Macro lens for Sony a6400

[TMG1961]

Hi everyone,

I am looking to buy a macro lens for my Sony a6400. My budget is an absolute maximum of 800 euro. So the Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 macro lens is not an option.

There is so much information that i am completely lost.

Do any of you have the Sony a6400 and shoot macro? If so then what lens are you using and what are the pro and cons of it?

 

[Martin_99]

There are a few important questions to you before final answer:

- do you require autofocus on macro lens?

- do you need true macro lens? (1:1 magnification)

- do you have a preference for focal length/distance from your subject? What you actually want to shoot?

 

[TMG1961]

There are a few important questions to you before final answer:

- do you require autofocus on macro lens?

- do you need true macro lens? (1:1 magnification)

- do you have a preference for focal length/distance from your subject? What you actually want to shoot?

- I want to shoot mainly insects. Focal length from 60mm to 105mm.

- Distance from subject 25-50 cm

- I will use the lens for macro photography only, autofocus is not a must have.

- Not sure about needing a true macro lens. Havent given other possible options any thought.

 

[Martin_99]

There are a few important questions to you before final answer:

- do you require autofocus on macro lens?

- do you need true macro lens? (1:1 magnification)

- do you have a preference for focal length/distance from your subject? What you actually want to shoot?

- I want to shoot mainly insects. Focal length from 60mm to 105mm.

- Distance from subject 25-50 cm

- I will use the lens for macro photography only, autofocus is not a must have.

- Not sure about needing a true macro lens. Havent given other possible options any thought.

 

[AZheaven]

The new Sigma 105 f2.8 macro is super sharp. And many reviewers have said it's sharper than the Sony 90mm f2.8. The Sigma is on my list to buy.

I would suggest watching Dustin Abbotts review of the Sigma. He also compares it the the Sony 90mm he reviewed just before the Sigma. And watch Christopher Frosts review as well.

 

[Nokiron]

I've been extremely satisfied with my Sigma 105 2.8 DG DN. The only issue I can see here is the lack of OSS. But I guess you would always use it on a tripod when shooting insects.

 

[TMG1961]

The new Sigma 105 f2.8 macro is super sharp. And many reviewers have said it's sharper than the Sony 90mm f2.8. The Sigma is on my list to buy.

I would suggest watching Dustin Abbotts review of the Sigma. He also compares it the the Sony 90mm he reviewed just before the Sigma. And watch Christopher Frosts review as well.

Thanks for your answer. Googled for the videos and will watch them a bit later.

 

[stevie wonder]

Try the Sony macro 50mm 2.8. Super sharp and cheap.

 

[TMG1961]

After viewing some reviews I decided to go with the Laowa 100mm f/2.8 2X Ultra-Macro APO Sony E-mount lens. It is priced at 549 euro.

 

[clarnibass]

There are many options depends on what you priorities are.

I would only get the Sony 90mm if you need the stabilizer, or some other features (not sure what).

I would get the Sigma 105mm if I wanted AF.

I would and did buy the Venus because I don't need the stabilizer, the x2 magnification was important and I don't need AF. Supposedly as good or better optics. As a bonus it's about half the price of the Sony and significantly less than the Sigma too.

There's the Samyang but honestly I'm not sure I see a reason to buy it over the Venus. It's pretty much the same size, heavier and only magnifies to x1. Maybe it has some advantages I'm not aware of.

 

[TMG1961]

There are many options depends on what you priorities are.

I would only get the Sony 90mm if you need the stabilizer, or some other features (not sure what).

I would get the Sigma 105mm if I wanted AF.

I would and did buy the Venus because I don't need the stabilizer, the x2 magnification was important and I don't need AF. Supposedly as good or better optics. As a bonus it's about half the price of the Sony and significantly less than the Sigma too.

There's the Samyang but honestly I'm not sure I see a reason to buy it over the Venus. It's pretty much the same size, heavier and only magnifies to x1. Maybe it has some advantages I'm not aware of.

Got the lens since yesterday and so far liking it. Only problem i am having is getting sharp photos using it on my Sony a6400.

 

[Martin_99]

There are many options depends on what you priorities are.

I would only get the Sony 90mm if you need the stabilizer, or some other features (not sure what).

I would get the Sigma 105mm if I wanted AF.

I would and did buy the Venus because I don't need the stabilizer, the x2 magnification was important and I don't need AF. Supposedly as good or better optics. As a bonus it's about half the price of the Sony and significantly less than the Sigma too.

There's the Samyang but honestly I'm not sure I see a reason to buy it over the Venus. It's pretty much the same size, heavier and only magnifies to x1. Maybe it has some advantages I'm not aware of.

Got the lens since yesterday and so far liking it. Only problem i am having is getting sharp photos using it on my Sony a6400.

Did you try it on tripod with enough time to focus?

 

[TMG1961]

There are many options depends on what you priorities are.

I would only get the Sony 90mm if you need the stabilizer, or some other features (not sure what).

I would get the Sigma 105mm if I wanted AF.

I would and did buy the Venus because I don't need the stabilizer, the x2 magnification was important and I don't need AF. Supposedly as good or better optics. As a bonus it's about half the price of the Sony and significantly less than the Sigma too.

There's the Samyang but honestly I'm not sure I see a reason to buy it over the Venus. It's pretty much the same size, heavier and only magnifies to x1. Maybe it has some advantages I'm not aware of.

Got the lens since yesterday and so far liking it. Only problem i am having is getting sharp photos using it on my Sony a6400.

Did you try it on tripod with enough time to focus?

I did but not with much succes, will do some tests later to see what the problem is.

 

[Nokiron]

There are many options depends on what you priorities are.

I would only get the Sony 90mm if you need the stabilizer, or some other features (not sure what).

I would get the Sigma 105mm if I wanted AF.

I would and did buy the Venus because I don't need the stabilizer, the x2 magnification was important and I don't need AF. Supposedly as good or better optics. As a bonus it's about half the price of the Sony and significantly less than the Sigma too.

There's the Samyang but honestly I'm not sure I see a reason to buy it over the Venus. It's pretty much the same size, heavier and only magnifies to x1. Maybe it has some advantages I'm not aware of.

Got the lens since yesterday and so far liking it. Only problem i am having is getting sharp photos using it on my Sony a6400.

I don't know how familiar you are with macro photography, but since the Laowa is a 2X macro lens the magnification is pretty immense. So every shake is magnified by a lot. So I would suggest using a sturdy tripod and a 10 second timer or something like that.

 

[TMG1961]

There are many options depends on what you priorities are.

I would only get the Sony 90mm if you need the stabilizer, or some other features (not sure what).

I would get the Sigma 105mm if I wanted AF.

I would and did buy the Venus because I don't need the stabilizer, the x2 magnification was important and I don't need AF. Supposedly as good or better optics. As a bonus it's about half the price of the Sony and significantly less than the Sigma too.

There's the Samyang but honestly I'm not sure I see a reason to buy it over the Venus. It's pretty much the same size, heavier and only magnifies to x1. Maybe it has some advantages I'm not aware of.

Got the lens since yesterday and so far liking it. Only problem i am having is getting sharp photos using it on my Sony a6400.

I don't know how familiar you are with macro photography, but since the Laowa is a 2X macro lens the magnification is pretty immense. So every shake is magnified by a lot. So I would suggest using a sturdy tripod and a 10 second timer or something like that.

I don't have much experience with macro photography.

 

[clarnibass]

Not sure what magnification you tried but at least to test use a solid tripod, preferably electronic shutter (don't know if your camera has it), focus carefully using magnified view, self timer and/or cable release. Basically eliminate everything except the lens itself.

 

[TMG1961]

Not sure what magnification you tried but at least to test use a solid tripod, preferably electronic shutter (don't know if your camera has it), focus carefully using magnified view, self timer and/or cable release. Basically eliminate everything except the lens itself.

I tried a tripod, self timer 5 seconds, carefully focused using focus peaking. Insect was completely red, so in focus. f/22 - 1/160sec, iso100 with flash. This was the best shot i got.







--
Theo
**I have no problem with downloading my original image and editing it**

 

[Nokiron]

Not sure what magnification you tried but at least to test use a solid tripod, preferably electronic shutter (don't know if your camera has it), focus carefully using magnified view, self timer and/or cable release. Basically eliminate everything except the lens itself.

I tried a tripod, self timer 5 seconds, carefully focused using focus peaking. Insect was completely red, so in focus. f/22 - 1/160sec, iso100 with flash. This was the best shot i got.

F22 will cause some severe image quality degradation due to heavy diffraction. That's a big obstacle with macro photography and the reason that people try to focus stack.

But if the object is moving, I would suggest open up the aperture a bit (F8, F11) and see how the image quality changes.

 

[TMG1961]

Not sure what magnification you tried but at least to test use a solid tripod, preferably electronic shutter (don't know if your camera has it), focus carefully using magnified view, self timer and/or cable release. Basically eliminate everything except the lens itself.

I tried a tripod, self timer 5 seconds, carefully focused using focus peaking. Insect was completely red, so in focus. f/22 - 1/160sec, iso100 with flash. This was the best shot i got.

F22 will cause some severe image quality degradation due to heavy diffraction. That's a big obstacle with macro photography and the reason that people try to focus stack.

But if the object is moving, I would suggest open up the aperture a bit (F8, F11) and see how the image quality changes.

Realised that F22 was a bit too much after doing some additional reading. This insect was about 3-4 mm long and i tried f8 and f11 before but it was much worse then this one. Almost nothing of it was in focus. Was a bit frustrating.

--
Theo
**I have no problem with downloading my original image and editing it**

 

[Nokiron]

Not sure what magnification you tried but at least to test use a solid tripod, preferably electronic shutter (don't know if your camera has it), focus carefully using magnified view, self timer and/or cable release. Basically eliminate everything except the lens itself.

I tried a tripod, self timer 5 seconds, carefully focused using focus peaking. Insect was completely red, so in focus. f/22 - 1/160sec, iso100 with flash. This was the best shot i got.

F22 will cause some severe image quality degradation due to heavy diffraction. That's a big obstacle with macro photography and the reason that people try to focus stack.

But if the object is moving, I would suggest open up the aperture a bit (F8, F11) and see how the image quality changes.

Realised that F22 was a bit too much after doing some additional reading. This insect was about 3-4 mm long and i tried f8 and f11 before but it was much worse then this one. Almost nothing of it was in focus. Was a bit frustrating.

I only do the occasional macro photography (I honestly just love using my Sigma 105 DG DN Macro as a normal telephoto when walking around) so I don't have many more tips for you macro-wise, but are you satisfied with the image quality of the lens just shooting normally with normal apertures?

But yeah, you have stumbled upon the tough balancing act in macro. Getting sufficient depth of field while still battling with diffraction.