I can't see that it matters in this thread what anything other than macro lenses can produce when taking macro photographs any more that I would be interested in the comparative speed of cars just because I wanted to buy a fast speedboat

Good macro lenses can't be chosen by normal lens tests and what is considered good is what looks good. You can't produce the goods with every macro lens either even though tests on B&W test charts say a lens is sharp it might not be able to handle say red flowers or any other colours properly.

We had some very good macros in this thread and John actually joined in and gave us some info about his equipment and how he tests macro lenses using focus stacked shots.

There's a short review of the Pentax SMC A* Macro 200/4 at link.
"Results are razor sharp with best resolution I have ever seen in any 35mm SLR lens. Its not only brilliant when used as a macro lens, but even more so when used as an ordinarily telephoto lens focused at infinity. The lens also work exceptionally well with Pentax converters, giving you a 400mm macro lens with superb optical quality. There's very quality little difference between the apertures."

The Tokina AT-X 90mm f/2.5 Macro was rated 5/5 by users at Photodo.

I agree with John Riley that enough information has been supplied for any members to make up their own minds.

I don't think it really matters too much. They are two completely different lenses. A macro lens is designed different than a normal lens and the resolution results may not be comparable. The design will be based on the subject being closer to the lens than the film/sensor plane (for lenses that go beyond 1:1). Some enlarger lenses such as the 63mm Nikon make excellent macro lenses when reversed, but they are still not as good as the real thing. Flare from the rear etc. would not have been part of the original design and the coatings might not be ideal. I wouldn't think a macro lens would work very well at it's infinity setting. There are other kinds of lenses as well that are used in industry which don't work too good for normal photography, but are very well designed for their particular job.

I remember buying mags such as AP in the 70's and looking closely at the lpmm resolution graphs carefully done by the likes of Dr. Stuart Bell. Some lenses looked really sharp..... then along came the 1st of the 90mm Macro lenses from the likes of Vivitar and Tamron and your jaw just dropped at how high the graphs went

Even amongst K mount macro lenses there are some that are regarded with higher esteem than others based purely on performance such as the 90mm Tokina "Bokina" and the Vivitar that Mike-P currently has plus of course the Pentax 200mm.

Glad to hear that you have found yourself a job
Codec packages are best avoided. It's better to just install
whatever codecs are needed when you need them, no point in
installing a lot of codecs that will never get used and are
difficult to remove

I bought a SLIK AF2100 Trigger head about 2 years ago. I wish I'd bought it 20 years earlier. Unbelievable how easy and rigid it is. Comes with a very good QR plate. One on ebay at present they usually go for about £40

Thanks Stefan I'll try that one and Welcome Back!

Proper Macro lenses are much sharper than normal lenses. There isn't another Pentax lens that can match the 200mm Macro. This test shows the smc PENTAX-FA 50mm f/2.8 macro to better better than all the other Pentax Standard lenses. Here Zeiss Luminar Macro lenses are shown to be sharper than other Zeiss lenses.

Some other tests on Macro lenses.

Does that convince you that it isn't a myth

It's very difficult to compare 28mm lenses (unless you have a really bad one). The 100% crops don't look impressive, but that may be because of the amount of pixels on a K-5, obviously a 100% crop from a K-10D would look better.

The Sigma 30mm and Vivitar 28mm f/2 are known to be sharp in the center and poor at the edge.

From the wide views I would say the Pentax SMC FA 28mm f/2.8 (at f/8 ) looks about the best, but I haven't seen the full sized shots. The shed and fence on the right look really sharp and it's picked out the trees in the background with good contrast. The others look to be struggling there. It would probably make an excellent landscape lens. The Vivitar and two Sigmas seem to be struggling with the distant details.

The Pentax SMC K 28mm f/2.0 looks impressive and very similar to the FA.

With any equipment you have to devise a safe way of
handling/holding and transporting. Big lenses on a body are
safer carried vertically preferably above the camera body
with both hands. In use they should be handled with both
hands, tripod mount or not. Massive lenses are probably better
handled by the lens only as much as possible.

Strange looking beasts I wouldn't like to
meet up with one

Good shots and the flash has paid off