View Full Version : Are macro lenses good for normal photography too?
08-08-2013, 09:57 PM
1) What's a pixel???? Never mind nobody cares.
2) Language like that is frowned upon here, it's obscene :o(
08-08-2013, 10:35 PM
My favorite portrait lens is Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 G. I love it for tight shots. No, it's not too sharp....
08-11-2013, 07:31 PM
Perhaps the OP has made an error, (oops!, non of us do that, ever, do we?). I only know of the Zuiko 50mm. f3.5 Auto-macro amongst the older series of lenses. This lens is optimized for reproduction at 1:10 but I would find it difficult to detect much difference between it and the Zuiko 50mm. f1.8, other than the aperture size and close focussing caperbility. It has become my 'standard' lens.
09-14-2013, 01:33 PM
I tried my 135mm f4 SMC macro-Takumar on my Pentax 6x7 for some 'distance' work and found it very disappointing -- used Tripod, Mirror up too but my 1970's bought 50mm f4 SMC Macro-Takumar M42 screw lens for PENTAX is good at distance -- I will see if I can put on a sample
Here is a 'middle distance' shot on 2005 outdated Kodak Ultra 400 rated 250 ASA on my 50mm f4 SMC Macro-Takumar on Spotmatic F
09-14-2013, 02:41 PM
I tried my 135mm f4 SMC macro-Takumar on my Pentax 6x7 for some 'distance' work and found it very disappointing -- used Tripod, Mirror up too
That's peculiar. My Bronica PG 110mm f/4 macro is fabulous, regardless of focus distance.
10-28-2013, 06:13 PM