wow excellent pics... thanks for the link

hey george

if you read my post you quoted from , youll understand that 200mm is by far not the ultimate macro lens , at least for me Not that I wouldnt want one , because I would , but a 200mm is not good for higher than 1x magnification . The reason is of the long bellows ( extension tubes ) youll need . It does sound the best lens , though , for bugs , because of the long focusing distance , and if you want to achieve poster-like images with diffused backgrounds , because of the narrow field of view . Also, with a 50mm you can use 4x faster shutter speed , so sometimes you can avoid flash .

You can always stack a 28mm in front of the 200mm macro , though, to get x6 hehehe

Does anyone know if there will be a DA*200mm macro in the future ?

And I kinda doubt that the 200mm is much sharper , if at all , than the 50mm. Does anyone have the 200mm macro and a 50mm macro ? Maybe we could see some comparisons done in 1:1 magnification

hey guys

I have bought the DFA 50mm macro before 4-5 months and I am very pleased with the results . I don't know if it is better than the FA 50mm macro but they should be on par .

I heard that 50mm DFA lens is better than the 100mm . Never done true tests .

There are two reasons I prefer the 50mm than the 100mm . The first reason is that I don't want to shoot bugs , only static objects and the 50mm needs half shutter speed for blur-free images . Second reason is that I want greater magnifications than 1:1 , that means bellows ( or extension tubes ) . I need 50mm more if I want 2:1 ( x2 ) with my 50mm lens , but I would need 100mm for the 100mm lens to achieve 2:1 ( x2 ) . The more bellows , the more the light loss = the more diffraction . To achieve 4:1 you need 20cm with 50mm lens . You need 40cm with a 100mm lens . 40cm ! After 2x magnification , I reverse the lens .

The 200mm lens sounds fine but I doubt it is any better in terms of sharpness than the 50mm and even if it is I am sure the difference is minimal . The only reason to buy one is because of the working distance , which I don't care to be long .

Now I want more magnifications and I have tried some cine lenses reversed ( 10mm - 25mm ) and they perform excellent with a bellows . I tested them for 4x-7x . The problem is that I have to focus wide open then stop down to the desired f-stop but this is something to be expected . There is nothing I can do about that ... Stacking lenses is an option but the quality isn't good . I will most probably buy a luminar or a photar or something like that if I can buy one for like 100 pounds . Up to x4 I will use my 50mm DFA reversed .

Have fun all

I dont care abour price. Do you know if the latest DFA 50mm is the sharpest of all or some older model maybe is more sharp ?

thanks

Hello

I want the ultimate in 1:1 macro. I heard 50mm are more sharp than 100mm. I don't care for insects or bugs , thus I dont care if the min. distance is 20 or 30cm. I just want the ultimate 1:1 macro lens

thank you very much . I am glad it is a good lens . Could you post some pics maybe which were shot with the scm 50mm f4 macro ? Can someone tell me if extension tubes are the best to get some more of the lens ?

thank you

edit : are there any incompatibilities with this lens and digital SLR ? Like chromatic aberrations , ghosting flares etc.. ? I am new to SLRs

hey,

I just bought this lens for 40 pounds ( about 70~ usd ) . I want it to use it with my k100d . Is it any good ? I am pretty sure this lens is 1:2 magnification ( not life size ) . This is for film right ? Will the magnification be greater than 1:2 if used with digital ? like 1:1.5 ? Now... if I want to get better macro from this lens .. is it better to use extension tubes or reverse ring.. or ?

I hope I won't regret giving 40 pounds for this lens ..

Thank you!