I think thats a bad recommendation, fast 50mm normal lenses do not perform anywhere even close (no pun) as Macro lenses in the high magnificaion ranges under say 1:10. They are optimized for infinity and speed, not closeup, and as such, dont do a very good job closeup with tubes. Many "regular" lenses have close focus limits built into the lens for a good reason, the reason is the performance of the lens goes to crapola when focussed closer. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Robb Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 7:33 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Macro Lenses ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Walters" Subject: RE: Macro Lenses >I guess it depends on how close Walt wants to get. A lot of what I do >is >"close" rather than "true macro" and I find the extra distance with the >90mm Tamron on the *ist DS is more workable than with my 50mm Macro >Takumar. I often use flash and find that I can't get the light where I >want it with the 50. I have macro lenses of 50mm, 100mm and 200mm. I had thought that the 50 would get more use with the smaller format, but in fact, I haven't used it yet on the digital. I am finding the A100/2.8 to be a gorgeous macro lens on the DSLR, and have chosen it or the FA200/4 macro every time over the 50mm. Frankly, if you want a 50mm macro, get a 50/1.4 and a set of extension tubes, it will probably serve you better as general purpose equipemnt than a slow 50mm macro lens. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
