Macro lens advice

[FrancoisduP]

The problem is the same for any macro lens - deep DOF needs small aperture, which in turn slows down exposure. The answer is to use flash - the onboard is fine in most circumstances but a diffuser is needed to avoid harsh shadows. Here's my zero-cost solution.

Great tip there Gerry. I am sure once I get my macro lens that I would try it out. I think I saw a similar kind of diffuser for the pop-up flash from Gary Fong. No doubt expensive...hehehehe.

Are you shooting a lot of macro together with "normal" photography? And if so, do you use the 35mm more as a macro lens or as an allrounder as its touted to be? The 1:2 shot looks good. I think I need to show my wife some full 1:1 macro shots so that she can decide how close or detailed she wants to get. And then compare to the 1:2 here.

Also, what made you jump from the Sigma to the Pentax?

Another advantage for the Pentax is its small size. This is even more noticable for close-range shots because the hood attaches to the outer barrel; this means it doesn't go out with the front of the lens so the whole set up is more compact.

Small lenses attract me very much. especially if they have good image quality. thats why I stay with the Pentax primes generally

Great pic with the DFA 100mm! And thank you very much for you lengthy answer.

Francois

 

[FrancoisduP]

Thanks for the posting of some very nice portrait shots there!

Although I am always keen on getting another good lens, to date my portrait lens of choice is either my 50mm M F1.7 or the DA ltd 70mm. So another portrait lens is not per se needed (as I also dont take so many). But what your shots and usage do highlight for me is the ability to use the lens comfortably for purposes other than macro work

And indeed, for the price it seems very nice

Cheers,

Francois

 

[Barry Fitzgerald]

Thanks for the posting of some very nice portrait shots there!

Although I am always keen on getting another good lens, to date my portrait lens of choice is either my 50mm M F1.7 or the DA ltd 70mm. So another portrait lens is not per se needed (as I also dont take so many). But what your shots and usage do highlight for me is the ability to use the lens comfortably for purposes other than macro work

And indeed, for the price it seems very nice

Cheers,

Francois

Well I'm a newer user here so I'm coming from another mount and started from scratch. I didn't have a big case full of older Pentax lenses so I'm gradually building things up.

But everyone has different needs sometimes you might compromise them sometimes you might overlap on lenses but generally you'll probably end up using 2 or 3 on a regular basis more than others. It's easy to just buy lenses and many of them can sit in the cupboard and I've done that before.

From your first post it seems you genuinely want a macro lens so that kinda nails it down fairly easily. There are lots of good macro lenses out there none are a bad buy I can't even remember using or seeing a bad macro lens they're usually a very safe buy.

I too use a 50mm for portraits quite often but ultimately it's there for speed more than anything else. 70mm ltd looks very nice too toyed with that idea too. For me the Tamron is a double hit, macro and portraits but it does either very well. Even if it's just for macro it's one of the best priced/bang per buck macro lenses on the market and that kinda seals it for most folks who buy one.

If you are happy with 90mm focal length I'd go for it. Being fair to the 35mm pentax macro the price has come down quite a bit recently to a much more appealing level I just can't say I like what it does to the background for non macro work hence I'd find it limited for what I'm looking for.

 

[Britney Elvis]

If you are just wanting close ups of flowers and larger items then the 35 would be great. If you are wanting much smaller subjects then a 90/100 would be better and also not double your focal length in the bag... The Tamron 90 and Sigma 105 are both really nice AF macros....

If you can deal with MF (which most macro shooting becomes mf) then any of the older macro lenses are fine.

Also a clip on macro adaptor like the Raynox 250 would work with the focal lengths you have already.

--
"It is not necessary to understand things in order to argue about them."
Pierre Beaumarchais~~

 

[John339]

It was recommended here that the Tamron AF 70-300 f4-5.6 LD MACRO would be a good choice for a not too expensive well performing lens.
I purchased one and am very happy with it.

I am older and the fact that you are about three feet from the subject in MACRO means not getting down and up so much.
The small insects don't skitter away because you are too close.

I purchased here but I am sure they are at all stores that sell camera equipment.

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-300mm-4-0-5-6-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000HP7L6E
About $165.00

 

[Framer]

Fantastic lens and it's water resistant (an important feature for me living on the west coast of Canada!).

I just posted these in another thread but thought they would be relevant here as well. Best of luck with your choice.

f9 @ 1/250th, ISO640



f5.6 @ 1/800th, ISO400



f8 @ 1/200th, ISO400



f4 @ 1/160th, ISO100 (centre-weighted metering)



f5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO640 (centre-weighted metering)



f2.8 @ 1/1250th, ISO100



--
Neil
http://thewarmland.com