Not at macro distances and that's where it matters for a proper macro lens. The flat field is another property, plus generally higher contrast and lower flare.

The Nikkor 50mm f4 Micro lens is legendary in this respect. I have never tried the Pentax 200mm but that too seems highly thought of, although I've never seen an in depth report on it.

To answer Robbiec's question, the more modest the spec the easier it is to make a high performance lens. Four element 50mm macro lenses at f4 are amongst the best, but open them to f2.8 and you need many more elements to achieve a similar performance.

No myth, rparmer, by proper macro lenses I would assume Algi means as opposed to all the zooms marked macro that are not macro lenses at all.

Proper macro lenses are made for a purpose that demands they are the best of their range. High resolution, flat field and very even standards across the frame. Add that most have reduced apertures and lower than usual numbers of elements to achieve this and this also leads to lower flare and higher contrast.

greynolds999, that's why we have moderators, but it's not up to you or me to restict people's opinions. If there's a restriction on making banal comments where is the line drawn. A banal opinion is still an opinion, and if yours is allowed then so is theirs.

It's been said before. PU does not have elite cliques. Nobody should be deciding who the "undesireables" are....perhaps you mean the "riff-raff"...and I don't think that idea has a place here.

Paying for extra services is one thing, but paying to exclude others is something else entirely.

Cintelli67, you are being told the right things, but of course it's up to you what you do.

I would have thought that producing beautiful images was the objective of every photographer?

cintelli67, You've got a number of things mixed up there. It's hard to know where to start with it.

You are using a colour space that gives much more information than you can print, so generally this results in weak colours on your monitor and certainly so if Photoshop isn't also adjusted to be the same. Your CMYK conversion won't do much harm but is unecessary. You're not leaving it to someone else to do a conversion, you are providing a home printer with its designed input.

If you are going to shops to get prints done then quality may well be variable, but most will give best results from sRGB and JPEG files. If you want professional prints then use a professional printer and discuss with them what file properties they work best with.

If you are using online libraries, likewise follow the instructions and provide say sRGB JPEG files if they ask for them (fotoLibra, for example).

If submitting to magazines likewise. They will convert to CMYK, you have no idea what profiles and equipment they are using.

If you are not getting a match between monitor and print, then go back to basics as something has been adjusted incorrectly.

The results are now up and congratulations are due to all the winners!

Have you asked for this under Articles>Suggest an article?

CMYK is for use in the printing industry for making books and magazines and the conversion from RGB to CMYK is a very skilled part of the process. Leave it to the professionals becsue they know what they are doing and will get the optimum results.

As for home printing, our printers are indeed RGB devices so there is no point putting an extra conversion stage in. Stay in sRGB and the printer will be receiving the input that it is designed for.

Pentax lens mounts use rather more than three screws - five is the norm.