-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Interesting features of the 35/1.4 and 90/2.8 Macro
- Thread starter Dave Sanders
- Start date
viking79
Forum Pro
Most likely focus by wire, but with manual like control (like Fuji uses in their new lenses, where there is a predictable way the lens focuses when you turn the ring, not variable rate). If it is really has manually coupled focus, the lens will likely not focus very well with AF as it will have to have PDAF style focus motors (like Canon USM).
The Samsung NX 85 mm f/1.4 and 60 mm f/2.8 macro have mechanically coupled focus rings with USM, and are both much slower focusing than any of the focus by wire lenses.
Eric
Last edited:
DFPanno
Veteran Member
I have shot a decent amount of macro but I have never seen/used these features.
What do they do? How are they useful?
Thanks
What do they do? How are they useful?
Thanks
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
Focus Limiter is especially useful with AF. It would allow use of the lens as a short telephoto as AF will be faster (the macro range AF, and MF, is about precision, requiring more turn, you eliminate that range when shooting outside the macro range). You can find focus limiter on many macro lenses (including Sigma 70/2.8 and Tamron 90/2.8). On my Tamron 90/2.8 (previously) and Sigma 70/2.8, I always have the focus limiter set outside the macro range (when I'm more likely to use AF, and with good speed).
Focus Hold is another feature found in higher end lenses including Sony FE 70-200G (many lenses have multiple Focus Hold buttons... you can see an example here with two Focus Hold buttons visible). Even my 1989 Minolta 200/2.8 G HS has it (it also has a primitive version of focus limiter to further speed up AF). It will, of course, hold the focus (especially useful when shooting with AF-C). The button may also be programmable (perhaps between Focus Hold and DOF Preview, if not yet another customizable button on E-mount bodies... someone with 70-200G may be able to tell us more about the available options).
Last edited:
DFPanno
Veteran Member
All my experience is with a f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor and the Canon 100 f/2.8.
Neither has these features.
Thanks for the primer…..
Neither has these features.
Thanks for the primer…..
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
YW!
The L version of Canon 100 does have Focus Limiter. Not sure about Focus Hold option (which is a common feature on Sony, and previously Minolta, G lenses).
Tuloom
Senior Member
- Messages
- 4,141
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 7,164
On the Canon 100L IS there are three settings: Full, 0.5m-Infinity, 0.3m-0.5m.
It limits the focus distance since the range is so broad in a macro lens. The last setting is the macro end. And the middle is the "portrait" setting.
I only used the middle 0.5m-Infinity setting on Canon bodies when I was not using it as a macro lens. I manual focused for all macro uses.
From the pics showing up of the 100 G, it will a similar three stage limiter switch.
Edit: here's the pic of the limiter.
Last edited:
pixelpushing
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,279
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,894
So was this post.
DFPanno
Veteran Member
[No message]
DFPanno
Veteran Member
[No message]
Jerry Fusselman
Leading Member
Funny, in a macro lens, I would much rather have OSS than AF. I'm not sure what good AF is when up close, but OSS buys me more depth of field at a given ISO.
Assuming it is a really excellent lens, to me, AF is worth maybe $50. OSS is worth $500, maybe more. In the case of a macro lens, a `hybrid' image stabilization system for increased effectiveness at close focus distances seems helpful.
Pixel Pooper
Senior Member
Could you explain this a bit more please? I don't know much about the different types of focus motors, but I would think it wouldn't matter if the clutch disengages the motor when it engages the focus ring.
--
The best camera is the one you have with you, so bring a good one.
Last edited:
It's more like a transition from MF to AF...
DFPanno
Veteran Member
Dave Sanders
Senior Member
I'd much rather have both :-D
AF gets me close and then I tweak...and when I'm really close, I'm on a tripod so OSS is of no use. Now, handheld in 'close up' situations, macro and OSS are an excellent combination.
Shhhhhhhh...Don't let Sony know or they will find a way to charge us more.
Indeed. I found the VR on my Nikon 105 to be great up till about 1:3, generally as close as I get.
Dave Sanders
Senior Member
When I shoot true macro, I set magnification and then adjust the camera position till I achieve focus. The IBIS in the Oly OMD series is awesome for this when using a legacy macro.
Absolutely. But I don't know anybody who uses their macro lenses only for macro all the time ;-) and in those non-macro cases. AF is a boon. In all cases, I find some sort of image stabilization a boon.
That's the thing I miss the most when not shooting with my E-M1. Oly's IBIS is simply awesome.
I imagine I'll pick up the Sony. I had the Nikon 105VR and, personally, never want to go back when it comes to having VR and a macro or close focus lens. The Canon looks like a beauty too. The Olympus IBIS is even better because it can be paired with a dedicated lens designed for MF.
Jerry Fusselman
Leading Member
Even for portraiture, I much prefer OSS to AF. AF is optional; OSS is valuable.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum