Is it worth $400.00-new macro lens
Oct 2, 2012 09:24:57 #
I have a Pentax K30 with 18-135 lens. Would like a macro lens for xmas. Pentax makes 2 very goods lens(from reviews,research) the 50mm f/2.8 for $430 and the 100mm f/2.8 for $850. Question: Is the 100 worth the extra money, or would the 50mm be the better choice. My two Jack Russells always buy me the best presents and will spend any amount to keep me happy!!
Oct 2, 2012 09:31:30 #
JustJerry wrote:
It's a shame Tokina doesn't make one to fit your camera. I Got the 100mm macro for my Nikon Camera for around $450. If money no problem I would choose the 100mm as you can use as portrait lens also. But I have no experience with the lens that are mentioned. Got luck with your choice.I have a Pentax K30 with 18-135 lens. Would like a macro lens for xmas. Pentax makes 2 very goods lens(from reviews,research) the 50mm f/2.8 for $430 and the 100mm f/2.8 for $850. Question: Is the 100 worth the extra money, or would the 50mm be the better choice. My two Jack Russells always buy me the best presents and will spend any amount to keep me happy!!
Oct 2, 2012 09:56:17 #
Thanks..Money is always a problem..but as I get older..who cares attitude is stronger..thanks again.
Oct 2, 2012 10:19:54 #
JustJerry wrote:
I believe you will find the working distance on the 50 too short for critters-- so depends on what you want to shoot.I have a Pentax K30 with 18-135 lens. Would like a macro lens for xmas. Pentax makes 2 very goods lens(from reviews,research) the 50mm f/2.8 for $430 and the 100mm f/2.8 for $850. Question: Is the 100 worth the extra money, or would the 50mm be the better choice. My two Jack Russells always buy me the best presents and will spend any amount to keep me happy!!
Oct 2, 2012 11:56:06 #
JustJerry wrote:
I believe that you may be limited in your choices for that camera but you might want to consider the Sigma 70mm macro lens, it will allow you a greater working distance for about $70 more than the 50mm lens that you are considering... I have a Pentax K30 with 18-135 lens. Would like a macro lens for xmas. Pentax makes 2 very goods lens(from reviews,research) the 50mm f/2.8 for $430 and the 100mm f/2.8 for $850. Question: Is the 100 worth the extra money, or would the 50mm be the better choice. My two Jack Russells always buy me the best presents and will spend any amount to keep me happy!!
50mm Macro lens can also double as a great walk around lens so you might consider that as well, but as far as straight macro work goes you will appreciate the longer focal length...
Oct 2, 2012 12:59:32 #
Oct 2, 2012 13:01:11 #
Oct 2, 2012 13:41:29 #
I have no doubt that the Pentax macro lenses are high-quality optics and construction. I personally shoot a Nikkor 105G macro lens, but I must say that several macro-photographers who post exceptional images to the Macro Forum, use Sigma, Lester Dine, Tamron, and other "secondary" manufacturer lenses, available at considerably less price. If I were to do it again, I would seriously consider one of the other macro lenses, which provide the same excellent results at a better price.
That said, let us discuss field differences:
At Minimum Focusing Distance (MFD), the Working Distance (from lens front element to subject) of a 50-mm lens is 75-mm = 3-inches. WD for a 100-mm lens is 150-mm = 5.9-inches.
A short WD causes illumination problems (working in your own shadow), plus the very real possibility of spooking insect subjects. Most field macro-photographers like a macro lens right around 100-mm or a bit longer.
That said, let us discuss field differences:
At Minimum Focusing Distance (MFD), the Working Distance (from lens front element to subject) of a 50-mm lens is 75-mm = 3-inches. WD for a 100-mm lens is 150-mm = 5.9-inches.
A short WD causes illumination problems (working in your own shadow), plus the very real possibility of spooking insect subjects. Most field macro-photographers like a macro lens right around 100-mm or a bit longer.
Oct 2, 2012 13:46:07 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
:thumbup: :thumbup:I have no doubt that the Pentax macro lenses are h... (show quote)
Oct 2, 2012 21:06:20 #
Thanks Nikonian72..You give excellent advice and make it understandable to us beginners. I'll check out the other brands and zero in on the100mm lens. Look for some blurry macro pictures this spring..Thanks again.jj
Oct 3, 2012 07:59:14 #
Is the MFD and WD the same thing? I have a Canon 100mm. MFD pretty well explains itself,but what is WD really mean? Thanks
Oct 3, 2012 08:13:57 #
boomboom wrote:
No. They are not the same thing, MFD is measured from the sensor plane so if MFD is 10" and the lens itself is 4" long then your Working Distance, the distance from the front of the lens, will be less than 6".Is the MFD and WD the same thing? I have a Canon 100mm. MFD pretty well explains itself,but what is WD really mean? Thanks
Oct 3, 2012 08:28:10 #
Ah Hah! So let me see if I have this right. I understand the MFD is the closest you can be from the sensor to your subject and still be able to focus. The WD is the closest you can be from the end of your lens to the subject and still focus. Right? If that's correct, then when my lens is 6 inches from my subject, is that when I reach a 1:1 image or is that something totally different?
Oct 3, 2012 08:48:25 #
boomboom wrote:
If you are using a true Macro lens somewhere on the barrel you should see two sets of numbers in a little window that are printed on a rotating dial... in that window you will see the focus distance both in feet and meters but you should also see a third set of numbers that look something like 1:1 1:2.... that third set of numbers are the magnification that you are focused at... Ah Hah! So let me see if I have this right. I understand the MFD is the closest you can be from the sensor to your subject and still be able to focus. The WD is the closest you can be from the end of your lens to the subject and still focus. Right? If that's correct, then when my lens is 6 inches from my subject, is that when I reach a 1:1 image or is that something totally different?
But to answer your question simply a true macro lens will only achieve 1:1 magnification when it is focused to it's minimum focus distance... so if your min focus is 6 inches then the answer is yes, that is where you achieve 1:1 reproduction.
Oct 3, 2012 09:55:12 #
i started out with a 50mm and used it for a year. you can get a lot of good shots with it. after that i bought a 150-mm for the extra reach (i loved it), but i had to have a 105mm too. i still have all 3, but i use the 105-mm more than the others, 99% of the time.tom
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.