Nope, 50mm is never short on APS, its already way past "normal" even at infinity and at 1:1, its three times the lenght of a normal lens at infinity. "short" lenses by my defintion would havet be wide or at least normal length and on APS 50mm is NOT.
Regarding using longer lenses, I am not saying they are not useful for some things, but the topis was a ONE LENS macro setup, and for only one lens those long lenses are too long for general purpose macro IMHO. What make 300mm and 500mm true macro lenses are you using? I have never heard of any for 35mm/APS unless you are just using regular lenses with extensions. jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:37 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Macro Lenses J. C. O'Connell wrote: > they dont allow "better control of the background" > when you WANT some more background do they? Thats > what shorter lenses are for in a lot of cases. Of course, I agree with that. I use wide angles a lot for flower macros. > It is not always desired to have the extreme telephoto effect. And > even with the shorter lenses (50mm is NOT short in macro range on APS > anyway) I have a 500mm and use a 300mm for butterfly closeups. 50mm is short. :-) > you can control > background somewhat with DOF/aperture if needed. Of course. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- 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
