Personally, I'd go for a fast 50mm over a macro if it was my only 50mm prime. The ability to shoot in low light and selectively focus that a fast lens gives outweighs the macro capability, especially when you can get the macro by adding an inexpensive extension tube. Just my 2 cents.
- MCC
At 06:05 AM 5/31/01 -0700, you wrote:
I have 4 lens to go with my ZX-5n:
- Pentax A 28mm f2.8 (which I may sell?)
- Pentax FA 28-80mm f3.5-5.6
- Pentax FA 80-320mm f4.5-5.6
- Vivitar Series 1 AF 19-35mm f3.5-4.5
I'd like to add a lens that can support macro photography and have found the following potential options in my price range:
- Pentax FA Macro 50mm f2.8
- Sigma Macro 50mm f2.8 EX AF
The minimum focus distance for the Pentax is 19.5cm/7.6 inches; the Sigma is 18.8cm/7.4 inches.
My questions to the group are:
1. Are there any other similar lenses I should consider?
2. Does anyone have either of these particular lens? If so, what do you think of it?
3. The Sigma lens is about $120/US less than the Pentax. Is there an advantage of the Pentax over the Sigma that isn't readily apparent?
4. Would it be smarter - it is cheaper - to buy the Pentax FA 50mm f1.4? Minimum focus on this lens is 45cm/1.5 feet. Could I use the faster lens for minimal macro work (flowers, etc.) with close-up filter(s)? What would be the draw backs of this approach?
I appreciate any and all assistance!
Ed Dombek
_____________________________________________________________
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
- - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- - - - - - - - - -
Photos:
- - - - - - - - - -
