[Photodana]

Hello
Are there any valid alternative for the VERY expensive (3000 USD) Pentax A* 4.0 200mm Macro ED?
I want a 200mm macro lens. No zoom, no converter. Just a 200mm lens designed for macro use.

Regards
Jens, Denmark

[Digitalis]

There is no substitute, the Pentax 200mm Macro lenses are simply without equal. The closest you can get is, the uncommon and hard to find Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO EX.

Here are a few sample images from both lenses:


Pentax K10D - SMCP-FA*200mm f/4 ED Macro


Pentax K5IIs - SMCP-FA*200mm f/4 ED Macro


Pentax K10D - Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO EX Macro


Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO EX Macro


Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO Macro.

[Adam]

Yes, the FA* 200mm F4 Macro, which is about 1000 USD more

There is also the Sigma 180mm F3.5, which you might be able to find second-hand. It's been discontinued for a while and is worth around $1000.

[Digitalis]

As I recall Tamron also made a 180mm f/3.5 that can be found second-hand ( it was a popular focal length for long macro lenses in the early 90s) But it isn't quite as good as the Sigma 180mm Macro lens, which is perplexing as the 90mm f/2.5 and its variants have such a high reputation.

[HYS]

Well, 150 is not 200 indeed, but what do you think about Sigma 150 f2.8 DG OS HSM APO Macro? As far as I know it is a good macro lens.

[Digitalis]

what do you think about Sigma 150 f2.8 DG OS HSM APO Macro?

There is little point in thinking about it as it isn't available in Pentax K mount.

[forest_bear59]

If you don't mind using a converter the 100mm Pentax macro and the 1,4 converter (maybe even an 1,7) will give you good results.
And the DA* 1:4, 300mm lens comes very close to a macro lens.


Another possibility is to buy a Nikon lens, replace the mount with a Pentax Mount and use it as you would use an M42 lens (stopped down). If the diaphragm is triggered electronically this won't work, that's clear.

[WPRESTO]

FYI: At the moment (May 23, AM) there are two 200mm SMCA macros being offered on EBAY. One (from Japan) offered @ about $2500, looks almost like new. Wish I could swap that for my brass-showing oldie. Purchased mine way back, second hand, for about $750 and considered it an extravagant expense.

[Photodana]

There is no substitute, the Pentax 200mm Macro lenses are simply without equal. The closest you can get is, the uncommon and hard to find Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO EX.

Here are a few sample images from both lenses:


Pentax K10D - SMCP-FA*200mm f/4 ED Macro


Pentax K5IIs - SMCP-FA*200mm f/4 ED Macro


Pentax K10D - Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO EX Macro


Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO EX Macro


Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO Macro.

Thank you very much. Some Very nice shots indeed :-)

regards
Jens

---------- Post added 05-23-2016 at 02:53 PM ----------

If you don't mind using a converter the 100mm Pentax macro and the 1,4 converter (maybe even an 1,7) will give you good results.
And the DA* 1:4, 300mm lens comes very close to a macro lens.


Another possibility is to buy a Nikon lens, replace the mount with a Pentax Mount and use it as you would use an M42 lens (stopped down). If the diaphragm is triggered electronically this won't work, that's clear.

Not a bad idea :-)
Thanks
Jens

[Simen1]

Yes, the Nikon 200mm f/4 macro is suppose to be extremely good, but its also very expensive.

[WPRESTO]

The older Nikon MF 200mm f4 macro, which goes only to 1:2, can be mounted on a K1 with a glassless N to PK adapter, which would amount to about a 10mm extension tube. ISFA the lens will be used only for macro 90% of the time or more, this would not be a problem, just a bit of "prefocusing." It does not not have the quality of the 200mm Pentax (or the 180 f3.5 Sigma),, and it would have to be used in full manual mode, including manual closure of the aperture (it does have an aperture ring), but it can sometimes be purchased for under $500 in excellent condition.
the original Nikon AF Micro 200mm f4, EDIF, a much better lens, can sometimes be purchased second hand for around $1000, It could be mounted the same way, it does have an aperture ring, so it could be used the same way on a Pentax body. Both lenses are less expensive and far more available that either the MF or AF versions of the 20mm macro Pentax.

[sculptor666]

i bought a sigma 180mm macro on ebay a couple weeks ago... listed as pentax mount THREE DIFFERENT TIMES. soooo excited until i opened the box and the lens cap said NIKON on it... sure enough, nikon mount. ffffffuuuuuugde... boxed it back up and it went back to the seller.

nikon and canon have multiple options for 180-200mm 1:1 macro lenses... and they're all cheaper than any used pentax 1:1 200mm lenses that you'll find. i don't know how good the modern tamron 180mm macro is, or the canon 180mm... but some of the results on flickr are impressive.

[TomTom]

If you don't mind using a converter the 100mm Pentax macro and the 1,4 converter (maybe even an 1,7) will give you good results.
And the DA* 1:4, 300mm lens comes very close to a macro lens.


Another possibility is to buy a Nikon lens, replace the mount with a Pentax Mount and use it as you would use an M42 lens (stopped down). If the diaphragm is triggered electronically this won't work, that's clear.

I recently mailed off my Sigma 105 Macro for service so have been using my DA* 300 as a substitute over the last 10 days or so.

[max_pyne]

I have the A* 200 F4 macro and i love it... but i never take it with me on holidays.... it seems to risky...
But i have my DA* 300 always with me and the HD 1.4 T i think the combo is great for most macro like shots sure its not the same as with the A*.

[swanlefitte]

I use a poor man's version. It cost about $50. Triple tubes with a takumar 150mm. To focus I need a lot of light or a lot of time. I do get 0.58x at a focus distance of about 2 feet. At that distance a flash on camera isn't too bad either.