Best macro lens for KD's ? Help please.

<p>So, the simple question:</p>

<p>What would you recommend as a <strong>GREAT</strong> macro lens for the K10D/K20D?<br>

Looking for: sharpness, great bokeh, no distortion, and a fast lens. (Don't we all?).<br>

Considering that getting close to a moving dragonfly, for example, is ... very difficult with a short focal, such as 35mm, then what would be the best approach?<br>

OK, I'll be back to check any reply.<br>

Thank you in advance.</p>

<p>JP</p>

 

<p>Tamron 90/2.8 Macro -- great lens, gives you more working distance than the Pentax 35 or 50 macros, sharper and better handling than the Pentax 100 macro.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.photozone.de/pentax/362-tamron-af-90mm-f28-di-sp-macro-pentax-">http://www.photozone.de/pentax/362-tamron-af-90mm-f28-di-sp-macro-pentax-</a></p>

<p>Thanks R.T.!<br>

This is one great review! Very appreciated.<br>

JP</p>

<p>Talk on the Tamron 90mm from just the past day or so...</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/pentax-camera-forum/00S6XF</p>

<p>I have no other lens to reference for you, sorry. But from the same Photozone site, here is the review/test of the current Pentax 100mm macro.<br>

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/129-pentax-smc-d-fa-100mm-f28-macro-review--test-report</p>

<p>From the Photozone summary of the Tamron (but thoroughly check both reviews to sort through any subjective statements)-<br>

"The Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP is an excellent lens without significant flaws and it is at least as good if not even slightly better than its more expensive native Pentax counterpart."</p>

<p>The Pentax Macro-Takumar 100/4 or the Pentax-M 100/4 are both Heliar formulations, which are well-known to have excellent bokeh. Not sure if the current AF 100mm macro is the same (probably not, as it's f/2.8)</p>

<p >I have had good luck with sigma 105mm F2.8 DG macro. Its sharp and with the focus limiting switch you can seed up the AF. It also makes a wonderful mid prime tele lens. Some test photos below <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/8419371&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8419371&size=lg</a> </p>

<p ><a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/6878872&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/6878872&size=lg</a> </p>

<p >another is the sigma 70-200mm f2.8II apo EX marco more useful. It can be used as portrait, and indoor sports lens also , works great with 1.4 conv and 2 conv </p>

<p ><a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/8474241&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8474241&size=lg</a><br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/8450737&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8450737&size=lg</a></p>

<p >Here is the sigma 105mm used in a portrait <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/8428592&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8428592&size=lg</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p>If you can find one, 200mm f4 FA*. May be 2nd price 200mm f4 A*. BTW: Be prepare to empty your wallet if your luck bring you to one :-) </p>

<p>I would second the 200mm f4 A* and if it can ever be found for less than the price of a 6 pound diamond the Pentax 100mm f2.8 A*. </p>

 

<p>For older alternatives, both the Tamron SP and Tokina AT-X 90 mmf/2.5 are very good. Both only to 1:2 without an adapter, and the Tamron requiring an adaptall mount.</p>

<p>Jacques,<br /> I've seen fine shots taken by all the above mentioned lenses. As with standard 50mm lenses, I think optical engineering has mastered macro lenses in the 90mm-120mm focal length range for several years now. It's a real treat having so many positive choices.</p>

<p>I owned the Tamron SP 90mm for a few years and enjoyed it immensely. Great color and bokeh, and it feels good to work with. Since I handle a macro lens more per shot that with other lens types, the physical interface matters to me.</p>

<p>The Tamron has since been replaced by what is considered by several (including me) to be the best macro for Pentax: the Voitlander APO Lanthar 125mm f2.5. A few months ago I posted a few examples here from my first hours of fun and shooting with a K20D. The lens is serious heavy metal, with a long throw, but the optics are, well, special. Unfortunately, the lens is out of production, which means that the second-hand market has pushed the prices for these into the four-figure cost territory.</p>

<p>But if you want the best, there you have it.<br>

ME</p>

<p>I have a Vivitar Series 1 100mm f/2.5 macro and I like it. I would appreciate any comparisions between Vivitar and Tamron.</p>

<p>Vivitar Series 1 105mm f2.5 Macro - I prefer the extra 15mm over the Tamron 90mm and I also prefer the color cast over the Pentax 100mm Macro. Other lenses I would consider are the Sigma 150mm and 180mm for more working distance. I have no experience with the Voigtlanders but have heard good things about them.</p>

<p>I have a Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5. Supposed to be one of the sharpest around (one of the top 10 as rated by photodo). It's is the equivalent to the Tokina Nick mentioned, but easier to find in my experience and also better build quality. Funny though, I happened to find the adapter for the Tokina but not for the Viv S1...<br>

GREAT lens.</p>

<p>Jacques didn't mention whether he wanted AF or not. Just about any modern macro is going to be outstanding and the reasons for choosing one over the other are more about focal length and handling preferences than anything else.</p>

<p>Paolo, your Vivitar is a fantastic lens. I recently had to sell mine due to financial problems and I'm still sad. Keep it while you can.</p>

<p>Hello Jacques, personally I agree about the Vivitar Series I 90 f2.5 is most likely the finest macro ever built. I have had mine almost since they came out( about 30 years)......Jim</p>

<p>Just curious Jim...do you have the Vivitar matched 1:1 adapter?</p>

<p>Steve T., thanks!<br>

Again, the Tamron seems to better a lot of other brands, including Pentax.<br>

JP</p>

<p>Thanks Orlando,<br>

I'LL Google that and see.<br>

JP</p>

<p>Ian,<br>

Those are great photos you have there.<br>

I am quite unsure which way to go now! All these reviews and sample pics make me wonder. They all have something good about them and I guess it would be a matter of choosing which has the focus limiter (which seems to be a great feauture) and price-wise to pick the one that offers the "most bang for the buck"!<br>

Well, thanks again ... I need to do my homework!<br>

JP</p>

<p>Tommy, I have Googled that and let me tell you that there are not too many available and yes, you were right, prices for those "on sale" are quite high.<br>

That is yet another to consider!<br>

JP</p>

 

<p>Doug, Nick, ... well appreciated replies here. Thank you both.<br>

This is becoming quite a journey!<br>

JP</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thank you, Michael!<br>

So, the Tamron would be a good pick and ... of course, if price is not an issue, try to find a used Voigt. as you described.<br>

But, if ever found, is this Voigtlander AF or manual? If manual, I was also considering the Zeiss Planar 100/2 ZK, but it is strictly manual focus, and the price ... well, very high!<br>

JP</p>

<p>Tom, Paolo ... great info! Thank you.<br>

As I said earlier, this is becoming quite a journey and the decision making also becoming rather large!<br>

JP</p>

<p>Miserere, thanks for the reply.<br>

You mentioned :<br>

<em>Jacques didn't mention whether he wanted AF or not. Just about any modern macro is going to be outstanding and the reasons for choosing one over the other are more about focal length and handling preferences than anything else.</em><br>

I guess I would prefer AF over manual for the simple reason that I would imagine it a difficult task trying to manually focus on a moving insect, for instance. Then a longer focal would probably be better in my case because where I plan to do macro photo, it is at a salt marsh/conservation area and that means lots of moving bugs!<br>

Thanks again.<br>

JP</p>