Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 4, 2010, 11:26 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldwinger View Post
One thing I thought of, I don't know about the other macro lenses but, the Tamron 90mm while it shines as a macro lens, it doesn't do too well as a short tele, pics are too soft.
Hi John. My experience is the opposite - I often use it for street (I'll find some shots for you as I haven't uploaded any to Smugmug yet) but it is ultra sharp - in fact for portraits I actually need to soften the shots afterwards otherwise every skin imperfection is highly visible. I think that tends to be the case for most macro lenses.
__________________
http://frogfish.smugmug.com
Pentax : 15 Ltd, 77 Ltd, 43/1.9 Ltd, Cosina 55/1.2, DA*300/4, Contax Zeiss Distagon 28/2.8, Raynox 150/250, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.

Nikon : D800, D600, Sigma 500/4.5, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 35/2.0, Nikkor 85/1.8G, Sigma 50/1.4. Nikon x1.4 TC, Sigma x2.0 TC

Last edited by Frogfish; Dec 4, 2010 at 11:34 PM.
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2010, 11:33 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewheeler20 View Post
the sig, pentax, and tamron all say their minimum focusing distance is between 11.4"and 12".
Please do not confuse min. focus dist. with the actual distance you are from the subject. The MFD includes the lense to sensor distance, so the MFD isn't the distance from the end of your lense is to the subject. In fact I just popped the T90 on now - it looks like 5 or 6 inches at 1:1. Once you add something like a Raynox 250 to it the MFD is now down to 2 or 3 inches.
__________________
http://frogfish.smugmug.com
Pentax : 15 Ltd, 77 Ltd, 43/1.9 Ltd, Cosina 55/1.2, DA*300/4, Contax Zeiss Distagon 28/2.8, Raynox 150/250, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.

Nikon : D800, D600, Sigma 500/4.5, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 35/2.0, Nikkor 85/1.8G, Sigma 50/1.4. Nikon x1.4 TC, Sigma x2.0 TC
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2010, 11:56 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Western Ma. USA
Posts: 795
Default

what if i add my 58mm canon 500D macro lens to the end of the sigma macro (that has a 58mm filter size)? would that just be rediculous, degrade the quality, or actually be semi-useful? That may be my deciding factor...
__________________
ewheeler20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2010, 12:01 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewheeler20 View Post
what if i add my 58mm canon 500D macro lens to the end of the sigma macro (that has a 58mm filter size)? would that just be rediculous, degrade the quality, or actually be semi-useful? That may be my deciding factor...
You just need a reversing ring and that would work (you don't need to have the same size filter-ring sizes so you can do this with many lenses not just the Canon lense, in fact I'm not even sure if an optimised macro lense can be reversed, standard primes are best although reversing a prime onto a zoom can be used too) - but you end up with a high set magnification (between 1:1 and 1.5:1 I would guess), very close focusing (guess 3-4 inches) and no control (also MF only - despite some people's assertions that only MF should be used in macro photography I actually use AF quite often - it works very well with the right techniques and subjects).
__________________
http://frogfish.smugmug.com
Pentax : 15 Ltd, 77 Ltd, 43/1.9 Ltd, Cosina 55/1.2, DA*300/4, Contax Zeiss Distagon 28/2.8, Raynox 150/250, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.

Nikon : D800, D600, Sigma 500/4.5, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 35/2.0, Nikkor 85/1.8G, Sigma 50/1.4. Nikon x1.4 TC, Sigma x2.0 TC

Last edited by Frogfish; Dec 5, 2010 at 12:03 AM.
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2010, 12:42 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Isn't the Canon an add-on lens, like the Raynox? If so, no need for reversing ring, and it will work just like it does on any other lens. The only experience I've had with something like this was a dioper filter. You end up getting really, really close to your subject, your dof is very small, but you do get more than 1:1 magnification, and that can be very fun! I think the Canon is supposed to be pretty good - better than the dioper filter I was using, isn't it? As long as the macro lens you are putting it on is 58mm or smaller (there's always step-up rings), it should work.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2010, 8:28 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

The Vivitar 2x tele macro converter is a great tool if you don't need AF for your macros.

Have a look here: http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index..._shootout.html

If you find one for a decent price, save the leftover money for a wide angle lens. Mind you - if you get the M-version of the TC - setting the aperture manually on your lens is a must.

Regards,
Th.
thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2010, 12:24 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Western Ma. USA
Posts: 795
Default

I definitely want AF. If nothing else, to get me close to the right focus point and then i can fine tune it in manual. I am leaning heavily towards the sigma still. I have 2 other sigma's, and if i add another sigma to my collection, it will be more compatible with a 1.4x or 2x sigma teleconverter that i plan on buying in the future.
__________________
ewheeler20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2010, 12:52 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

IMO you shouldn't put a TC on a macro lense ..... they don't seem to play very nicely together and of course you'd lose AF (unless it's the AFA x1.7 which micro-focuses). Extension tubes or diopters (such as the Raynox) do work well though.
__________________
http://frogfish.smugmug.com
Pentax : 15 Ltd, 77 Ltd, 43/1.9 Ltd, Cosina 55/1.2, DA*300/4, Contax Zeiss Distagon 28/2.8, Raynox 150/250, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.

Nikon : D800, D600, Sigma 500/4.5, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 35/2.0, Nikkor 85/1.8G, Sigma 50/1.4. Nikon x1.4 TC, Sigma x2.0 TC
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2010, 9:06 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
NMRecording's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eastern Appalachains
Posts: 866
Default

i would second a tamron 90, i actually have the MF version which is a 2.5 and it is one of my favorite lenses. I dont find it soft for portraits either, I find this lens extremely sharp throughout.

i like lenses that can fit several purposes. Mostly macro is going to be MF anyways, and for me portraits also so in my opinion this lens is just fine as a manual lens, and its also 1/5th price. I got my tamron 90mm for about 70.00 which is a good price, i also have the ext tube that gives it 1:1 macro. Again its not auto but i dont think af would be used for me on this particular lens. Buying the Mf would allow you to get a wide angle with it. You would get many uses out of these two lenses.

heres a few taken with the tamron 90 sp 2.5, the MF version











let us know what you get!

also, i have used the tamron 90 sp with the paired ext. tube and the tamron sp TC and also a combo of both, all combinations worked great
NMRecording is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2010, 9:55 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Western Ma. USA
Posts: 795
Default

i ordered the sigma 105 last night. It just seemed to me to be more cohesive with the rest of my lens's.. im used to sigma and never had a tamron before. I like the sigma EX stuff too. It had the right size filter for my needs. The extra 15mm reach is also nice.

I really do appreciate everybody's input, and i took it all in to help me make my decision.
__________________
ewheeler20 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:51 PM.