Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Which mf macro?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:34 pm    Post subject: Which mf macro? Reply with quote

I was thinking of purchasing a macro glass for my canon 5D but I would not use it much to justiy spending more than 200-300 usd. And would love to try an older mf lens. Since I shoot FF I think a 135mm or longer would be in order, any suggestions?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Longer macro lenses are usually more expensive than shorter one and their image quality is weaker also.

So think about twice you really need longer lens than shorter ?

Generally all dedicated macro lenses are good no matter it is made by top maker or third party one.

Naturally top makers are usually better, but no big difference between them.

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/top_lenses/macro/


PostPosted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For that money you should be able to find a Micro-Nikkor 60mm
Excellent lens.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 5:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio's right


patrickh


or you might try the enlarging lens/bellows route.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 6:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would also suggest a set of bellows and a few different enlarger lenses for diffent focal lengths. Other possibilities are extension tubes or lens reversing rings.

I use all of the above plus a 90mm Tamron macro, which makes a great lens on a FF body.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's an affordable Tamron 90/2.5 52B.

Click here to see on Ebay

It's a 1:2 macro, so you'd need to use extension tube or a suitable TC to reach 1:1.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Enlarger lenses and bellows are a very good option.

Last edited by jjphoto on Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:13 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For a 5D I would definitely go for at least a 90mm focal length and nothing shorter. There isn't much to choose from between 105 and 180mm though, within your budget.
If you don't mind using a big lens, the Mamiya 645 120/4 macro is the best option. It's capable of a 1:1 reproduction ratio and has truly excellent IQ (better than Tamron/Vivitar/Tokina etc. 90-105mm lenses according to some). It's nearly apochromatic (uses SLD glass). Price-performance ratio is really good, as it often goes for low prices.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

S-M-C Macro Takumar 100/4


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
S-M-C Macro Takumar 100/4


+1


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

welcome Pit
have a nice stay with us
http://forum.mflenses.com/industar-50-2-on-5dii-t26168.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/helios-44-2-on-5dii-t26136.html


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bellows-Takumar 100/4 or S-M-C- bellows TAKUMAR 100/4 with its bellows of course Smile


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Minolta Rokkor TC 135/4.0 bellows preset lens is a very good option IMO.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Minolfan wrote:
Minolta Rokkor TC 135/4.0 bellows preset lens is a very good option IMO.


The Olympus 135/4.5 with the 65-116mm telescopic extension tube is nicer to use handheld than bellows. Wink I've seen wonderful images from it.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are not many macro lenses longer than 100mm to chose from, consider having a Canon FF camera body, it would be easier to adapt a lens if one of the following lens mount is chosen: Nikon, M42, Olympus, Leica R.
Some third party lenses are having good reputation, like Vivitar series 1 and Tamron Adaptall, their 90mm are good choices. The ultimate macro could be the Leica Apo Macro Elmarit 100mm f2.8, with a price tag to match however. There is a large selection of enlarging lenses to chose from for macro application, quite a few are with Apo designation. While it is a lower cost alternative, the use however is very much limited to be used with a bellow on tripod. If on tripod and slower operation are not problems, then and additional benefits could be better control of image sharpness with bellow equipped with tilt / shift operation. Have fun searching.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All good suggestions above.

Me, I have a crop-body EOS, but I'm happy with the results I've gotten with my old Micro Nikkor 55mm f/3.5, my Tamron 90mm f/2.5 52B, and my Vivitar S1 100mm f/2.5. Any of these lenses, including the Tokina and/or Vivitar 90mm macros should do you just fine. And yes, I would also strongly consider getting a bellows. It really opens up the macro possibilities for you. Since you're shooting EOS, I'd recommend a bellows using Nikon mount, which I feel is most flexible in terms of offerings -- both with regards to the various bellows that have been manufactured and with regards to the lenses that are available.

Another item that you should consider is a macro-focusing stage. This is of great help when you're trying to get the focus and composition just right when doing high-magnification photography. I recently bought one from an eBay seller (in Hong Kong) and am pleased with the quality of the unit.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Although I would like to try a bellows setup, it would cost me a fair bit to get good mounting hardware and such. I don't need true 1:1 but it would be nice easily obtainable true extension tubes. What I want is a fair priced lens that can be easily adapted to EF mount.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bellows in M42 are not expensive and easy to adapt to Canon EF. Lots of macro lenses can be fit on that. The 135mm Rokkor I meant before has M39, just like a number of enlarger lenses. M39 to M42 is very cheap.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Incredibly great bang-for-the-buck macro (IMHO) is the Tamron SP 90mm f2.5. It will only go 1:2 without a 2x teleconverter or extension, however.

Another wonderful 1:2 macro lens is the 50mm f4 S-M-C Takumar. One of my favs.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

womble wrote:
no-X wrote:
S-M-C Macro Takumar 100/4


+1


+1


PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cheekygeek wrote:
Another wonderful 1:2 macro lens is the 50mm f4 S-M-C Takumar. One of my favs.

Asahi made two versions. The S-M-C and Super Takumar (ver.2) are 1:2. The non-Super (ver.1) is 1:1 without added extension. I got mine for US$45 a couple months ago. I was lucky and the lens was a bit dinged up front, but who puts filters on a macro lens? AND I LOVE IT!

My other great bargain was an M42 Vivitar-Kiron 90/2.8 for US$3 -- missing its knurled rubber focusing grip, which I replaced with duct tape. Looks bad, works just fine, goes 1:1, weighs 470g / 1 lb. Don't leave home without it.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I'll echo others above and recommend bellows, with enlarger lenses, and/or mount reversal ring(s). Standard lenses from ANY MAKER can be reversed for macros. Note that the working distance for any reversed lens is its registration (mount-to-frame distance) which for 135 cams is under 50mm / 2 inches. The closest working distance for a non-reversed lens is its focal length. When I want to stay 6+ inches from a subject, I use a 162/4.5 Wollensak enlarging lens (EL) on bellows and I also use it for non-macro shots. My M42 bellows cost about US$35; the Wolly was US$7; tubes to stretch the extension to 160mm were another US$8. So that's US$50 for a flexible setup.

Why reverse lenses, or use enlarger lenses? Sharpness and cheapness. Medium-format EL's especially will project an edge-to-edge sharp image to a 135 or APS-C frame, but all EL's (except those meant for 110 or similar tiny formats) should be good there. EL's longer than 75mm can focus to infinity on most bellows; shorter glass is for closeups only, due to the thickness of the bellows. A fine Nikkor EL 50/2.8 or 80/5.6 or 105/5.6 can usually be had for well under US$20, including shipping.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The only issue I have with bellows (in combination with a digital SLR) is dust. Film camera? No worries.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Canon FD 200/4 Macro is long.
It does not focus to infinity with an adapter without glass, but if you want it for macro it might not be a big problem.

The lens is supposed to be possible to convert to Canon EF mount with infinity focus.

I bought lens relativly cheap a while ago and planning to investigate the possibility to convert it later. It would be a perfect macro for shooting butterflys and other shy insects.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Canon FD 200mm f/4 is uncommon but is a great performer. Good find! And well worth doing the conversion to EOS, in my opinion.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
The Canon FD 200mm f/4 is uncommon but is a great performer. Good find! And well worth doing the conversion to EOS, in my opinion.


I bought batches of lenses on a buying spree a couple years ago. One such lot was a group of Canon FD lenses including the 200/4 macro. I paid US$9 each for those FDs. I have no camera for them, so I just sold them all on eBay. The 200/4 macro went for US$25. I made a $16 profit!! Everybody is happy, except maybe the guy who sold them for $9 each...