Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Macro lenses for m43, old ones
  • 52 Replies sorted by
  • stoneystoney
    @feha Leica 45mm 2.8 is not cheap, but it seems quite useful. Macro, AF, and nice color. Flickr has macro shots from the Leica. Freaking stunning. http://www.flickr.com/photos/fardels2009/with/4788728050/
  • lattiboylattiboy
    First post here, but I thought I'd chime in as I've tried quite a few.

    1) Vivitar Series 1 135mm f/2.8 "close focus" Komine lens. - Not technically a "macro", but it goes 1:2 without an adapter. Beautiful bokeh.

    2) Kiron 105mm f/2.8 (also sold as Vivitar 100mm f/2.3 and "Lester A Dine" 105mm dental lens) - 1:1 without an adapter, SUPER sharp wide-open, nice (neutral) bokeh. Excellent color rendition.

    3) Minolta 50mm f/3.5 Rokkor - A much more "manageable" focal length for non-tripod use. Very sharp wide-open, lovely Minolta bokeh and color rendition.


    That's my experience.
  • bubbabubba
    @lattiboy
    +1 on all of your selection!
    ...and the Minolta is still cheap, too ...because few know about it.
    BTW Welcome!
  • cowpunk52cowpunk52
    Canon FD 50mm f3.5 Macro with 1:1 extension. One of the sharpest lenses I have ever used.
  • fehafeha
    @stonebat
    thank you, i will buy this one in near future.

    To alll of you thank you for your suggestions, will check if I can get one at affordable price.
  • AthirilAthiril
    Don't forget the Russian lenses, quite highly rated some of them... M39 LTM variations mean shorter mount distances and more stable lens :)
  • DrDaveDrDave
    I've tested the Vivitar 135mm, and they make several variations, including several Komine variations, and while some are better than others they were all a bit soft wide open. The 105mm "lester" is a sharp lens, but they go for a premium. The 50 3.5 Rokkor is a good lens but 3.5 is just a bit on the slow side and I slightly prefer the Viv 55mm here. But they are all good!
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev
    Long modern lenses (90mm) are usually superior. They are both sharp, have AF, and also much lighter.
    Vivitar 5mm is the most useful old macro on m43 bodies, as I think. It is also much cheaper than highly advertised 90-105mm lenses.
  • lenuisiblelenuisible
    >The 50 3.5 Rokkor is a good lens but 3.5 is just a bit on the slow side
    if you're using it for real macro, you will be only at a few centimeters from the object, so working with natural light is kind of difficult anyway (you'll cause the shadow most of the time)
  • fehafeha
    how about:
    Canon FD 35-105mm f/3.5 Macro ?
    any experience ?
  • kazuokazuo
    Picked up a SMC Takumar 35mm 2 days ago and am amazed at how small, light and sharp the little fella is. Placed alongside my other 35mm (namely, Zeiss and Leica) it can more than hold its own. Tack sharp and colours are so saturated. But is a little soft wide open, and does not have the Flektogon's close focusing at 0.7
  • diptwodiptwo

    I just purchased a canon fd 50 mm 1.4. Im rather new to the camera and lens experience and im looking to get a macro lens next. Can I concert the lens i mentioned above to work as macro? by adding tubes? or do i have to get a separate lens just for macro?

  • nomadnomad

    Get the Tamron SP 90mm 2.5 – it's a beautiful macro with excellent sharpness and bokeh.

  • fehafeha

    There are two types of Tamron SP 90mm 2.5 ... Witch it better ? Early or later ones ?

    tamron_90_early.JPG
    400 x 266 - 13K
    tamron_90_later.JPG
    266 x 400 - 20K
  • targoszstock+targoszstock

    How does mounting an old macro lens on a m43 camera affect its parameters? Canon FD 50mm macro 3.5 1:2 on a m43 camera is effectively 100mm right? What about the 1:2 magnification? Is it somehow affected by the FD to m43 adapter as well?

    I am a beginner to macro

  • mrbillmrbill

    Vivitar 55mm fd fit macro is very sharp and dirt cheap

  • nomadnomad

    1:1 is always the same, just means that something is as large on the sensor as it is in reality.

    But a smaller sensor will fit less reality, of course ;-)

    Regarding the two versions I can only comment on the old Tamron, which I really love.

  • targoszstock+targoszstock

    so you are saying: if I mount a 50mm 1:1 macro on a m43 I get 100mm 2:1; if I mount a 50mm 1:2 macro on a m43 I get 100mm 1:1, right?

  • nomadnomad

    No.

    Let's say I have an insect that is 3mm long. A 1:1 macro will project an image on the sensor that is 3mm long. That does not change.

    If your sensor is small, it will fill more of it, if it's large, it will fill less.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    image

    image

    http://www.focus-numerique.com/test-2926/focale-fixe-panasonic-leica-dg-macro-elmarit-45mm-f28-megaois-test-8.html

    img224.jpg
    800 x 537 - 68K
    img223.jpg
    595 x 505 - 48K
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    200mm F4 Canon FD Macro

    image

    http://bigstreetguns.com/2016/07/canon-fd-200mm-f4-macro-the-newest-addition-to-my-arsenal/

    img1102.jpg
    800 x 595 - 52K
  • markr041markr041

    The Olympus Zuiko 43 (not m43) 70-300 is an old macro lens (140-600mm eq.) - it really gets close, from far away.

    See this video for examples:

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    55mm Vivitar macro

    image

    image

    https://www.ephotozine.com/article/vivitar-auto-macro-55mm-f-2-8-vintage-lens-review-32163

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Another review of Vivitar 55 f2.8 Auto Macro

    image

    https://www.theweekendlens.com/vivitar-55-f28-macro.html

  • MikeLinnMikeLinn

Add a Comment