Without a dought, the best macro lens I've ever come across is the Nikon Micro-Nikkor 200mm f4 IF AIS.
I also have the Micro Nikkor 55mm f2.8 AIS but the 200mm is in a totally different league.
Some samples, most of them hand-held!:
And a 100% crop:
These are unsharpened, with default saturation, and apertures ranged from f16-f32.
Ok, the battle is joined. MORE PHOTOS !!! I like the idea of argueing for your lens with your best shots posted as examples.....(not that doing so will change anyone's position, but it will make for a great thread of outstanding photos).
Very nice...I wonder, were these insects glued in place or dead from the freezer?, because I dought the working distance of the MPE 65mm is more than a couple of inches at best and I know how hard it is to capture shy bugs with a lens barrel looming up close to them...My Nikkor's working distance, even at 2:1 is something like 10 inches so all mine were fully alive, before and after I took their pic.
id say MPE without a doubt, thats why a lot of people use canon for macro, no other lens can even compair, i own one to, the above shots i can vouch for, there not easy but definatly not impossible, i have a few close ones like those myself. You build up technique after a while.
Alf Beharie wrote:
Very nice...I wonder, were these insects glued in place or dead from the freezer?, because I dought the working distance of the MPE 65mm is more than a couple of inches at best and I know how hard it is to capture shy bugs with a lens barrel looming up close to them...
A fair question. I never shoot dead insects, but I do study the behavior of live critters so I can take advantage of their quirks to get close. With bees I get most of my photos in the early spring when the temperatures are low and the sun dips behind the clouds (the bees need the heat to drive their metabolism)...
...so you see there really is no such thing as a "bug lens" and that having a short working distance actually allows me to get photos that I wouldn't be able to take with longer glass...
It's what John says, the MP-E, without a shred of a doubt in my mind, at least. I have long glass, too, the Sigma 150mm + TCs = 210mm and 300mm, that I love using (conveniece and versatility, with a tripod). But for ultimate macro-shots there is nothing that comes close to the MP-E.
I'm afraid I've yet to see evidence of a bad macro lens from a major manufacturer. The resolution of most macro lenses is nearly identical although it tends to fall off slightly with longer focal length ones. There's far more variability in the ability of the user than the lenses they use.
The MPE-65 is a bit difficult to compare as it is the only lens of it's type available for high power work without any add-ons.
Shot below taken with a 50mm pentax lens cobbled onto a canon body with manual extension tubes.
I think it is hard to say this macro lens is the best since there is a variety of objects that people shoot with macro lenses and the magnification is an important issue.
For flowers I prefer either the 85L with tubes for the great bokeh and subtle colortransitions:
I also never shoot dead insects. I did it once to try out my new high mag lenses. Found a dead wasp that I practiced on. It is quite easy to tell if the bugs are alive or dead.
LordV wrote:
I'm afraid I've yet to see evidence of a bad macro lens from a major manufacturer. The resolution of most macro lenses is nearly identical although it tends to fall off slightly with longer focal length ones. There's far more variability in the ability of the user than the lenses they use.
Very well said! There are definitely more bad photographers than there are bad lenses -just look at all the "my lens back / forward focuses" threads at DPR...
@ Everyone: I read the first post like it was a challenge and it seemed like fun to "play". I know that the photographer, and not the lens, makes the photo. So please do not get bent or take this thread down a negative path...
Dalantech wrote:
@ Everyone: I read the first post like it was a challenge and it seemed like fun to "play". I know that the photographer, and not the lens, makes the photo. So please do not get bent or take this thread down a negative path...
I hope I did not just do that. I just wanted to show that difference lenses suits different purposes.
