Finite Conjugate MTF Bench Tests for Macro Lenses

<p>For the lens geek crowd. Are macro lenses better close-up than at infinity? <br>

LensRentals gets a new finite conjugate modification for their optical test bench that allows MTF measurements and comparisons of macro lenses at close distance. <a href="https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/08/more-photogeekery-finite-conjugate-mtf-bench-tests-for-macro-lenses/">HERE</a> Results are compared to infinity MTF data. <br>

Micro-Nikkor, Canon EF , Sony FE, Zeiss, and Sigma macro lenses were tested and compared.</p>

<p>The testers were "totally shocked" by the results of the Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 macro lens! </p>

<p>Shocked because a macro lens performs actually better close-up than at infinity? Always thought that would be the case anyway.<br>

Actually more impressed by the Zeiss 100/2. And by how well the Sigma 150 performs.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> Shocked because a macro lens performs actually better close-up than at infinity?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, that was not the basis of their reaction. Please allow me to quote the article more fully for you, "The <a href="https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/preorder-products/sony-fe-90mm-f2.8-g-oss-macro">Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro</a> totally shocked me. It’s clearly better at all frequencies at macro distances. In fact, it’s the highest resolving of all these lenses at macro distances, at least in the image center. "<br>

</p>

<p>Louis,<br>

I am shocked by the extraordinary quality of images taken with a Sony 90/2.8 Macro you have posted here at photo.net. Please share your secrets some time. Focus stacking?</p>

<p>The Sigma 150mm seems to me to be an unsung champion. I have heard this before. The trouble is it came out before the ART series so seems barely noticed. I would probably own a Zeiss 100/2 if it were AF.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The Sigma 150mm seems to me to be an unsung champion.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Indeed, I enjoyed the non-OS version and then upgraded to the OS version - both of which do very well. The OS version gave up the compactness and lighter weight of the non-OS version though.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Louis,<br />I am shocked by the extraordinary quality of images taken with a Sony 90/2.8 Macro you have posted here at photo.net.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>+1</p>

<p>Thank you, Edward and Barry. There are no real secrets. The perception of image quality is achieved by being attentive to a number of variables in the image creation process. Certainly, having a top-shelf image forming optic like the FE 90mm f/2.8 and a high resolution, high dynamic range camera, like the A7RII, is part of the equation. </p>

<p>The Sony 90/2.8 Macro is an interesting lens. It changes from auto focus to manual simply by pulling the focusing ring about 1/8" toward the camera. In manual, it has distance markings, and hard near and infinity stops. You can't use manual mode to fine tune an AF setting, because the focus jumps immediately to the manual distance setting. The manual focusing throw is long, making it easier to focus that way than a Nikon 105/2.8 Macro. Unlike the Nikon, it doesn't "grow" or wobble when you move in close.</p>

<p>For some reason, I get sharper "walking closeups" with other lenses, including a 24-70/2.8 zoom, than with the Sony 90. On a tripod with IS off, it behaves perfectly. At normal distances the 90 is still very sharp, and oddly for a macro, has very smooth bokeh.</p>