Disappointed, don't need a macro lens.

[Jerry R]

Was trying to convince myself that I needed the 90mm macro lens. I really don't do macro just close ups. The 0.2x of the 24-70mm, f/4, with a slight crop (unfortunately) doses the trick.

70mm @ f/4, 8x10 crop (4800 x 3800) will print 16" x 12" at 300 dpi. (ISO 3200, hand held @ 1/160 sec, JPEG )









--
Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R ,Sony A7.
Lenses: 24mm, f/1.8, FE 24-70, f/4, & FE 70-200, f/4.
Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.

 

[daran]

And you are disappointed because...?

 

[Jerry R]

Because I wanted the 90mm macro and can't really justify it. The 0.2x of the 24-70mm, f/4 is all I really need.

--
Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R ,Sony A7.
Lenses: 24mm, f/1.8, FE 24-70, f/4, & FE 70-200, f/4.
Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.

 

[richj20]

Was trying to convince myself that I needed the 90mm macro lens. I really don't do macro just close ups. The 0.2x of the 24-70mm, f/4, with a slight crop (unfortunately) doses the trick.

You make a good case; nice example.

Other lenses work well for closeup:


Batis 2/25mm has close focusing capability


Longer focal lengths provide nice background separation (200mm here)

Of course, if you want to magnify, you need something else: tubes, achromat, or macro lens.


FE 2.8/50mm Macro

- Richard

--
http://www.rsjphoto.net

 

[lacix]

You right!







--
UBL

 

[osv]

Was trying to convince myself that I needed the 90mm macro lens. I really don't do macro just close ups. The 0.2x of the 24-70mm, f/4, with a slight crop (unfortunately) doses the trick.

i like that pic, but honestly, there isn't anything sharp in that shot, at all... perhaps it's motion blur or something.

you can get sharp flower pics with many of the cheap legacy macro lenses, for a lot less money than what you'd spend on an fe90:









--
dan

 

[Ari Aikomus]

Was trying to convince myself that I needed the 90mm macro lens. I really don't do macro just close ups. The 0.2x of the 24-70mm, f/4, with a slight crop (unfortunately) doses the trick.

Nice. But, unfortunately, not very sharp.

But, you are right. An expensive macro lens (like sony 90 macro) is not necessary.

For example you can get used Tamron 90/2.8 Di macro for 200-300$, and it's very sharp lens...




Tamron 90/2.8




Tamron 90/2.8




Tamron 90/2.8

..Or Minolta AF 50/2.8 macro (clcik) , used one for 90$

Even Sony SEL 16-50PZ APS-C kit zoom can do nice close-ups with cheap 10mm ext.tube, on fullframe:




SEL16-50+10mm ext.tube




SEL 16-50+10mm ext.tube

cheers,



Ari

70mm @ f/4, 8x10 crop (4800 x 3800) will print 16" x 12" at 300 dpi. (ISO 3200, hand held @ 1/160 sec, JPEG )



--
Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R ,Sony A7.
Lenses: 24mm, f/1.8, FE 24-70, f/4, & FE 70-200, f/4.
Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.

--
- Ari Aikomus -
'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'

 

[PVCdroid]

Because I wanted the 90mm macro and can't really justify it. The 0.2x of the 24-70mm, f/4 is all I really need.

 

[Ken Sky]

When my daughter asked me to photograph the jewellery she makes, I just reached my cupboard for my old Minolta 50mm macro and the LAEA3. A tripod is a must with macro shots and a rail helps. Don't be disappointed that you won't have an expensive lens gathering dust for the odd shot it was designed for.

 

[Rey66]

This is really in the eyes of the beholder, if it looks good to you and you are satisfied, then you got what you need. It is less lens to carry .. I sold mine months ago but I preorder the 100mm STF which has a close focus ability to .57m, this will be interesting for 1:4 closeup..

 

[Ari Aikomus]

When my daughter asked me to photograph the jewellery she makes, I just reached my cupboard for my old Minolta 50mm macro and the LAEA3. A tripod is a must with macro shots and a rail helps.

Agree. And BTW - this Minolta 50 macro is pretty good one. I have one too, and like it a lot.

Ari

Don't be disappointed that you won't have an expensive lens gathering dust for the odd shot it was designed for.

 

[mg_k]

Because I wanted the 90mm macro and can't really justify it. The 0.2x of the 24-70mm, f/4 is all I really need.

If that's all you need then that's great, because that's nowhere near 1:1 macro mag that the FE90 is designed to do for those that need it.

--
Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R ,Sony A7.
Lenses: 24mm, f/1.8, FE 24-70, f/4, & FE 70-200, f/4.
Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.

--
My Flickr
My Getty Images

 

[Jerry R]

Nice ones. I have the 70-200mm, f/4 and did get some nice pics at the Botanical gardens a few days ago.

 

[Jerry R]

Its hand held at f/4. But I'm happy with the color, contrast and soft background.

 

[Jerry R]

Nice pics, thanks.

 

[Jerry R]

Agree, thanks.

 

[Jerry R]

Yes, I'm happy with the colors, contrast and background.

 

[LBJ2]

Longer focal lengths provide nice background separation (200mm here)

--
http://www.rsjphoto.net

Love this photo Rich. Great colors, smooth Bokeh, mesmerizing water drop reflection. Best view in original size.

P.S. I think I see a tire/wheel in the bottom left water drop ?

 

[BBQue]

[No message]

 

[Jerry R]

Yes, and some day I would like to get there.