legacy macro

[Garnier1981]

I'm soon to purchase my first macro lens.  There is not much info in the legacy forum about macro, can anybody recommend anything?

[KMG]

The Minolta A mount 50mm 2.8 macro is a sweet lens. if you're looking for a longer reach, the Minolta A mount 100mm 2.8 is a decent performer.

 

If you have an E mount camera you'll need the LA-EA1 or 3 adapter for manual focus LA-EA4 adapter for auto focus.

 

I own the amazing FE 90mm 2.8 macro but still pull out the Minolta lenses now and then. Maybe just me but I'm still drawn to that "Minolta look" ;-)

[MikeTison]

Tokina 90mm 2.5 macro 

[nomad]

Tamron SP 90mm f2.5

[PeterWa]

Minolta MD/MC 100mm f/4

[Birder52]

Sigma 150 version 2 is one of the best.

[asterinex]

I really like the Nikon Micro Nikkor 55mm f3.5.

[addicted2light]

I'm soon to purchase my first macro lens.  There is not much info in the legacy forum about macro, can anybody recommend anything?

 

 

Probably there isn't that much info because 99% of macro lenses are going to be from super to extremely sharp anyway at the useful apertures, at least assuming we're talking about major manufacturers. So no need to sweat it.

 

If I were you, the thing I'd consider in choosing which one to buy is the full lens lineup of a particular brand. This just in case you might be tempted to buy some other legacy glass afterwards. Keeping it "clean", i.e. sticking with just one brand, it will make easier fidgeting with adapters (you will need only one), handling the lenses (direction of focusing & of the aperture ring) and color-correcting the resulting pictures (many brands have their own color signature and/or are warmer/cooler than others).

 

I don't think I ever had a "dud" macro...with the possible partial exception of the Nikon 105/4 (the really old one) when used at infinity (it was optimized, unsurprisingly, for close up and macro work, where to be fair it shined).

[lassethomasson]

I agree with addicted2light.

 

And then I add the Contax Zeiss 50mm 2.8 Macro as a suggestion. The old version that goes to 1:1 (not the new "C" that only goes to 1:2). If you like that 80s and 90s Zeiss rendering and pop you won't go wrong with that.

[Austrokiwi]

I had used the MInolta MD 100mm and The MC 50mm macros.... however when I up graded to the A7r2 I found they both looked soft.   I  no longer have the test shots but I tested both lenses  with a 1951 USAF Resolution target. Both lenses could not match the resolution of the cameras sensor .. so I sold them off.   Based on that experience I would recomment against the  MC and MD macro lenses form minolta

[Reinhold_1]

A good introduction to macro photography is the Minolta MD/MC 3.5/50 mm. Two sample pictures can be found in this forum at:

 

 

http://www.sonyalphaforum.com/topic/746-a6000-minolta-md-3550-macro-with-novoflex-adapter/

[Michael_j]

To give a comfortable working distance I recommend at least 90mm (60mm on APS). Sigma 105,, Tamron etc all very sharp and you won't go too far with any of them. I like the 105mm Sigma OS with LA-EA4 but it's not as useful as the FE 90mm. Native lens offers full functionality and system integration.

[Golem]

I have a full trio of MicroNikkors, but I'm 

more often using my Sigma 90/2.8. It's 

out of production and rather affordable. 

It's very much smaller than my 105/4.0,  

and a stop faster. It's smaller than most 

other 90/100 f/2.8 macros as well. Thaz 

prolly why it's my "go-to". [52mm filters.]

[VanveenJF]

I picked up a Vivitar Series-1 90mm (macro). also know as the "BOKINA"

Can't wait till I use it on the A7ll...Stay tuned.

 

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vanveenjf/albums/72157671495749660

[Gilgenberg]

Asahi Pentax Macro-Takumar 50mm f/4.....WOW

[nerp]

+1 for the Macro-Takumar.

[Adrichardson]

I've done a few tests (which I might write up if people are interested) with macro lenses on my a7ii.  For the money, the Tokina 90mm f2.5 is an amazing lens, but needs a bit of work in post to get the most out of it.  The Tamron 90mm f2.5 is one to avoid, as it's prone to showing a blue blob from f8 onwards.  If you want something wider and more affordable, the Canon FD 50mm f3.5 is incredible value for money and produces beautiful results on FF and APSC.  I've also picked up a Nikkor 55mm f2.8 AI, which is wickedly sharp and a pleasure to use.

 

Of the legacy macros I've tested, the only one I've hung onto is the Nikkor to give me a wider angle for food photography (the Canon was donated to my mum for her a6000). 

[Username]

I'm soon to purchase my first macro lens.  There is not much

info in the legacy forum about macro, can anybody recommend

anything?

   

I use these dedicated macro lenses for FF and APSC: 

  

Sigma 90/2.8 

Maxxum 50/2.8 

Nikkor 55/3.5 

Nikkor 60/2.8 

Nikkor 105/4.0 

Minolta 135/4.0 [short mount] 

Nikkor 200/4.0  

   

I never test them, I use them on faith. And they never 

let me down. I work them waaay past 1X and also for 

somewhat larger objects. You haven't given the least 

hint about your intended use. For many macro uses a 

huge tripod and focusing rail are far more important to 

sharp results. The other important concern is whether 

your working distance allows lighting the subject. You 

don't wanna use more FL than needed cuz vibration 

is worse with longer lenses. So you juggle those two 

opposing concerns [FL/working distance vs vibration], 

and shop for a nice bargain, cuz all the lenses will be 

equally capable. 

[Austrokiwi]

You may want to be careful which legacy macro you go for. I had the Minolta MC100/4 and the MD 50. they worked fine on the A7 but when I upgraded to the A7rII  it was clear they weren't up to the task.  The reason was that the resolution of the sensor was greater than that of the lenses. I recall for a while really enjoying using the Canon FD 200/4 macro. It was great in all areas but one:CA.  The FD 200/4 was built of r black and white and in color purple fringing in the middle of the subject ruined many photos taken with my Sony.   I have also learned you have to be careful with he recommendations of others. I had read many rave reviews about the MAmiya 645 120/4 macro.  I got one and found it does have some serious limitations. It is a 1-1 macro but  clearly it shouldn't be used at the maximum magnification, as it was clearly outside its optimum range. It was stunning at 1-2( half life sized) and much less impressive at 1-1. As username has pointed out you have stated your intended purpose.  Assuming you just want to give macro a go for the first time then you should start off with a lens in the 90 - 105mm range.   If you want ultimate resolution. near zero distortion and full APO then there is one serious of lenses you should aim for: The Printing Nikkors(  they beat the Coastal optics 65mm). There are three sought after Printing Nikkors, the 95, 105 and 150mm.   These are not camera lenses but are film scanner lenses, that when new cost over US$10,000. Now with hunting and patience you are looking at US900-$2000.00 for an example.  They are not for a novice lens as they each are designed to perform  perfectly in a very narrow range.