For my other half who has just graduated to an APS-C option (A6700) from a bridge camera
Has the Sony 16-70 f4 and 70-350 currently and space in the bag for another option, ideally something a little better in low light with semi decent macro capabilities. Can be an aps or ff lens but all needs to go into a Gomatic 12l sling so nothing too big
85mm f1.8 would be a good option but doesnt really tick the macro box, 90mm f2.8 ticks the macro option but not sure what it would be like for non macro use on a crop sensor (seem to recall reading it hunts a lot) 50mm f2.8 a little short
What's your SO looking for out of a "macro" lens? Is it all field work (flower shots, for example) or do they want to get into table top/reproduction? Are they wanting to get into bug hunting?
If it's the former, I wouldn't worry so much about picking a dedicated macro. I'd actually avoid it, particularly for flower shots. I'd go for something with a wider aperture that gives more bokeh options in those scenarios. My choice would either be the Zony 55/1.8 or Sigma 56/1.4, because I prefer the focal length, but if your SO wants something longer, I'd have nothing against the FE 85/1.8. All three of those lenses are great for the format. The Sonys have the advantage of being FF, so you cut off a lot of the things FF shooters complain about with the lenses. They are a little SA softened at MFD, which I think works to their advantage. You can stop them down to f/2.8 where typical macros start and they clean up nicely, but all three offer some beauty advantages wide open. I would supplement whatever I chose with an appropriately sized Kenko Pro AC1 No 3 diopter, because, even on APSC, their MFDs aren't spectacular. The diopter gets you closer without a huge drop in quality. I would also get into that knowing that they may need some manual intervention working at close distances with the diopter. Sometimes they just need a push in the right direction to keep them from sweeping their focus ranges.
I have the A6700 and the 16-70/4 OSS as well. For macro dedicated lens I’ll go with the 90 macro. For portraiture I like the Sonnar 55/1.8. If you want something longer the Sony 85/1.8 is an excellent lens. In my case, I have the Batis 85/1.8—it’s relatively light but the rendering is awesome. Good luck with your decision.
Jul 13, 2026 at 04:02 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
I have always thought that the Zeiss Touit 50 f/2.8 Macro is a really nice option for APS-C shooters. It provides full 1 to 1 macro if your SO is into that, but really nice performance not quite as close as well. The lens is fairly small as well being less than 100 mm long and less than 300g. The price isn't too bad either and you should be able to get it on the used market for less than $400.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I have always thought that the Zeiss Touit 50 f/2.8 Macro is a really nice option for APS-C shooters. It provides full 1 to 1 macro if your SO is into that, but really nice performance not quite as close as well. The lens is fairly small as well being less than 100 mm long and less than 300g. The price isn't too bad either and you should be able to get it on the used market for less than $400.
I absolutely love that glass. It's great all-around, but it's very noisy, slow, and lacks a focus limiter (no dedicated macro should be without one). For those reasons, I think the Sony FE 50 is a better proposition, though it's not fast, just mildly faster and quieter.
freaklikeme wrote:
I absolutely love that glass. It's great all-around, but it's very noisy, slow, and lacks a focus limiter (no dedicated macro should be without one). For those reasons, I think the Sony FE 50 is a better proposition, though it's not fast, just mildly faster and quieter.
Was there a firmware update to the Touit 50? My 32/1.8 was noisy when it hunted for focus but I sent it to Zeiss in NYC for a firmware upgrade and the AF improved a lot.
jojib wrote:
Was there a firmware update to the Touit 50? My 32/1.8 was noisy when it hunted for focus but I sent it to Zeiss in NYC for a firmware upgrade and the AF improved a lot.
There was, and it improved AF-C stickiness and fixed a shutter-release issue some were having. It didn't make it any faster or make it sound less like a pepper grinder and it's still likely to hunt some without help.
Jul 13, 2026 at 05:51 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
freaklikeme wrote:
I absolutely love that glass. It's great all-around, but it's very noisy, slow, and lacks a focus limiter (no dedicated macro should be without one). For those reasons, I think the Sony FE 50 is a better proposition, though it's not fast, just mildly faster and quieter.
I have a hearing deficit, so I am mostly immune to noisy lenses and therefore the last person to ask about such things. Sometimes my lack of hearing can be a blessing in disguise, but it makes my advice about such things pretty terrible. So my take on such things is not at all helpful. For example, when you wrote it sounds like a pepper grinder I actually have no clue what a pepper grinder sounds like and was a bit surprised it would be a loud sound, . I don't doubt that it is, but I would never know that.
What about an FE85 plus a Nisi achromatic magnifier? Way cheaper and smaller than a 90G. Plus when subjects get moving quickly, the FE85 can keep up and the 90G simply can't. If you're not going to do a lot of macro, this might be a good way to go
. I don't doubt that it is, but I would never know that.