Wife Sony A6000 Macro Lens

ilovelens · Joined: 03 May 2013 Posts: 27 Location: Canada

Hello guys my wife is looking for a macro lens for her sony a6000 what would be a really nice sharp macro manual lens you can buy? dont want to spend more than $200. Thanks

StyxD · Joined: 18 Nov 2014 Posts: 79 Location: Italia

Kiron 105 f2.8 or Tamron Adaptall 90 f2.5, those are the 2 macro lenses I've tested.

The Kiron has one of the most beautiful IQ I've ever seen in a macro lens but it's HEAVY as a brick. I kept the Tamron as it's sharp as a surgeon knife (sometimes just too much sharp) and way more portable on a small mirrorless.

WolverineX · Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2015 7:40 am Post subject: Re: Wife Sony A6000 Macro Lens

kansalliskala · Expire: 2016-12-30

ilovelens · Joined: 03 May 2013 Posts: 27 Location: Canada

Thank you I'll look them up and I need adapter for them correct ? I'm leading on Tamron 90 2.5 seems sharp

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

I have the A6000, and have for macro

Minolta Rokkor 100 / 3.5 with the dedicated extension tube. It's big and heavy but very very good.
Asahi Macro Takumar 50 / 4. Which is tiny and also a great lens, very nice on the A6000
Tamron SP 52BB 90 / 2.5 Another really good lens, can be adapted to the mount of your choice.
There's a 24 / 2.8 Macro lens that turns up with many different names such as Ensinor, Clubman, Tefnon, and is usually cheap and surprisingly good.
There are many zooms that do decent macro, although they might not do 1:1. My favourites are
Minolta Rokkor Macro 35- 70 / 3.5 and the Tamron BBAR 17A 35 - 70 / 3.5 it's hard to choose between these two.

Minolfan · Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3437 Location: Netherlands

I am supporter of the Minolta 100mm 3.5, but you can cheaper with
Panagor 90mm 2.8 and Panagor 55mm 2.8, both 1:1 without extra extension ring.
Very good and not as heavy as the Minolta, that needs the dedicated ring for 1:1.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Difficult to find crappy macro lenses, they are all good.

Oldhand · Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2015 10:36 pm Post subject:

Another very good and very light lens that is often found cheaply is the Sigma EX 50mm 2.8 macro.
It is natively 1:1 without any extension.
Those made for the old Minolta Maxxum are likely the cheapest.
Here is mine on X-E1 with mount adapter.
OH

eno789 · Joined: 27 Aug 2010 Posts: 159 Location: California

Cosina/Phoenix/Promaster/Soligor/Vivitar/Voigtlander 100mm f/3.5 Macro, 49mm filter thread, 258g.

See https://www.flickr.com/groups/cosina

kansalliskala · Expire: 2016-12-30

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

In your price range, you'll find many manual focus macro lenses that will do what you need. You should probably ask yourself first of all what your macro requirements are. How likely are you going to need 1:1, for example. Many, if not most, macro lenses go down to 1:2 only. But these lenses can also usually achieve 1:1 with the use of an extension tube or teleconverter.

I'm not familiar with the Sigma OH mentions, but the fact that it goe s down to 1:1 is a definite advantage. The only other one I'm aware of that does this is the Kiron 105mm f/2.8, which can often be found as the Lester Dine macro, and sometimes as a Vivitar Series 1 macro (I have a copy of the latter). This is also an exceptionally good lens, but its prices tend to be rather high.

I have a bunch of macro lenses, and to be honest, for the sort of macro stuff I do, I almost never need 1:1. For this reason, most of the macro work I end up doing is with a macro lens in the 100mm range because it gives me a greater stand-off from the subject. Something that the above Sigma won't permit. And in those special circumstances when I need 1:1, I can either switch to the Kiron -- which I usually don't do -- or I add extension or a teleconverter. If I'm using my Tamron 90mm macro, I'll often use a dedicated Tamron 2x, which will render exactly 1:1 image size. I also own a Vivitar 7-element macro-focusing teleconverter. This is an excellent TC, probably the best I've ever used, but what's nice about it is it has a focusing helical and when using just a regular normal 50mm lens, you can focus all the way down to 1:1 with it. So having one of these will turn ANY lens into a macro lens.

So, recommendations? Based on your requirements and your gear, you have a tremendous range of excellent optics to choose from. I can only state that the Tamron 90mm macro is one of the two sharpest lenses I've ever used and the other one was a Nikon 55mm f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor. So to get down to 1:1 with it, I'd get either a Tamron dedicated 2x tc or a Vivitar 7-element 2x tc -- or both. Tamron did make just a tube for the 90 macro, but it's uncommon -- I've never seen one, just heard about it. Remember, you can use the Vivitar tc with any lens and get macro results. So by picking up these three items,. the Tamron 90mm, the Tamron tc, and the Vivitar macro tc, you've maximized your possible selection of useful items without going overboard or breaking your budget.

Basilisk · Joined: 21 Mar 2013 Posts: 356 Location: UK

For shooting insects in bright natural light, a longer lens is preferable, as it gives a more comfortable working distance, and you are less likely to cast a shadow on the subject. A lot of good options in the 90-105 range. A couple of considerations - my Sigma 105mm f2.8 AF lens takes a nice image but throws up a couple of issues you might want to consider. Close macro work usually requires stopping down for extra DOF. My Sigma has six blades which make distinctly hexagonal OOF highlights when stopped down (fine if wide open). If that bothers you, look for lenses with more blades. It also my most flarey lens if pointed towards the light - I don't know if that is because it is a macro design, but my manual non-macro Nikkor 105 f2.5 is pretty flare resistant even without a hood. Another issue is Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration (LoCA) - particularly noticeable when shooting shiny metallic details. Historically lenses have not been as well corrected for this. I find I can live with it, and in the vast majority of subjects it doesn't show up. But watch for really contrasty situations.

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

I just sold my Tokina AT-X 2.5/90 because of the fact that i wanted a macro lens that does 1:1 without an extra tube. I feel it's annoying when you are shooting and then find out that you'd love to go closer and have to take it off again to put the tube in between.....

Don't get me wrong: i love my Minolta macro and use it a lot on the A3000!
But on the 5D i chose the Kiron 2.8/105, does 1:1 by itself and was a lot cheaper than the money i got offered on the AT-X!

edri · Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

The dreaded blue spot with the Tamron 90 is a problem, but it's not such a problem that I would stop using my lens, and I certainly wouldn't consider getting rid of it. I have had pictures with the blue spot, but with my NEX5, Pentax K10 and Sony A6000 I can see the blue spot in the viewfinder or screen as I compose the picture and either move slightly or shade the lens if I can with a bit of cardboard or something. I always use the hood with this lens, it needs it.
I feel that it's such a good lens it's worth working around the blue spot issue. I've had way more excellent pictures with this lens than rejects due to the blue spot.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

I guess I've never used my Tamron 90 in a way that the blue spot was an issue. I've been able to confirm that it was there, but it was in a way I rarely if ever use the lens, as I recall. So yeah, that's why I never hesitate to recommend it. Especially since it seems to be one of the most reasonably priced 100-ish macros around, which is saying something because of its adaptall-2 versatility.

kido · Joined: 06 Jun 2013 Posts: 105 Location: Chile

I agree with the above: the blue spot has never ruined any picture of mine. On the other hand, when it will, I'm sure it will be the one photo I can't repeat.

As for the original question, I have only had experience with two of the lenses mentioned in this thread and I can vouch for both.

1. Tamron SP 90mm f/2.5 is a great piece of glass, super-sharp, easy to focus, with the addition of the Tamron 01F 2x teleconverter and Tamron 18F extension tube + a decent lens hood (Tamron 98FH if you're lucky) it's a hell of a set-up for very little money.

I've made these two photos the first time I shot with this lens on Sony A6000, both handheld, wide open, 1/2000s, ISO200. The second one was shot at MFD:

2. The Ensinor/Promaster/Super Ozeck/SICOR-XL/Clubman/Ozunon/Super Paragon 24mm f/2.8 - probably not what your wife is looking for, but great lens nevertheless. According to the markings, when it comes to the magnification it goes up to 1:4, its MFD will make you bump into things and most importantly, the IQ is far above its price-point.

The following images were also shot the first time I mounted the Promaster on Sony A6000, these two work great together.
Both handheld, wide open, ISO100, the first one at 1/320s, the second one at 1/60s:

Nordentro · Expire: 2015-01-29

Volna-9 is nice! I also like the Soligor 90mm f/2.5

http://manuellfokus.no/soligor-cd-macro-mc-90mm-f2-5/

ilovelens · Joined: 03 May 2013 Posts: 27 Location: Canada

what iis magnification 1:1 or 1:2 what does it do?

Oldhand · Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2015 6:49 am Post subject:

anktonio · Expire: 2017-02-22

ilovelens · Joined: 03 May 2013 Posts: 27 Location: Canada

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

That's it. Well, actually, that's the second version, even though the two versions are optically identical. They're pretty easy to tell apart. The first version has the severe, abrupt lines that Tamron used on its short primes back then, plus it has a 49mm front filter thread. The second version has the more rounded appearance and a 55mm front filter thread. Either way you go, you can't go wrong.

That particular lens is priced a bit on the high side for what I've seen the Tamron 90s going for on eBay. Often, if you keep your eyes open there, you can find one for less -- either early or late models. For example, here's an early one:

Click here to see on Ebay

One thing both of these lenses have going for them is they include Nikon Adaptall-2 mounts. Nikon mounts are not that common on eBay because of their popularity (everybody wants one, so few are available), I think. I've seen just the Nikonn Adaptall-2 mount sell for $25-30 on eBay. The above lens also comes with a nice Tamron case. Tamron made very nice, sturdy cases for its lenses, but I dunno about you, but I never use them. I have bags and bags full of lens cases, many or which are Tamron. I'll never use them, and I haven't bothered listing them on eBay cuz I figure nobody else really wants them either, but they're just too pretty to throw away.

The search I just conducted on eBay turned up quite a few hits, but I was surprised to see that most of the 90 macros are priced on the high side. I guess the word has finally gotten out about this lens's sharpness, and enough people are like me -- they don't care about the blue circle.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas