[paulh]

Those sorts of zooms labelled 'macro' usually only do 1:4 or so magnification - 'close focusing ' would be a better description.

Actually, in the case of the Sigma 28-80 macro zoom, it *will* do 1:2 magnification. I own the 28-90 variant, and it's capable of 1:2.3 to be exact. It has a locking macro switch, which locks the lens at 90mm, and increases the manual focus throw to make MF easier. Yeah, it's a plastic lens, and I wouldn't call it smooth focusing, but for the price it does a decent job.

Here's a old shot using the 28-90 on an *ist D:

---

Last edited by paulh; 03-30-2016 at 07:47 AM.

[photolady95]

Just so you know, AF changes the POV (point of view) in macro photography. To focus in macro photography, you must move the camera in and out to obtain focus. And I do this in the field and have for more than 15 years. I don't think 15 years of shooting macros could be wrong.

[lowlandspentax]

Thank you all for the numerous messages!

I don't be fixed to 'zoom' for a macro lens, so i will go for a non-zoom one..
The length is an issue, and as i think it is not possible to take a lens for living objects (long focus) together with one for static objects, i will aim on an around 100 mm. type lens.
It seems to be more of an allround to me...

I will start to look for an appropriate lens, will make a list of your proposals to stick next to my monitor.

Thanks again and sorry for posting in the wrong section..

lowlandspentax

[dms]

As mentioned--the macro use/scenario is important. And while a true macro lens is better in theory, in practice w/o a (geared) focusing slide, it can be inconvenient for macro in the field w/ a minimum of equipment--asuming you are using a tripod, and thus cannot easily fine tune position by moving the camera. In this scenario a good close focusing zoom, or a variable extension tube (if auto exposure), or a combination variable extension tube and TC (Vivitar macro 2x TC), are useful. But if (still) considering a zoom look for one that has been found to be good in the close up range (likely limited to about 1/4 to 1/2 magnification), and not just done as a marketing ploy.

BTW you also should think about the triood and the kind of head you will use. A head that has seperate control in each of three dimensions is likely much better as the magnification becomes (moderately) large--very tough to otherwise loosen the ball and try to adjust things.

---

Last edited by dms; 03-30-2016 at 10:25 AM.

[bluestringer]

As paulh said, the sigma will do 1:2 and it's really a pretty good lens. But a dedicated macro is better, and manual focus is better than AF for really close macro. Look for the Pentax-M 100mm f4 macro, it's an older lens but still one of the best out there. It only does 1:2, but stick a couple cheap extension tubes behind it and you can get 1:1. They can found for around a 100 bucks on ebay or at KEH. And don't forget a light source, close macro needs good light.

[clackers]

Actually, in the case of the Sigma 28-80 macro zoom, it *will* do 1:2 magnification. I own the 28-90 variant, and it's capable of 1:2.3 to be exact. It has a locking macro switch, which locks the lens at 90mm, and increases the manual focus throw to make MF easier. Yeah, it's a plastic lens, and I wouldn't call it smooth focusing, but for the price it does a decent job.

I actually have your version rebadged as a Quantaray, Paul.

Cost almost nothing, quite sharp, and some light loss in OoF areas means it can get that 3D pop look some people lust after. I have used it as a walkaround with FF. ☺

[zburatoru]

You talking the older model 105? I've tried and tried to find the last model on k mount to no avail. I would love to have one.

Yes I have the old model and it's my Most used lens!

[denik]

You talking the older model 105? I've tried and tried to find the last model on k mount to no avail. I would love to have one.

Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5 1:1 Macro Telephoto. Only wish it had a tripod mount.

[pepperberry farm]

I recently purchased a Tamron Adaptall 2 72BB (90mm f2.8 Macro) and am stunned at its abilities.... definitely a lens to keep on your short list as you shop...

[normhead]

The Tamron 90 macro.. highly rated on every SLR system. Usually available second hand. The Pentax 100 if you can find one second hand is by far the lightest. I use auto-focus all the time.

[Skodadriver]

I have two macro lenses, this Tamron and a Sigma 50mm F2.8 macro.
The Tamron only gives 1:2 (though with a 2x TC will provide 1:1) while the Sigma does 1:1......(2:1 with 2x TC?) but the Tamron leaves some room to hopefully not scare the wildlife too often.
I can recommend both if you are just doing macro for fun, not profit.


This fly was trapped in a spider web in my greenhouse, I have done some amateurish pp as I have no ring flash but it gives you some idea of how sharp it can be. I like the bokeh at F2.5 too.

[csa]

SIGMA MACROZOOM 3.5-5.6 28-80 lenses.

I have this lens; purchased it for $15 from a wonderful member. This shot was handheld.

I do also have a dedicated macro; but if you're on a small budget, I think you'd be happy with this lens. I'm now using a K3, but have also used this lens with my K10D.

[csa]

You talking the older model 105? I've tried and tried to find the last model on k mount to no avail. I would love to have one.

I have the Sigma 105 DG EX macro, and it's a fantastic lens!!

[old4570]

The 18-55 kit lens is already relatively close focus ...
Buy a +4 and a +8 close focus filters and go play ...
The results can be very good .

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/177-macro-photography/272641-pentax-k20d-...us-filter.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/177-macro-photography/272719-pentax-k5-si...cf-filter.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/177-macro-photography/267135-cheap-macro.html

[Kevriano]

Has anyone tried the Samyang 100mm 2.8? I currently have a old SMC 100 mm, which has a bit of haze and fungus, though it's not really seeming to affect pics much if at all, and I am considering the Pentax, Tamron and now Samyang, but I've not seen much written about it.

Cheers