Alternative macro lens suggestions for an A7iii

[Cliff]

Hello everyone
i appreciate the 90 macro from Sony is probably the number 1 choice for many, but I’m not interested in blowing the best part of £900 on a speciality lens, which won’t be used that often. I’m more interested in either The Sony 50mm which can double up for other uses/ genres in the studio , or as an f2.8 standard lens or maybe the sigma 70 macro, anyone shed some thoughts on these 2 with examples, or even possibly some other lenses, MF with AF but I don’t do adapted lenses.

 

[Clix Pix]

In November 2019 when I purchased my A7R IV, the lens at the top of my list was the 90mm macro, but I also got the 50mm macro as well; I have to admit that I haven't really used the 50mm all that much, as that 90mm seems to just jump right into my hands and on the camera. That said, one reason I like the 50mm is that it is smaller and lighter than the 90mm, and sometimes if working in close spaces smaller is better. As you mention, too, it is versatile in that it provides the classic standard "normal" focal length for just going out-and-about, too. When I have used it, the lens works very nicely both on its own and with an extension tube for those times when I've wanted to get really up close and more personal with my subject.

I tend to use AF quite a bit, on both my macro lenses but MF works nicely, too, with Focus Peaking. Like you, I don't do adapted lenses, and so far I have stuck with Sony for everything as I've been gradually developing my lens collection as need arises for a specific focal length or type of lens.

 

[WeeMalky]

Cliff felt the same way and picked up a Minolta AF 100mm F2.8 Macro for Sony Mount-A and A to E adapter you are going to use it in manual anyway always worth a thought

 

[Atmfrank]

The Minolta 100mm f/2.8 is a good choice if you came from the Minolta camp. For people who started out with Sony, it's less attractive because you have to put up with the sub-par LA-EA4 adapter. I have the 100mm f/2.8 lens and it's a great piece of glass, which can be obtained for a decent price ($150-$180 USD). Since I already have the LA-EA4, I also use the 135mm f/1.8 ZA (Zeiss Sonnar) for macro photography. You can get very close with it (roughly 0.7m/2 ft) which fills out the frame quite well. Optical quality is phenomenal and perhaps the same as the newer 135mm f/1.8 GM version. For macro, I don't need fast AF performance. You can pick up the old alpha ZA for $700-$800 USD. While still expensive, you get a very versatile lens for portrait, macro, landscape with superior optical quality.

 

[Cliff]

Cliff felt the same way and picked up a Minolta AF 100mm F2.8 Macro for Sony Mount-A and A to E adapter you are going to use it in manual anyway always worth a thought

Thanks for the suggestion, I have read the Minolta is a good macro,

 

[Cliff]

In November 2019 when I purchased my A7R IV, the lens at the top of my list was the 90mm macro, but I also got the 50mm macro as well; I have to admit that I haven't really used the 50mm all that much, as that 90mm seems to just jump right into my hands and on the camera. That said, one reason I like the 50mm is that it is smaller and lighter than the 90mm, and sometimes if working in close spaces smaller is better. As you mention, too, it is versatile in that it provides the classic standard "normal" focal length for just going out-and-about, too. When I have used it, the lens works very nicely both on its own and with an extension tube for those times when I've wanted to get really up close and more personal with my subject.

I tend to use AF quite a bit, on both my macro lenses but MF works nicely, too, with Focus Peaking. Like you, I don't do adapted lenses, and so far I have stuck with Sony for everything as I've been gradually developing my lens collection as need arises for a specific focal length or type of lens.

I’m sort of tempted to get the Sony 50 as it’s dual / multi purpose And see how I get on , I wouldn’t mind seeing some examples of insects etc ......

 

[Clix Pix]

Sorry, no bugs here, especially with the 50mm macro! . I tend to do flowers and such rather than insects with my macro lenses.....

 

[Vorkell]

I shoot with an A7Riii and have a 100-400GM for wildlife. It's super short focusing distance has been great as an impromptu macro lens! Here's an example of the 100-400 at full 400, about 3m away, it's not the most spectacular shot, but should give you a good idea of what is capable with the lens.

 

[Clix Pix]

I have the 100-400mm, too, and have used it some for shooting flowers and such, but haven't yet captured any dragonflies or insects with it. The other day I was shooting some flowers and thought I saw a butterfly, but on closer inspection it turned out to be just a dead leaf. I am hoping to get to a local botanical gardens soon, where there should be ample opportunity for finding and shooting butterflies and dragonflies, and perhaps a frog or two....

 

[Carolg]

I own the 100-400mm and have used it for Dragonflies and butterflies when they are skittish and won't let you get close, but a close up with the 90mm macro is far sharper, but it depends what you are looking for in your photography, and how close you want to get, every lens has its speciality.

 

[Cliff]

yes, I have outdoors covered with the 200-600 and I'm thinking of the 100-400 as well, my usage would be studio, where distance from subject is not too much of an issue > I use a cage to mount light and have lab lifts and such to present objects like precious stones, insects ( dead) etc, lighting is controlled by multiple speed lights and or strobes so a controlled environment

 

[Carolg]

yes, I have outdoors covered with the 200-600 and I'm thinking of the 100-400 as well, my usage would be studio, where distance from subject is not too much of an issue > I use a cage to mount light and have lab lifts and such to present objects like precious stones, insects ( dead) etc, lighting is controlled by multiple speed lights and or strobes so a controlled environment

I love the 100-400mm as its so much lighter than the Sigma150-600mm I used to own, and auto focus doesn't struggle like the problems I used to had with the Sigma.

 

[Vorkell]

Anything can be a Macro lens if you're close enough, and crop enough! (Joking!.... Kind of)

• ILCE-7RM3
• FE 24mm F1.4 GM
• 24.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/640 sec
• ISO 50

Sony A7Riii with the 24mm f/1.4 GM.

 

[Carolg]

Anything can be a Macro lens if you're close enough, and crop enough! (Joking!.... Kind of)

View attachment 1246

Sony A7Riii with the 24mm f/1.4 GM.

nice image

 

[Cliff]

Nice image especially with a 24 mm, however, this is an example of what I’m interested in

 

[Vorkell]

Nice image especially with a 24 mm, however, this is an example of what I’m interested in

Incredible shot! Yeah, the 24mm was a joke . Was that taken with the 90mm GM? My better half loves doing Macro photography and has been using my 100-400GM for it, but that seems far and away beyond the capabilities of the 100-400GM!

 

[Cliff]

The bee was taken on a sigma 105 on my previous system , but I guess the Sony 90 could do the same job, although based on the competition I.e Nikon and canon the 90 is very expensive, and for what I do I not prepared to pay around £900-1000 for speciality lens, so that leaves me with the sigma 70 or just buy an old Nikon d 500 and a macro lens for the cost of the Sony

 

[Annerosemary]

I have a pre owned Canon 100mm f2.8 macro and sigma mc11 converter.
bought the lens from Japan and had it not been for import duty it would have been a bargain!
It‘s a great lens and worth considering.

 

[Cliff]

thanks for the suggestion, it does appear options are limited outside fo the Sony 90, so even though I didn't want an adapted lens it may offer the best solution, other than that go buy the 90

 

[Vorkell]

thanks for the suggestion, it does appear options are limited outside fo the Sony 90, so even though I didn't want an adapted lens it may offer the best solution, other than that go buy the 90

While I don't have any evidence, the new Tamron 70-180 is supposed to have a "manual macro" mode. When put in manual mode, it apparently drops the minimum focusing range to 0.27m/10.6".

"Switch to manual focus and set the lens to 70mm, though, and you can suddenly focus as close as just 0.27m /10.6 in, with an impressive 1:2 reproduction ratio - not bad for a 70-180mm zoom! The only proviso is that it's difficult to focus on subjects at the edges of the frame - it's more a mode for focusing on what's in the center and blurring out the edges."

That's a snippet of this article: https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/tamron_70_180mm_f2_8_di_iii_vxd_review

If you're looking for an all-rounder, this may be something to look at, though I doubt you'll get even close to the quality of a dedicated macro lens from any system. I think you may be stuck getting a dedicated lens after all for the quality you're looking for. Good luck and be sure post up some shots once you decide on a lens!

 

[Carolg]

I have only just purchased the 90mm Sony macro, i've previously used a Tamron 90mm macro (A mount so need the Sony LA EA4 A-E Adapter ) the picture quality is really good, but I'm currently changing all my lens to avoid the adapters as a personal choice. Also it doesn't have image stabilisation, but not an issue as the A7iii I shoot with has in body stabilisation. The only thing I found that could be annoying is that it doesn't have the range of focus points, not usually an issue, but when it was, it was always on a shot you didn't want to miss. You can pick them up really cheaply now as A mount cameras are no longer made. ( Im also going to be selling mine if you are interested)

 

[PhotoGebo]

There are some amazing shots in here. I just switched from all Canon and couldn't afford to re-buy everything, so I got the adapter from Sigma and still use my 100mm 2.8. Not the most perfect option, but it works!

 

[KCH]

Hello everyone
i appreciate the 90 macro from Sony is probably the number 1 choice for many, but I’m not interested in blowing the best part of £900 on a speciality lens, which won’t be used that often. I’m more interested in either The Sony 50mm which can double up for other uses/ genres in the studio , or as an f2.8 standard lens or maybe the sigma 70 macro, anyone shed some thoughts on these 2 with examples, or even possibly some other lenses, MF with AF but I don’t do adapted lenses.

I am a fan of the older Tamron Adaptall II lenses. The 90mm Macro is spectacular (and used to be nearly free). Prices have gone up a bit on ebay. I also have several other adaptall macro zoom lenses. If you like manual lenses these are great.

 

[GordyDunwoking]

Hello everyone
i appreciate the 90 macro from Sony is probably the number 1 choice for many, but I’m not interested in blowing the best part of £900 on a speciality lens, which won’t be used that often. I’m more interested in either The Sony 50mm which can double up for other uses/ genres in the studio , or as an f2.8 standard lens or maybe the sigma 70 macro, anyone shed some thoughts on these 2 with examples, or even possibly some other lenses, MF with AF but I don’t do adapted lenses.

Hi don't know if it will help you i have a Sony 70-300 g lens, and i use an extension tube on it, and that enables me to get very close to the subject