I got the new Sony 90mm macro lens this morning and tried it out on my a7 at a butterfly house. The lens looks about the same size like the Canon 100mm L IS I had before. It feels lighter than it looks. I had the Nikon 105mm VR macro lens too but I didn't use it much before I sold it.
The bad: the AF of the Sony 90mm is very very slow, painfully slow, may I add. It hunts frequently. Granted, all the butterfly shots were taken inside a glass house but even outside it felt slow in the flower shots. Definitely no in the league of the Canon 100mm L and the Nikon 105 VR. Not sure if it had anything to do with the A7. Will try it on the A6000 to see if it's any better.
The good: The pictures look very sharp and contrasty, nice bokeh too, to my eyes. Not much vibrancy and saturation increase are required in Lightroom.
kdrk888 wrote:
The bad: the AF of the Sony 90mm is very very slow, painfully slow, may I add. It hunts frequently. Granted, all the butterfly shots were taken inside a glass house but even outside it felt slow in the flower shots. Definitely no in the league of the Canon 100mm L and the Nikon 105 VR. Not sure if it had anything to do with the A7. Will try it on the A6000 to see if it's any better.
Thanks for the report.
My question on bad AF is, is the performance the same between close-ups and reasonably long distances (e.g. portraits and landscape)? Or do longer distances focus significantly faster?
I'm wondering as well if whether there will be a firmware update to improve performance on the bodies. I know that lately each firmware update for the bodies includes a performance update for recently released lenses. I know that macro lenses traditionally aren't speed demons but hearing how slow it is is a little disappointing.
Quick update. The AF is noticeably faster for subjects not very very close. It's slow at macro distance. One thing I don't understand though, the specs' min. focus distance is 28mm, or about 9", but I was able to focus even at around 1/2 of the min. focus distance. Wonder why? Or do I misunderstand the meaning of min. focus distance in this context?
MFD is distance from the subject to the sensor. You're probably thinking of working distance, which is from the subject to the front of the lens.
FWIW, I'm finding the FE 90 to have pretty quick AF for most things on my A7 II. It definitely slows down in the macro range, but there's very few macro lenses I've used that don't. It's been too long since I used the 100L (I owned it for about 2 years) to say whether that was faster or slower than the FE 90 in the macro range, but my impression is that it's not a huge difference, but I sold my Canon gear about 5 years ago so it's too long to say anything definitively. I have to say that it's a stunning optic.
kdrk888 wrote:
Quick update. The AF is noticeably faster for subjects not very very close. It's slow at macro distance. One thing I don't understand though, the specs' min. focus distance is 28mm, or about 9", but I was able to focus even at around 1/2 of the min. focus distance. Wonder why? Or do I misunderstand the meaning of min. focus distance in this context?
The minimum focusing distance is meassured from the sensor (film) plane. The minimum working distance is meassured from the front of the lens. For macro lenses, both are useful to know.
Jman, atwl, bjornthun, thank you for the explanation. I thought MFD was the min. distance from the subject to the front element of the lens.
The Canon 100 L I had hunted at macro distance too. But my recollection is it didn't hunt back and forth, back and forth as much as the Sony. The hunting at macro distance doesn't really bother me as much for my macro usage, which is mostly flower shots.
So what it be safe to say at about 8ft distance to subject the AF would be comparable to like the 55 in AF speed. I also think when you talk about AF speed than we should include what body. The A7II is miles ahead of the A7r so we need a base camera to go by. What most folks are comparing as I read a lot of comments on the decision process between the Batis 85 and the 90 macro. So I think not so much working in the macro world which clearly this lens is designed for and it totally will be slow AF here but more in the general ranges like 5ft to infinity and how that AF speed is. Here is where I think a lot of folks are thinking okay I can deal with a 2.8 lens over the 1.8 but are we talking comparable speeds with AF let's say where the 85Mm minimum focus distance starts. This we have not heard to much about. The lens looks very good and it is compelling as a general purpose lens.
Than we have to think how much faster it will be with the A7rII which clearly looks to be even more responsive and faster over the A7II. Need to think ahead here because a lot of folks will be upgrading too. Nice reports so far folks
p.1 #10 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
GMPhotography wrote:
So what it be safe to say at about 8ft distance to subject the AF would be comparable to like the 55 in AF speed. I also think when you talk about AF speed than we should include what body. The A7II is miles ahead of the A7r so we need a base camera to go by. What most folks are comparing as I read a lot of comments on the decision process between the Batis 85 and the 90 macro. So I think not so much working in the macro world which clearly this lens is designed for and it totally will be slow AF here but more in the general ranges like 5ft to infinity and how that AF speed is. Here is where I think a lot of folks are thinking okay I can deal with a 2.8 lens over the 1.8 but are we talking comparable speeds with AF let's say where the 85Mm minimum focus distance starts. This we have not heard to much about. The lens looks very good and it is compelling as a general purpose lens.
Than we have to think how much faster it will be with the A7rII which clearly looks to be even more responsive and faster over the A7II. Need to think ahead here because a lot of folks will be upgrading too. Nice reports so far folks...Show more →
Guy, i just went outside to try the AF again, for subjects 4' or 5' away, the focus (with a7) locks on pretty quickly, I guess it's somewhere around one second or less. That's pretty good.
p.1 #11 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
Yea that does sound pretty good for sure. Reason I brought this up as I believe a lot of folks are thinking what I wrote above. Obviously you get the bonus of a macro lens but you lose speed but if AF between them is fairly close and knowing it will get better on the A7rII than this decision gets harder to make. For myself I think I'm better off with the Batis because my work is more outside the macro world but for the hobbyist the 90 maybe a better choice. It has macro obviously but it also has less distortion than the 85 as well. Product shooters will also look at the macro more closely as the lens to go with. No lens can fill everyone's shoes but I do find this lens quite compelling to buy.
p.1 #12 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
GMPhotography wrote:
Yea that does sound pretty good for sure. Reason I brought this up as I believe a lot of folks are thinking what I wrote above. Obviously you get the bonus of a macro lens but you lose speed but if AF between them is fairly close and knowing it will get better on the A7rII than this decision gets harder to make. For myself I think I'm better off with the Batis because my work is more outside the macro world but for the hobbyist the 90 maybe a better choice. It has macro obviously but it also has less distortion than the 85 as well. Product shooters will also look at the macro more closely as the lens to go with. No lens can fill everyone's shoes but I do find this lens quite compelling to buy.
Oh and thanks for running outside and doing that. ...Show more →
Guy, I will use this for the very occasional portraiture stuff that I do. The bokeh certainly looks nice. I had a Canon 85mm F1.2 L II until last year and still have a Nikon 85mm f1.8 G. I do think the Sony's 90mm FL and the nice bokeh should work well for portraits. I will try it on my dogs since my kids don't want to be the model.
p.1 #15 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
Depends on the subject. For insects like bees that quickly move from flower to flower, I do. If things are more stationary, I'll use MF.
Jul 08, 2015 at 12:34 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
Jman13 wrote:
Depends on the subject. For insects like bees that quickly move from flower to flower, I do. If things are more stationary, I'll use MF.
I find for bees, butterflies, and other insects, I find prefocussing to spot (like the stamens of a flower where the pollen is) and waiting for them to come to where I am focussing works best, but I am sure others' MMV.
p.1 #17 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
Rick Bolin wrote:
Do many of you use autofocus when shooting macros? I wouldn't think slow autofocus at short distances would be much of an issue for a macro lens.
p.1 #18 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
Steve Spencer wrote:
I find for bees, butterflies, and other insects, I find prefocussing to spot (like the stamens of a flower where the pollen is) and waiting for them to come to where I am focussing works best, but I am sure others' MMV.
p.1 #19 · Sony FE 90MM Macro Lens First Impression
A couple more taken today. These are JPEG straight out of the A7. No processing at all. The dog pictures are those of two dogs although they look similar.
Thanks for looking. You be the judge. Any comments are welcome.
DSC01770
