro for a while, you will feel the need as I did for the extra 50mm of length.
It gets you further away from the subject and makes it easier to manually focus the lens. The extra distance also gives you more room to make use of natural lighting as well as artifical lighting. Bugs and other critters like the extra distance too. They don't feel as threatened and tend to hang around longer for the 100mm marco.

I a perfect macro world there are also the Pentax 200mm macros. These lenses are legendary and priced accordingly.

Tom G

**beachgardener** · 08-27-2014, 03:35 PM

Yes, i can understand the need for the 100mm macro, for me I want a focal length for art work reproduction (sharp corner to corner) and with the studio lights I don't want to have to be a long way from the art work, space can be an issue. On the other hand I like macro not for bugs and critters but for flowers and abstract flowers. So, I'm thinking the 50 might suit me, and yes i have been eyeing off the A50 too, but will want AF, so I'm still thinking that the D FA will fit the bill.
Might get the 100 down the track, but first the K-3 and D FA 50 macro

old4570 · 08-27-2014, 05:36 PM

Pentax SMC A 200mm F 4 Macro Ed Lens | eBay

200mm Macro lens ..... The price is legendary for sure ....

**TER-OR** · 08-28-2014, 05:22 AM

I also have a Sigma 28mm f1.8 macro which I really like for close work. It's a big lens (as expected for f1.8) but has a pretty flat field and is quite responsive. There are other short options out there, which I would choose over the 50mm lens - which is probably a bit tight if you're in a greenhouse or somewhere like that.

08-27-2014, 02:56 PM	#27
8540tomg Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,461	Originally posted by old4570 So many options ... Sigma 105 .... I own a few lenses , and if you can find one , try the Pentax A 100mm F4 Macro ( 1:2 ) , + a Pentax No1 close focus filter .. [snip] them all , I have the Pentax A 100/2.8 macro. It gets you 1:1 without any closeup filters. A little rare and a tad expensive but brutally sharp. In any case I think, after you use a 50mm macro for a while, you will feel the need as I did for the extra 50mm of length. It gets you further away from the subject and makes it easier to manually focus the lens. The extra distance also gives you more room to make use of natural lighting as well as artifical lighting. Bugs and other critters like the extra distance too. They don't feel as threatened and tend to hang around longer for the 100mm marco. I a perfect macro world there are also the Pentax 200mm macros. These lenses are legendary and priced accordingly. Tom G Last edited by 8540tomg; 08-28-2014 at 05:40 AM.

08-27-2014, 03:35 PM	#28
beachgardener Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,842	Yes, i can understand the need for the 100mm macro, for me I want a focal length for art work reproduction (sharp corner to corner) and with the studio lights I don't want to have to be a long way from the art work, space can be an issue. On the other hand I like macro not for bugs and critters but for flowers and abstract flowers. So, I'm thinking the 50 might suit me, and yes i have been eyeing off the A50 too, but will want AF, so I'm still thinking that the D FA will fit the bill. Might get the 100 down the track, but first the K-3 and D FA 50 macro Last edited by beachgardener; 08-27-2014 at 03:38 PM. Reason: add info.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which is which macro? old vs new	rp_dxn	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	09-27-2013 05:48 AM
Which Macro lens?	k-5 II	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	08-20-2013 07:36 AM
which of my lens is best for macro work?	WA-surfer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	04-25-2013 09:06 PM
Which Macro lens?	Spiderman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	08-21-2010 12:57 PM
Which Macro lens?	jfsavage	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	37	06-07-2009 07:10 PM

08-25-2014, 03:11 AM	#16
old4570 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 2,551	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. So many options ... Sigma 105 .... I own a few lenses , and if you can find one , try the Pentax A 100mm F4 Macro ( 1:2 ) , + a Pentax No1 close focus filter .. If you want Auto focus , and $$ is not the issue , Sigma 105 Pentax lenses have a good rep overall .. + Plenty of used ones on Ebay Tamron 90mm is certainly good enough , if the price is right . I wish I owned them all , But my sharpest results have come from 50mm lenses combined with Tele macro converters ... And soon ( come summer ) I will run all my lenses through a K20D to see whats what ... And after that , ill be selling stuff on Ebay ...

08-25-2014, 08:23 AM	#17
kentishrev Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 180	Originally posted by Kozlok I agonized over this for months, and ended up going for the Sigma 70mm. I thought the image samples from it were just slightly nicer than the longer lenses. I also like the it has a 62mm thread, same as my Sigma 30/1.4 and my DA18-135. Only shot with it a couple of times, but so far, I love it. I already had the Pentax 100mm WR and it is a great lens. I then had the chance for a very well-priced Sigma 70mm. I did not expect to keep both, but the rendering and bokeh on the Sigma are, to my eyes, very different to the Pentax. Both are lovely, and both are keepers. Another point to consider with the Sigma 70mm is the metal hood, which is quite short and very robust, allowing very close manual focus. The Sigma 70mm has been discontinued, but there are plenty around at the moment.

08-25-2014, 04:49 PM	#18
vagabond79 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Greensboro, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 147	I totally got macro LBA a while back and bought the FA 100mm 2.8 and a Lester A. Dine 105mm 2.8 at the same time. I found that both gave me high quality images but the Dine just felt so good in my hands that I stuck with it. The FA line feels a bit plasticky while the Dine is built like a rock. I'm also of the ilk that believes auto-focus is pretty much useless for a macro lens (as an aside, I have used the Dine for plenty of photos that were not macro). However, the 'A" setting is definitely desirable especially if you are going to be shooting things that move. So I would at least consider the Vivitar/Kiron/Dine macro lenses. I think they are going in the mid $200's these days. Worth it IMO. A link to the reviews: Kiron/Dine Reviews

08-25-2014, 05:38 PM	#19
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Since many of us have mentioned that manual focus is allright for macro, I would like to point out that this is where Quickshift really comes in handy. The DFA 100mm WR has QS, which means you don't have to switch the camera AF/MF switch. You can have it in AF, and as soon as the motor stops, you can focus manually. (you should remove AF at shutter half press btw, and relocate it to the AF-L button) This is one of the advantages of the DFA 100mm WR (the previous 100mm versions don't feature QS, as far as I know)

08-26-2014, 01:22 AM	#20
markl62 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Brisbane Qld Aust Posts: 220 Original Poster	thanks everyone for their comments. decisions decisions and more options

08-26-2014, 06:34 PM	#21
beachgardener Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,842	Anyone have the FA 50mm macro or F 50mm macro and the D FA 50mm macro? I have been looking at getting a 50mm macro lens in fact eyeing off the D FA version, and i have been doing lots of reading, but some real world help would be nice. Lots say that the FA and F versions are sharp, sharp to the corners, will the D FA show the same characteristic? Thanks. Hope it is ok to add to this thread

08-26-2014, 06:52 PM	#22
markl62 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Brisbane Qld Aust Posts: 220 Original Poster	Originally posted by beachgardener Anyone have the FA 50mm macro or F 50mm macro and the D FA 50mm macro? I have been looking at getting a 50mm macro lens in fact eyeing off the D FA version, and i have been doing lots of reading, but some real world help would be nice. Lots say that the FA and F versions are sharp, sharp to the corners, will the D FA show the same characteristic? Thanks. Hope it is ok to add to this thread I was more interested in the 100 / 105 to be able to get a bit further away from the subject, particularly insects etc.

08-26-2014, 07:21 PM	#23
beachgardener Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,842	Yes, definitely, i am aware of the needs there. For me I want the 50mm, mainly for flowers but also art work reproduction, the 100mm would do both of those for sure, and basically I want to replace the Canon 60mm with the Pentax 50mm I might need to start a thread, but hoping some more comments here if allowable.

08-27-2014, 05:36 AM	#24
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	Quickshift would come in handy in the field. Right now I'm getting good at switching the body to manual. I have the FA100 2.8 which has performed very well while wading through prairie plants searching for bees.

08-27-2014, 06:15 AM	#25
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Originally posted by beachgardener Anyone have the FA 50mm macro or F 50mm macro and the D FA 50mm macro? I thought they were optically identical, except that the DFA might have newer lens coatings, for digital sensors? I doubt the DFA would be optically worse than the F or FA version. The main differences are in build and features (focus limiter, focus clamp, quickshift, filter size, WR, weight, hood). Filter size is important if you already have filters for 49mm (DFA) but not for 52mm diameter (F, FA). WR is important if you have WR camera and expect to be taking photos in wet environments (lots of macro photographers go crawling in wet grass for those dew photos). Focus limiter is a nice feature, so you can use the lens as a regular 50mm without any AF slowdowns. Focus clamp might not be that important (this just prevents focus from being moved accidentally. Might be good for studio work). Quickshift is a very nice feature in my opinion. I think the DFA 50mm is also the smallest and weighs the least. This can be important, but some people prefer the heavy build of older lenses.

08-27-2014, 01:37 PM	#26
beachgardener Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,842	Thank you both for your answers, i am leaning toward the D FA

08-27-2014, 05:36 PM	#29
old4570 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 2,551	Pentax SMC A 200mm F 4 Macro Ed Lens \| eBay 200mm Macro lens ..... The price is legendary for sure ....

08-28-2014, 05:22 AM	#30
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	I also have a Sigma 28mm f1.8 macro which I really like for close work. It's a big lens (as expected for f1.8) but has a pretty flat field and is quite responsive. There are other short options out there, which I would choose over the 50mm lens - which is probably a bit tight if you're in a greenhouse or somewhere like that.

Macro Which macro lens ??

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!