bwcolor wrote:
My only use for a macro is on the copy stand copying 35mm - 6x7 film, so image stabilization and tele-extender isn’t so important, but should the optics be in another class, I would consider switching from my excellent Tamron 90mm Macro.
I feel like macro optics, like many other prime optics, have already peaked. I can't see what drastic improvements you could possibly find over the latest Sigma, Tamron, and even the old Sony. Dating back to the old Canon EF100L, I can't remember a time when I took a macro shot and was disappointed by something that was a function of the optics.
If I'm being really picky, I suppose lateral CA would be an area of opportunity, but other manufacturers have already addressed this with APO macros.
AGeoJO wrote:
Unless you are doing serious macro and quite a bit at that, this lens looks superfluous to me. I still have my 90mm macro that I use occasionally and then I do have the G 70-200mm Macro that I use more often. I may look into getting this lens a year or two down the road...
This is a sensible take - if chasing after insects handheld is a big priority, this is a probably an essential lens. For the casual macro shooter, particularly one who is working off a tripod, DMF and fast AF aren't that important and definitely not worth paying 2x or more for this lens.
MMP wrote:
I feel like macro optics, like many other prime optics, have already peaked. I can't see what drastic improvements you could possibly find over the latest Sigma, Tamron, and even the old Sony. Dating back to the old Canon EF100L, I can't remember a time when I took a macro shot and was disappointed by something that was a function of the optics.
If I'm being really picky, I suppose lateral CA would be an area of opportunity, but other manufacturers have already addressed this with APO macros.
I assume autofocus will be faster than all the lenses you mention (especially the old Sony 90mm) and having a 1.4x macro lens improves on their magnification ratio significantly. I could imagine both factors being pretty useful in addition to any potential improvements in LaCA and bokeh (two slight weaknesses of the 90mm).
If I actively took more macro photos I'd definitely consider upgrading my Sony 90mm, but I honestly can't remember the last time I took a true macro shot and generally just use my 100-400 for close-up wildlife stuff now.
AGeoJO wrote:
Unless you are doing serious macro and quite a bit at that, this lens looks superfluous to me. I still have my 90mm macro that I use occasionally and then I do have the G 70-200mm Macro that I use more often. I may look into getting this lens a year or two down the road...
When people hear "macro", often bugs and other insects to mind. But that's not a demanding use case for a macro lens.
The real torture test is the reproduction work on a copy stand where 100% flat focus field, even illumination and corner performance at optimal aperture mean everything. And this is where the current 90mm G lens struggles. The current E-mount champion for repro is the 105mm Sigma Art. I hope the new Sony will beat it because the Sigma relies on software correction for mild pincushion, which also affects the edge integrity. Besides, the Sigma has a habit of occasionaly misfocusing. That's why I bought the Z8 with the 105mm Nikkor macro.
And honestly, the flat-field 1:1 (or better) macros is an underserved market, as evidenced by blogs like https://www.closeuphotography.com/ - to get high quality flat-field reproductions people resort to adapted process lenses, enlarger lenses, or even pull lenses out of old film scanners. I really hope that Sony finally delivers a true modern flat-field macro with strong corners.
Can't wait to get my hands on this one.
[EDIT] And I hope Fujifilm is watching. Their GFX is the dream platform for reproduction work, but they have no suitable macro lens for it, creating an opportunity for PhaseOne $50K manual focus rigs. What a shame...
wordfool wrote:
I assume autofocus will be faster than all the lenses you mention (especially the old Sony 90mm) and having a 1.4x macro lens improves on their magnification ratio significantly. I could imagine both factors being pretty useful in addition to any potential improvements in LaCA and bokeh (two slight weaknesses of the 90mm).
If I actively took more macro photos I'd definitely consider upgrading my Sony 90mm, but I honestly can't remember the last time I took a true macro shot and generally just use my 100-400 for close-up wildlife stuff now.
The AF speed will definitely be better, but most macro work is done in manual focus. If you are planning to use the lens often for portraits, it might make a difference, but even then, the AF speed for portraits isn't very demanding. I bet they could have made this a much more compelling sale if the starting price was closer to $1100-1200. I'll be more interested once these start hitting the used market.
Yesss, finally a 100mm OSS. The 90mm was my favorite more so than the 85 gm 1, but I always wanted a 100mm. The flat field is important for me too for detailed insert shots. The OSS and 1.4x is icing. Also very glad they did 67mm filter.
I have the Sigma 105 Macro and absolutely love it. There's essentially zero chance I'd be interested in this lens but... I'm ALWAYS interested in new lenses, especially Sony GM's.
I'll look forward to a comparison to the Sigma. The Sony is US$1,498.00, the Sigma is currently US$879.00 @ B&H. We'll see if the Sony is 1.8x better than the Sigma.
I sent back our eval copies at work on Friday. It picks up some nice resolution over the 90G, putting it in line with the Sigma 105/2.8. I think it has a little bit better bokeh than the Sigma, but, overall, neither have any big flaws optically.
The AF is fast and incredibly sticky on the a9III and a1II. I also used it on my own 6700 and found it flawless, even when chasing a scurrying wolf spider. It's a decent MF focus feel and the distance scales on the two eval copies were accurate. I probably wouldn't whine too much if I had to use it for MF. It takes the extenders, so you can give up a little resolution and add a little FC with the 1.4x. I do not recommend the 2x. Objectively, you're better off shooting in crop mode with the 1.4x.
Personally, I'm content with the 70-200GII. I really appreciate having that broad range in a field close-focuser. The situations where I want AF and the situations where I want higher magnification aren't generally the same for me, so I doubt I'll spend the cash on the GM. That said, if you like to bug/lizard hunt with this type of lens, or if you just want to get more handholdability in a lens of this type than you've ever had, I highly recommend giving it a rent, at least. Sony's done a good job making both AF and OSS more effective at close distances on both the zoom and the GM.
Would have preferred longer focal length, but a solid upgrade nonetheless.
MMP wrote:
The AF speed will definitely be better, but most macro work is done in manual focus. If you are planning to use the lens often for portraits, it might make a difference, but even then, the AF speed for portraits isn't very demanding. I bet they could have made this a much more compelling sale if the starting price was closer to $1100-1200. I'll be more interested once these start hitting the used market.
old-gregg wrote:
When people hear "macro", often bugs and come to mind. But that's not a demanding use case for a macro lens.
The real torture test is the reproduction work on a copy stand where 100% flat focus field, even illumination and corner performance at optimal aperture mean everything. And this is where the current 90mm G lens struggles. The current E-mount champion for repro is the 105mm Sigma Art. I hope the new Sony will beat it because the Sigma relies on software correction for mild pincushion, which also affects the edge integrity. Besides, the Sigma has a habit of occasionaly misfocusing. That's why I bought the Z8 with the 105mm Nikkor macro.
And honestly, the flat-field 1:1 (or better) macros is an underserved market, as evidenced by blogs like https://www.closeuphotography.com/ - to get high quality flat-field reproductions people resort to adapted process lenses, enlarger lenses, or even pull lenses out of old film scanners. I really hope that Sony finally delivers a true modern flat-field macro with strong corners.
Can't wait to get my hands on this one.
[EDIT] And I hope Fujifilm is watching. Their GFX is the dream platform for reproduction work, but they have no suitable macro lens for it, creating an opportunity for PhaseOne $50K manual focus rigs. What a shame... ...Show more →
I don't believe it will disappoint you.
As for the GFX, it, the Cambo Actus G, and the Actar 105 (Rodenstock lens that has an FLE for fine tuning focus) is one way to go if you want a solid repro set up. It won't be cheap, but it won't be $50k.
dclark wrote:
Excellent review by Mark Galer, as per usual, but I'm surprised to hear that cropping in post or shooting with a crop sensor increases magnification.
All the videos I've seen of him contain some errors, and sometimes multiple errors, so at this point I'm not surprised.
I would actually be surprised if there was a video without a single error.
old-gregg wrote:
When people hear "macro", often bugs and other insects to mind. But that's not a demanding use case for a macro lens.
The real torture test is the reproduction work on a copy stand where 100% flat focus field, even illumination and corner performance at optimal aperture mean everything. And this is where the current 90mm G lens struggles. The current E-mount champion for repro is the 105mm Sigma Art. I hope the new Sony will beat it because the Sigma relies on software correction for mild pincushion, which also affects the edge integrity. Besides, the Sigma has a habit of occasionaly misfocusing. That's why I bought the Z8 with the 105mm Nikkor macro.
And honestly, the flat-field 1:1 (or better) macros is an underserved market, as evidenced by blogs like https://www.closeuphotography.com/ - to get high quality flat-field reproductions people resort to adapted process lenses, enlarger lenses, or even pull lenses out of old film scanners. I really hope that Sony finally delivers a true modern flat-field macro with strong corners.
Can't wait to get my hands on this one.
[EDIT] And I hope Fujifilm is watching. Their GFX is the dream platform for reproduction work, but they have no suitable macro lens for it, creating an opportunity for PhaseOne $50K manual focus rigs. What a shame... ...Show more →
In the last 40 or so years after leaving the academy world, I didn't feel the need to do any document or other flat-field reproduction. And indeed, as such, I have used my macro lens or lenses mostly for capturing small and yes, 3-D targets, mostly out in the open air. For that purpose, my existing Sony 90mm G Macro lens has performed well and indeed my emphasis is not performance in the edge, let alone in the corners. My other macro lenses from a different brand, both MF and AF, did basically the same tasks.
I would be lying if I say that I am not intrigued by the new Sony macro lens. But that would not be my first priority. Again, that's my user's case and I completely understand that other folk's user case varies individually.
Alan Parker wrote:
A rewiew/first look in German (autodubbed English available), but with some excellent examples:
He is a quite annoying guy, and in many reviews it seems very much that he is somehow paid by the respective company, but his macro photos here indeed are great!
This lens continues a trend from Sony - a near perfect lens for its intended use at a premium price. With this one - outstanding optical performance, beautiful bokeh, DMF switch, over 1:1 mag, takes teleconverters for higher mag ratio, push/pull MF, great AF with linear motors and macro optimized OSS. Really impressive, anything I could think to ask for (and more) in a single purpose macro/close up lens or dual purpose macro/general use telephoto... But about that price.
For those who have the budget and the desire, though, this is an absolute home run of a lens.
Oct 01, 2025 at 09:28 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
As a macro enthusiast, I love what this lens provides. Great AF that may actually be usable for macro, but also that mechanism that looks like it will provide really good and easy to use manual focus. It is a 100 f/2.8 with 1.4X magnification, a 140 f/4 with 2X magnification with a 1.4X TC, and 200 f/5.6 with 2,8X magnification with the 2X TC. I don't think any other macro lens has come close to be able to provide all that and the bokeh just may be great as well, which I find very important in macro lenses. Would I use all of that? Not a chance. Is the 70-200 f/4 II G Macro actually a lot more than I need and would typically use--yes. Is the $500 Laowa 180 f/4.5 probably about perfect for me when I want more working distance and the answer to that is probably yes too. Would I use this much when I don't need a lot of working distance over my Voigtlander 35 f/2 APO Ultron Macro for Fuji. Probably not at all because I love how that Voigtlander has such good performance and is so small.
It is a great time to shoot macro or even close focus. Some really good lenses have come out recently. So much so that I don't think I need this lens at all. Nevertheless, I will probably get it at some point if I really like the bokeh. That will be what determines it for me and I won't pay $1,500 for it either, but I don't think we will have to pay close to that in a few years either.
So, I can see a three lens macro kit, with the Voigtlander 35 f/2 APO Ultron, this 100 f/2.8, and the Laowa 180 f/4.5 in my future, all of which are way better for my shooting than any lens I would have hoped to be designed just 5 years ago.
Do I want this? DUH! Of course I want it, it's a cool bit of kit!!! Do I need it? Ummm... maybe? Will I actually buy it new right away? Errmm... tempted, but not convinced yet.
Like many, I do shoot hand held macro with A/F, chasing small critters around, etc, so the fast A/F isn't lost on me.
Currently though, I use my Sony 70-200 2.8 GM II for that... it has .3x mag and that goes up to almost half life with the 1.4x TC, and the A/F is uber fast. So all the new Sony is really adding for me is more magnification and a shorter working distance (around 11" on the new Macro vs around 15" on the zoom)
Both are sharp lenses, though the zoom isn't at its best at the corners at 70mm, but comes on strong from 85mm on up.
So, the question for me is it worth it? I kind of like the longer working distances for not scaring off flighty little subjects, and at times, my Sony 200-600mm with its .2x mag and even longer working distance is actually even better suited, albeit with lots of cropping, thank goodness for 61MP, heh.
When I compare MFD and magnification of some of my lenses to the new 100mm Macro, it does give me something to think about:
I "think" the bottom line for me will be when more reviews come out, and see how the new 100mm Macro performs for also-ran uses... like portrait use, how is the bokeh, etc.
MMP wrote:
The AF speed will definitely be better, but most macro work is done in manual focus. If you are planning to use the lens often for portraits, it might make a difference, but even then, the AF speed for portraits isn't very demanding. I bet they could have made this a much more compelling sale if the starting price was closer to $1100-1200. I'll be more interested once these start hitting the used market.
I'm happy with my CV 110mm's manual focus and it can be bought ridiculously inexpensively second-hand.
Looks impressive, but I wonder how practical AF is with that thin DoF (as even a slight miss on a small bug like in that video review will be rather visible) ...
It looks like that's the main selling point compared to the cheaper competition.
I have had several macros but the only one i really loved was the Canon 100L; it had a "soul" and i know in the scientific world of pixels and corner sharp and all the fun ways we talk about lenses I will get laughed out about soul but I think lenses have them and need them.
So I have pre ordered and now have to sell a few lenses to make it work Sig 24-70, 85 1.8, 20 1.8 will get me close but I am very hopeful this lens has a soul like the old 100L from Canon.
