Should I still invest in a macro lens?

[sury]

This one was taken with A900 and Vivitar Ser 1 35-85 f2.8 MD lens. I was having a bit of softness when I took the close ups at the long end and then I went to 35mm and got closer to the flower. The attached image is a crop of the original.
I have a Vivitar 90/2.5 Macro with 1:1 adapter. Since I am told most of the macro is typically manual focusing anyway, should I still look at buying a current generation macro lens?

With best regards,
Sury

[David Kilpatrick]

Unless you want the macro for other reasons, what you have already sounds fine. Are you using the Vivitar 35-85mm with an adaptor, or has it been converted by changing the mount? The flower shot looks pretty clean, but has been cropped, perhaps the edges are not so acceptable? A modern macro would be sharp corner to corner like the Vivitar 90mm.

David

[sury]

David,
Here is the full image. I found out that I have to "underexpose" by couple of stops otherwise
it tends to over expose. Yes, I am using an adapter with glass in it. By the way, is there a
suggested way of using Viv 90 with 1-1 adapter?

With best regards,
Sury

[David Kilpatrick]

Yes, in the 1960s there was a set of manual extension tubes with a screw thread and mounts at each end (SR mounts). If you got hold of one of these sets, with an SR mount at the front end, and engineered an AF mount on to the other end using a suitable screw thread adaptor. The tubes have a thread which I think is 44mm, the same as the Miranda hybrid bayonet screw fitting, though placing a ruler across it it could be 45mm. Pentax screw is 42mm.

I have the complete set - No 1 (a very short 7.5mm SR/SR extension tube), No 2 (the same length, but goes from SR mount to 44mm screw) then two tubes - No 3 is a 15mm long screw thread tube, No 4 is a 30mm long tube. Finally No 5 is a 7.5mm screw thread to SR lens bayonet tube. They can be used in two different orders as a set - 12345, or (front the front) 23451 - both arrangements end up with a bayonet at both ends.

Getting a screw thread adaptor 44mm to 42mm so a Pentax M42 to M-AF adpator could be added, would be a simple engineering job.

David

[sury]

David,
Thank you. I believe I have a tube set as you described. I bought it on eBay. There are two threaded mount interfaces,
one for MA mount (for camera) and the other for MD mount (for the lens). My question is about the 1:1 adapter that came with my Vivitar 90/2.8. If I put the 1:1 converter, I need to get extremely close and only small objects can be shot. Is the purpose of the converter to magnify ONLY small objects? Just curious.

With best regards,
Sury

[David Kilpatrick]

The 1:1 converter is just a tube (if it contains glass, it will be a correcting element). You can use this with the MA to MD adaptor. But, if the MA to MD adaptor contains a glass element, this is going to ruin the results from the Vivitar at close range (it will allow it to focus on infinity). You should buy another adaptor, and remove the glass in it permanently. It then become an extension tube, ideal for use with MD macro lenses - but with no chance of infinity focus, and no degradation of the image.

David

[sury]

David,
Thank you very much. Now I beginning to see the light. I see why I get better macro shots with my M42 and tubes than with my MD. My M42 adapter has no glass element and my MD one certainly does. Once again your patience with me and passion in the subject matter is very much appreciated.

With best regards,
Sury

[Mr_Canuck]

I haven't used extension tubes, but would like to try some time. But I can say that the Minolta 50/2.8 RS Macro that I got this spring has become a favourite. It is very easy to walk around with and hand-hold, and it has rendered my 50/1.7 obsolete. I think it's probably a simple and more versatile solution than tubes etc. that is if you have a zoom as well.

[sury]

Since I have a 50/1.7 I was not keen on 50/2.8 Macro. Hmmm!! Based on your experience I should rethink.
I have used tubes, I have used culsets and macro lenses. The results from all of them are keepers to junk.
I resigned to the fact that only thing common among all these techniques is me and therefore am focusing
on learning more. Hence my series of questions.

With best regards,
Sury

[sury]

Here is an example with a no glass adapter and Vivitar 90mm/f2.5 macro lens. I will try
side by side with adapter with glass over the weekend. I am very pleased with the results.
Once again, thank you David for pointing out the advantage of no glass adapter.

With best regards,
Sury

The 1:1 converter is just a tube (if it contains glass, it will be a correcting element). You can use this with the MA to MD adaptor. But, if the MA to MD adaptor contains a glass element, this is going to ruin the results from the Vivitar at close range (it will allow it to focus on infinity). You should buy another adaptor, and remove the glass in it permanently. It then become an extension tube, ideal for use with MD macro lenses - but with no chance of infinity focus, and no degradation of the image.

David