Macro lenses

[AncientMariner]

Whilst waiting for news on Sony's plans for KM dslrs, I decided to look around for a proper macro lens. Does anyone who uses any of the following please advise which you think would be a better buy and if they are any good as a telephoto lens as well?

Tamron SP AF 180mm F/3.5 Di LD (IF) 1:1

Sigma 180 F3.5 EX DG IF APO MACRO

My inclination is towards the Sigma because it has a focus limiter just like the Minolta AF 200 / 4 Macro APO G
Thanks.

[GENO]

if u want, get the tamron 180 Di,,, one of the best lens around...

[kelster]

how abt the Tamron 90mm F2.8 Di?...heard its not bad too...rite?...

[leeshock]

Originally Posted by kelster how abt the Tamron 90mm F2.8 Di?...heard its not bad too...rite?...

Agree with you that the Tamron 90mm is good for both portrait and macro.

[AncientMariner]

Geno - Tks

Kelster, leeshock - There are many reasons I prefer 180 mm over 90mm inspite of the price being about double.
1) I do not want to get too near the critters I intend to shoot.
2) I need to build up my primes and intend to have the lens double as a telephoto prime. I have a 85 f1.4G(D) but have only zooms covering 180mm.
Thanks for the suggestion though.

[pai]

the 90mm is great. very sharp. not super fast focussing when used as a tele-lens, but the focus limiter helps.

i've not used the 180mm. i guess the advantage is that the working distance is greater, good for insects that scare easily. it's pretty big though.

[Peng62]

I use the Sigma 180mm, DG version, sometimes together with a Canon 500D closeup lens, and I had just got a Sigma 2x TC, DG version, to go with them.

You can see my photos, all taken with the 180, or 180+500D and a few with 180+2xTC on my KM Dynax 5D here :

http://photobucket.com/albums/d49/CPLai

Sorry I have no indication of which photo uses which combi as I am not in the habit of making notes about my setup while out taking photos. I just intuitively switch as and when I feel like it.

[AncientMariner]

Pai - Thanks. Longer min focal distance is a prime factor as I would rather not take the pic if my presence has stressed the subject.

Peng62 - Tks for the link to the photos. The shot I like most is one of the caterpillars.

[Peng62]

Hi AncientMariner,

Just like to add that my sharing of the photos is just to show that the image quality will not really be any better or worse than those taken by using macro lenses of the major manufacturers, like Canon, Nikon, Minolta or Tamron. Some will add Tokina also I guess. Of course, anyone with higher skill level than my amateur hobbyist status will do better, but thats another issue.

Macro lenses are all basically superbly designed and all offers great image quality. It is always most likely the case that given an image to look at, there is almost no way to tell which manufacturers' lens was used to take the photo without looking at the EXIF data.

It mostly comes down to the handling and feel of the lens that determines which lens to buy. I recommend that you go to some camera shops and handle the Sigma and Tamron and see what you like about the weight balance, zoom and focus ring rotation, etc. and also future add-on accessories and compatibility issues.

Also remember that using 180mm means tripod mounting for practically 100% of the time for macros. Unless you are a 6ft 6in bodybuilder. So you will need a sturdy tripod if you already do not have one, and I will recommend having a ballhead instead of those pan, tilt, rotate type of tripod head for macro photography.

Whatever you decide, wish you well and lots of fun with your photography.

[Eyesthruthelens]

with KM100mm f2.8 macro.. sharpest KM lens rating from most of the km lens chart

[AncientMariner]

Originally Posted by Peng62 ...It mostly comes down to the handling and feel of the lens that determines which lens to buy. I recommend that you go to some camera shops and handle the Sigma and Tamron and see what you like about the weight balance, zoom and focus ring rotation, etc. and also future add-on accessories and compatibility issues.

Agree that testing each oneself would be the best way to select the lens. Unfortunately, there aren't many shops with Minolta mount lenses and none I know of, carry both the Sigma and Tamron 180mm. At best it would mean testing each lens at different location, times and conditions will result in skewered impressions and will take more time than I have available. Therefore I posted here, hoping someone who has owned and used one over time could disclose strengths and weakness especially that which would not be apparent in a short trial.

Originally Posted by Peng62 Also remember that using 180mm means tripod mounting for practically 100% of the time for macros. Unless you are a 6ft 6in bodybuilder. So you will need a sturdy tripod if you already do not have one, and I will recommend having a ballhead instead of those pan, tilt, rotate type of tripod head for macro photography..

I do have a sturdy tripod, a stout monopod, several ballheads and a gimbal which I use for my ultra telephoto lenses but if I found I have to rely on a tripod often to shoot macro, I would consider getting a micro-positioning plate as well. However, I have learned to shoot macros hand-held with various telephoto lens and extension tube (or reversed 50mm lens) combos and am quite confident of being handle a lens weighing less than 1 kg. OT here - something to share which I borrowed from my days from having to tote a heavy gun, is to take the weight off my arms and hands by coiling the strap around my forearm and running the strap under one shoulder. That way, my shoulder then supports both my arm and my "weapon" and I can hold it level steadily and in readiness for hours. Btw, I am not built like Drudkh.

Originally Posted by Peng62 Whatever you decide, wish you well and lots of fun with your photography.

Thanks, I already am enjoying myself.

[TME]

Originally Posted by AncientMariner Btw, I am not built like Drudkh.

Almost there... almost...

[AncientMariner]

Originally Posted by TME Almost there... almost...

Really?

[dr34mc4st3r]

are there any value for money (i.e. not too exp :P ) macro lenses available for minolta? or is the tamron 90mm one considered already "cheap" ?
tempted to try macro photography but not willing to pay too much for a top end macro lens...

[tankm]

Originally Posted by dr34mc4st3r are there any value for money (i.e. not too exp :P ) macro lenses available for minolta? or is the tamron 90mm one considered already "cheap" ? tempted to try macro photography but not willing to pay too much for a top end macro lens...

You can always try using close-up lens(filter) together with your existing lens that have close focusing capability. It will not be as sharp compare to true macro lens, but will get your started on macro.

[dr34mc4st3r]

Originally Posted by tankm You can always try using close-up lens(filter) together with your existing lens that have close focusing capability. It will not be as sharp compare to true macro lens, but will get your started on macro.

how about extension tubes?

[AncientMariner]

Originally Posted by dr34mc4st3r how about extension tubes?

I prefer extension tube as it is faster to connect a tube between the body and lens than to screw a filter onto the lens. Also no need further degradation of image from the additional glass.

[tankm]

Originally Posted by AncientMariner I prefer extension tube as it is faster to connect a tube between the body and lens than to screw a filter onto the lens. Also no need further degradation of image from the additional glass.

Extension tube does not degrade quality as there is no additional lens but light loss will be there depending on the length of the extension tube.

For close-up lens/filter there is no/minimal light loss, but introduce another lens in the setup.