On 06/02/2014 9:53 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
Not to disrespect your choices, but I find autofocus to be less than
helpful (at the very least, unnecessary) for macro work. You might
want to consider manual lenses, too.
Depends on how close the macro is.
The D FA100/2.8 is a good macro choice. It's
Not to disrespect your choices, but I find autofocus to be less than
helpful (at the very least, unnecessary) for macro work. You might
want to consider manual lenses, too.
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:40 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> remember on aps-c BOTH the 50mm and 100mm
> are already telephoto
remember on aps-c BOTH the 50mm and 100mm
are already telephoto equivalents. The 50mm is
closer to normal and the 100mm gives the most
perspective compression in usage.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, ple
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 02:35:41PM -0500, Glen Berry wrote:
> Please help me decide on a used Pentax macro lens. I've narrowed it
> down to these two used lenses:
>
> 50 F2.8 SMC MACRO D FA
> 100 F2.8 SMC D FA MACRO
>
> What are the pros and cons of the 50mm vs the 100mm?
>
> What applications w
I have both of those lenses. Working distance on the 50mm is pretty
tight if you want magnification at 1:1 or so. The 100 mm gives you a
lot more room.
I bought my 50 for use in extreme macro situations - reverse mounted on
extension tubes or bellows. You can easily get to 4x to even 10x
mag
The 100mm is best for smaller items like coins, stamps, insects, etc.
The 50mm is best for larger items like whole flowers, groups of flowers,
product photography.
On 2/6/2014 4:17 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
At any magnification the DOF for either lens will be roughly the same
for a give f stop.
At any magnification the DOF for either lens will be roughly the same
for a give f stop. I'd go for the 100mm for macro work it will give you
a lot more working room at any given magnification, unless you expect to
be working in cramped quarters then get the 50. As far as optical
qualities, P
Please help me decide on a used Pentax macro lens. I've narrowed it down
to these two used lenses:
50 F2.8 SMC MACRO D FA
100 F2.8 SMC D FA MACRO
What are the pros and cons of the 50mm vs the 100mm?
What applications would the 50mm be best for?
What applications would the 100mm be best for?
if your enlarger lens is good old M39 you can pick up a cheap used
Zörk Mini Macro Helix along with am M39 adaptor, some M42 extension
tubes or an M42 bellows and a M42 to PK adaptor. with a little luck
you can get all that for under $150 and it will let you focus and
shoot with enlarger lenses jus
I just realized that I have a lens-reversing adapter. I just mounted a
Pentax 50mm f2.0 lens on my camera backwards, and it gave fairly
impressive results. When shooting coins, a US quarter will almost
totally span the narrow dimension of the frame. There is just a very
tiny amount of space lef
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 3:57 PM, steve harley wrote:
> On 2011-01-31 15:36 , Glen Berry wrote:
>>
>> Are there any other macro lenses I should consider?
>
> after spending a lot of time taking semi-macro shots with my 16-45 i asked
> here a while back to test my notion that a longer macro would sui
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "eckinator"
Subject: Re: Which Macro Lens?
2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
I've had Nikon pros wanting to see mine because they've heard so much
about
it. One called it legenda
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "eckinator"
Subject: Re: Which Macro Lens?
2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
So I could buy a Canon equivalent for $250?
I've had Nikon pros wanting to see mine because they've
On 2011-01-31 15:36 , Glen Berry wrote:
Are there any other macro lenses I should consider?
after spending a lot of time taking semi-macro shots with my 16-45 i
asked here a while back to test my notion that a longer macro would suit
me; i got lots of suggestions that 45-50mm was long enough,
2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
> Yep. The Pentax SMC A* 200mm f4.0 ED Macro - about as good as they get !
>
> Longer is better - gives you more room to work - especially good with little
> creatures.
Actually, I just sold mine. I agree that longer is better, but it
depends a lot on what you're shooting. If
I'll second that.
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 4:10 AM, eckinator wrote:
> 2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
>>
>> I've had Nikon pros wanting to see mine because they've heard so much about
>> it. One called it legendary.
>
> did they offer to show you theirs?
> man, that's some braggadocio... =)
>
> Markworthy?
Glen, if you are after dedicated macro lens, then the likes of
90-100-105 mm lenses either from Pentax or from Tamron, Sigma, Tokina,
etc are highly regarded, affordable and useful. With shorter lenses the
problem is that you loose the working distance. To achieve magnification
you ought to be
2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
>
> I've had Nikon pros wanting to see mine because they've heard so much about
> it. One called it legendary.
did they offer to show you theirs?
man, that's some braggadocio... =)
Markworthy? I think so
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailma
2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
>
> So I could buy a Canon equivalent for $250?
>
> I've had Nikon pros wanting to see mine because they've heard so much about
> it.
> One called it legendary.
OK so the Canon isn't legendary but I am extremely happy with it.
Don't own the Pentax but 8 times better would be
Firstly I assume from the focal lengths that you are fine with shorter
FL macros. For the type of work I do the 35mm sees more frames than my
50 or 125mm macro lenses and I used my A*200/4 so infrequently that I
sold it. Both lenses are reputably great performers but I can only
speak from experienc
I had both the A50 2.8 and the FA100 2.8. The 100 was sharper but the
A50 was so light and easy to carry that I was more likely to have it
with me. My macro stuff was usually on the wander.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:41 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
> From: Glen Berry
>>
>> I'm considering spending so
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Glen Berry wrote:
> Anyway, I'm currently shooting with a K100D, and I'm trying to decide
> between getting one of these new macro lenses:
>
> Pentax smc P-D FA 50mm f/2.8
> Pentax SMCP-DA 35mm f/2.8
A friend has a K20D with the 35 macro as his main lens. He uses
From: Glen Berry
I'm considering spending some money on a new macro lens. I used to have
an older Pentax 50mm f2.8 autofocus lens that was built like a tank, and
took very sharp photos. I bought it used at a local shop for only about
$100, which was a huge bargain! Unfortunately, that lens got st
@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bob
Sullivan
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 6:42 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Which Macro Lens?
That's why I like the 100mm macros. DFA100/2.8 is nice. A100/2.8 is an old
favorite. Regards, Bob S.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:33 P
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "eckinator"
Subject: Re: Which Macro Lens?
2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
Are there any other macro lenses I should consider?
Yep. The Pentax SMC A* 200mm f4.0 ED Macro - about as go
On Jan 31, 2011, at 5:36 PM, Glen Berry wrote:
> I'm considering spending some money on a new macro lens. I used to have an
> older Pentax 50mm f2.8 autofocus lens that was built like a tank, and took
> very sharp photos. I bought it used at a local shop for only about $100,
> which was a huge
My two cents is that autofocus is for wussies. Autofocus on a macro is
for really silly wussies.
I think the operative question is what KIND of macro you shoot. Both
35mm and 50mm are going to put you very close to the object being
photographed. If it is a live thing that can get spooked and move
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 18:40 -0500, "Ken Waller"
wrote:
>
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Glen Berry"
> Subject: Which Macro Lens?
>
>
> > I'm considering
On 31/01/2011 5:42 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
That's why I like the 100mm macros. DFA100/2.8 is nice. A100/2.8 is
an old favorite.
As much as I like my A100/2.8 macro, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone
who shoots digital.
It is very prone to picking up sensor reflections.
--
William Robb
--
2011/2/1 Ken Waller :
>>
>> Are there any other macro lenses I should consider?
>
>
> Yep. The Pentax SMC A* 200mm f4.0 ED Macro - about as good as they get !
>
> Longer is better - gives you more room to work - especially good with little
> creatures.
too bad it costs about 8 times as much used a
On 11-01-31 6:33 PM, Cory Waters wrote:
I have the DA 35 macro.
It's sharp. It's well built. It's pretty. I don't use it much.
I do wish it had a little more reach. I find that getting the object
big enough in the viewfinder means I've got to get *really* close.
Not so great for spiders.
On 11-01-31 5:36 PM, Glen Berry wrote:
I'm considering spending some money on a new macro lens. I used to
have an older Pentax 50mm f2.8 autofocus lens that was built like a
tank, and took very sharp photos. I bought it used at a local shop for
only about $100, which was a huge bargain! Unfortu
That's why I like the 100mm macros. DFA100/2.8 is nice. A100/2.8 is
an old favorite.
Regards, Bob S.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Cory Waters wrote:
> I have the DA 35 macro.
> It's sharp. It's well built. It's pretty. I don't use it much.
> I do wish it had a little more reach. I find
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Glen Berry"
Subject: Which Macro Lens?
I'm considering spending some money on a new macro lens. I used to have an
older Pentax 50mm f2.8 autofocus lens that was built like a
I have the DA 35 macro.
It's sharp. It's well built. It's pretty. I don't use it much.
I do wish it had a little more reach. I find that getting the object
big enough in the viewfinder means I've got to get *really* close. Not
so great for spiders. Doing "human zoom" with this lens, I actu
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:48 PM, P. J. Alling
wrote:
> Do your lenses pout often? Do you think they might need counseling?
Probably,but they don't speak to each other
Dave
>
> On 1/31/2011 5:43 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Glen Berry wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway, I'
On Jan 31, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Glen Berry wrote:
> I'm considering spending some money on a new macro lens. I used to have an
> older Pentax 50mm f2.8 autofocus lens that was built like a tank, and took
> very sharp photos. I bought it used at a local shop for only about $100,
> which was a huge
The only /true/ macro lens I own is the Vivitar Series 1 Flat Field
90-180mm. I don't think I've ever taken a "macro" photograph with it at
90mm. The longer the better I say, so I'd go for the D FA 50mm if that
were my only choice. However I think I'd actually be looking for an A
100mm f4.0,
Do your lenses pout often? Do you think they might need counseling?
On 1/31/2011 5:43 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Glen Berry wrote:
Anyway, I'm currently shooting with a K100D, and I'm trying to decide
between getting one of these new macro lenses:
Pentax smc
I would buy an SMCA 50/2.8 Macro. But that's me. I prefer manual focus for
the very little macro work that I do.
Bob...
I don't mind if you don't like my manners.
I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad.
I grieve over them on long winter ev
I have a DFA 50 for sale, checked and microfocus adjusted by Pentax,
doubt I can beat eBay US for price though... =(
Cheers
Ecke
2011/1/31 Glen Berry :
> I'm considering spending some money on a new macro lens. I used to have an
> older Pentax 50mm f2.8 autofocus lens that was built like a tank, a
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Glen Berry wrote:
> Anyway, I'm currently shooting with a K100D, and I'm trying to decide
> between getting one of these new macro lenses:
>
> Pentax smc P-D FA 50mm f/2.8
I have the one above. I cannot compare it to the 35 as i do not own
one, but once i had pen
I'm considering spending some money on a new macro lens. I used to have
an older Pentax 50mm f2.8 autofocus lens that was built like a tank, and
took very sharp photos. I bought it used at a local shop for only about
$100, which was a huge bargain! Unfortunately, that lens got stolen
along with
Hi,
as I've said before - D-FA and FA versions seem to be the same
optically, but not mechanically. D-FA is much lighter (I don't find it
always a good thing) and has a more "plasticky" feeling. On positive
side - it's cheaper, has wider focus ring and uses smaller filters. AF
lovers should als
--- Chad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any input on the D-FA will be most useful.
There was a guy who did some close-up tests on DS and found the DFA was quite a
bit
sharper than the FA, especially wide open.
=
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
I want to buy a telephoto macro lens. After doing some research I'm
starting to like the D-FA 100 lens. It is more compact, lighter, and
just seems to look better than the FA 100. I have read little in the
way of chatter on this lens. Does anyone on the list have experience
with this lens?
Seeing
- Original Message -
From: "Fred"
Subject: Re: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
I've got the FA100 f2.8, and use it on the *ist D. I've yet to
have
any problems with CA.
My favorite macro is the A 100/2.8. However, I've never used it on
other
than
"Now, with the *istDS, I found a Pentax-A 50mm f/2.8 Macro at a
reasonable price. It works well and has nice imaging qualities.
I also picked up a set of extension tubes which I'll use with. . ."
I also have this lens. It's a good length on the IstD and since I like
short teles as a walk around l
--- Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My favorite macro is the A 100/2.8. However, I've never used
> it on other than film bodies. (Has anyone tried this critter
on the *ist
> D or DS ?)
If it works as well as the A50/2.8 Macro, it will be a delight.
BTW:
The "Pentax K Auto Extension Tube Set
> I've got the FA100 f2.8, and use it on the *ist D. I've yet to have
> any problems with CA.
My favorite macro is the A 100/2.8. However, I've never used it on other
than film bodies. (Has anyone tried this critter on the *ist D or DS ?)
Fred
I've got the FA100 f2.8, and use it on the *ist D. I've yet to have
any problems with CA.
All the macro shots here were made with this lens:
http://groups.msn.com/OzSavage/shoebox.msnw
Just my 0.02
Dave S
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:38:21 + (GMT), Kostas Kavoussanakis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
On 2005-02-15, at 21:38, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
I believe I have read here that the FA100/2.8 suffers from CA on the
digitals. Someone will surely correct me with vigour if denigrating a
fine (and expensive) lens.
Yes it does, but only at specific angles of view and in apertures range
about f
Got it, Thanks!
> From: Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:38:21 + (GMT)
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
> Resent-From: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
&g
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, John Forbes wrote:
> If cost is a consideration, go for the M 100mm f4. If not, the F/FA 100mm
> f2.8 is faster, possibly a fraction sharper, and the AF, whilst pointless
> for macro, is useful if using the lens for non-macro purposes on an AF
> camera.
I believe I have read
Wow! Thanks for all the input guys. This is very useful. Helps a lot.
Way back in my grey matter I had a feeling around 100 mm would be the
sweat spot. I will be mainly be using the lens for plant/flower/bugs
on flower type of shots. I'll be shopping today for one. It would seem
by the comments th
ritisism welcome!
John
-- Original Message ---
From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:38:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
> "John Whittingham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
On 2005-02-14 14:23, Chad wrote:
> I'm looking to buy a macro lens, again. Used to have one but now
> anymore. Long story. Which lens do you like to use most often for
> macro pics, the 50mm or the 100mm? I lean a little towards the 50mm
> since it will be cheaper, however, having the extra reach m
At 05:20 PM 14/02/2005, you wrote:
I'm looking to buy a macro lens, again. Used to have one but now
anymore. Long story. Which lens do you like to use most often for
macro pics, the 50mm or the 100mm?
I have the M50/4 and the FA100/3.5
I use them both, but I prefer the 100mm. This particular model
Soon as I get them back I'll get some scans done, where do you want 'em
photo.net?
John
John Whittingham
Technician
-- Original Message ---
From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:38:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Whi
"John Whittingham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sounds good, I was only asking because I recently got the FA 135. I used it
>for the first time yesterday at a MAXXIM Supamoto race meeting locally (I
>was close to the action) AF seems very fast and accurate, I'm looking forward
>to picking up th
005 3:23 PM
Subject: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
I'm looking to buy a macro lens, again. Used to have one but now
anymore. Long story. Which lens do you like to use most often for
macro pics, the 50mm or the 100mm? I lean a little towards the 50mm
since it will be cheaper, howeve
eb 2005 14:45:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
> --- John Whittingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Are they AF extension tubes by any chance, just curious.
>
> No, they're Pentax' Pentax Auto Extension Tube Set B (12, 19 &
>
"Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>As others have said it really depends upon your intended use, reach isn't
>always important and in most instances neither is the perspective difference
>between different focal lengths at macro ranges. The 50mm lenses are great
>value and the used mark
An "A" 100mm f/4 would be a nice lens to acquire...
Andre
--- John Whittingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are they AF extension tubes by any chance, just curious.
No, they're Pentax' Pentax Auto Extension Tube Set B (12, 19 &
26mm): I believe they connect the lens' electronics to the body
for metering and diaphragm function but do not drive the AF.
n experience.
- MCC
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, MI
www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- Original Message -
From: "Chad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 3:23 PM
Subject: Which Macro
On 14 Feb 2005 at 14:23, Chad wrote:
> I'm looking to buy a macro lens, again. Used to have one but now
> anymore. Long story. Which lens do you like to use most often for
> macro pics, the 50mm or the 100mm? I lean a little towards the 50mm
> since it will be cheaper, however, having the extra re
iscuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
Correction; it's actually the A, not the M, that I have, and that is a
better bet for the DSLRs, though optically the same as the M.
John
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:36:30 -, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
&
Correction; it's actually the A, not the M, that I have, and that is a
better bet for the DSLRs, though optically the same as the M.
John
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:36:30 -, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Most people prefer the greater reach of the longer lens.
If cost is a consideration
> Now, with the *istDS, I found a Pentax-A 50mm f/2.8 Macro at a
> reasonable price. It works well and has nice imaging qualities.
> I also picked up a set of extension tubes which I'll use with
> the FA135/2.8 for more 3D stuff
Are they AF extension tubes by any chance, just curious.
John
I have the M 50/4 macro and the Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 macro. I use the
Vivitar almost exclusively. It's a great lens and usually not very expensive.
Paul
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Chad"
> Subject: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
>
>
An "A" 100mm f/4 would be a nice lens to acquire...
Andre
It depends upon what you are looking to photograph. A longer
lens will give you more working distance and better perspective
for three dimensional objects. A short lens will give you more
magnification with less extension, but DoF becomes razor thin
very very quickly and working distance disappears
- Original Message -
From: "Chad"
Subject: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
I'm looking to buy a macro lens, again. Used to have one but now
anymore. Long story. Which lens do you like to use most often for
macro pics, the 50mm or the 100mm? I lean a little towards
Most people prefer the greater reach of the longer lens.
If cost is a consideration, go for the M 100mm f4. If not, the F/FA 100mm
f2.8 is faster, possibly a fraction sharper, and the AF, whilst pointless
for macro, is useful if using the lens for non-macro purposes on an AF
camera.
The f2.
I'm looking to buy a macro lens, again. Used to have one but now
anymore. Long story. Which lens do you like to use most often for
macro pics, the 50mm or the 100mm? I lean a little towards the 50mm
since it will be cheaper, however, having the extra reach might be
useful. I will be using the lens
> Try to find a Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5. Better than anything from
> Pentax for less money.
1. A great lens.
2. The Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 Macro, its optical twin, is just as good.
3. It is ~not~ better than the A 100/2.8 Macro.
4. It is definitely less money (than a Pentax macro).
Fred
> The drawback of the 200mm macro is that it is harder to get to
> high magnifications
Another drawback is that "it is harder to get to high [enough a
position" if you are shooting a subject from above. That is, the
greater working distance of a 200mm Macro can be helpful, but it
also ~requires~
Christian wrote:
Or. Pentax SMC-A 200/4 macro or Pentax SMC-FA 200/4 ED IF
macro... But who can justify the cost?
REPLY:
Justification? Who needs to justify things? :o)
Pål
--- Tony Cogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
> I want to quit using close-up filters and start
> using a macro lens for
> flowers, insects, etc. Which lens would be a good
> place to start?
For insects a 200 Macro is definitely the no. 1 choice. It is great for flowers as
well. The working d
Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5. Best bang for the buck for a lens that goes
life-size without accessories, is sharp as anything Pentax makes and has the
little "A" on it for those pesky new bodies.
Or. Pentax SMC-A 200/4 macro or Pentax SMC-FA 200/4 ED IF
macro... But who can justify the cost..
IL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 6:13 AM
Subject: Re: Which macro lens would you buy
> Steve, the request was for nature shots, bugs etc.
> In my experience, edge-to-edge sharpness is often
> not needed in such photography. I'd be hard pressed,
> on many of my shot
Somehow I have managed to collect three macro lenses. Tokina 90F2.5 with
matched doubler. (excellent well made Quite heavy.) Pentax 100F4 dental macro.
(small very light 49mm front, and a joy to use. Finally Kiron 105 F2.5 1:1 (Big
heavy and without a doubt the best of the lot for useability wit
l get you the shot, but not edge to edge sharpness that a
true macro will generate.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 3:15 AM
Subject: Re: Which macr
t;
> > Steve Larson
> > Redondo Beach, California
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Tony Cogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 9:49 AM
> > Subject: Which macro lens wo
On Sun, 15 Jun 2003, Brendan wrote:
> Get a revesal ring and a 28mm F2.8 and enjoy ( Aaron
> where is my reversal ring!!!)
Reversing an FA28/2.8 onto my bodies yields teh worst possible results
I've ever had. There's massive flare in the middle of each and every
image.
--
http://www.infotainment
PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 9:49 AM
Subject: Which macro lens would you buy
Hi
I want to quit using close-up filters and start using a macro lens for
flowers, insects, etc. Which lens would be a good place to start?
Thanks,
Tony
Get a revesal ring and a 28mm F2.8 and enjoy ( Aaron
where is my reversal ring!!!)
--- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
Try to find a Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5. Better than
> anything from Pentax
> for less money.
> paul
>
> Tony Cogan wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> > I want to quit using close-u
Try to find a Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5. Better than anything from Pentax
for less money.
paul
Tony Cogan wrote:
>
> Hi
> I want to quit using close-up filters and start using a macro lens for
> flowers, insects, etc. Which lens would be a good place to start?
>
> Thanks,
> Tony
Hi There,
No one has mentioned the Tamron 90mm AF f2.8 1x macro.
I've got one and it's superb!!
Sincerely,
Ryan
__
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
Or Tamron 90mm/2.8 Autofocus. I have this lens, highly recommended.
The impression I have from reading various tests and user experiences:
you can't go wrong with any of the 90~100mm macro lenses. The
differences are not big. If I had to choose again, I might go for the
the F or FA100mm/2.8 Pentax
I am very happy with Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5 (which is the same as Kiron 105/2.5); does 1:1 without extensions, great build, backwards focusing direction (compared to Pentax lenses). It can be had for <$120 in great condition.
Mishka
From: Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wh
--- Tony Cogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
> I want to quit using close-up filters and start
> using a macro lens for
> flowers, insects, etc. Which lens would be a good
> place to start?
>
> Thanks,
> Tony
>
>
Hi,
I use the FA50mm most. For larger magnifications I
prefer the 50mm over t
: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Which macro lens would you buy
> One with around 100mm focal length. Doubles as a portrait lens too.
>
> Inexpensive options:
> - Pentax FA 100/3.5 (autofocus)
>
I was referring to f2.8 verions.
--- Ramesh Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I started with Pentax FA 50mm macro and then added
> Pentax FA 100mm macro.
> My suggestion is you can start directly with 100mm
> macro and for most of the people 100mm may be
> enought
> for macro work. You may not n
One with around 100mm focal length. Doubles as a portrait lens too.
Inexpensive options:
- Pentax FA 100/3.5 (autofocus)
- Vivitar S1 90/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5, Tokina ATX 90/2.5 (manual focus)
Expensive options:
- Pentax F or FA 100/2.8, Sigma EX 105/2.8 (autofocus)
- Pentax A 100/2.8 (manual focus)
I started with Pentax FA 50mm macro and then added
Pentax FA 100mm macro.
My suggestion is you can start directly with 100mm
macro and for most of the people 100mm may be enought
for macro work. You may not need 200mm macro.
Coming brand I think Pentax or Sigma.
No need to tell; Pentax is really
Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Cogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 9:49 AM
Subject: Which macro lens would you buy
> Hi
> I want to quit using close-up filters and start using
Hi
I want to quit using close-up filters and start using a macro lens for
flowers, insects, etc. Which lens would be a good place to start?
Thanks,
Tony
On 28 Dec 2002 at 0:00, Dan Scott wrote:
> Rob,
>
> Do the colored lines on the end of the barrel serve any purpose or are
> they decorative?
Hi Dan,
Purely decorative, nice hey :-(
The single red line on the barrel indicates the 2:1 to 1:1 scale transition as
the focus ring rotates twice.
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
