Sony's 100mm macro??

[GaryMulcahey]

Hi folks
I'm about to take the leap into the world of the a900 I would like to use it on this large job I have coming up in the next couple of weeks. I'm in need of some closeup shots of faces that will go to print(ad campaign and booklets, etc) and I'm wondering about the quality of the Sony 100mm Macr0 2.8.

Any help from those who have used it would be appreciated.

Cheers
G

[pakodominguez]

Do you have any idea of how will you develop this series of Portraits? depending of that, the 100 f2.8 Macro can or can not be the right lens for this gig...

The 100 Macro is a really sharp lens, even wide open. And I believe that sharpness (I mean: THAT sharpness and contrast) isn't always flattering on a portrait... If you work @ f4 or f5 it will be ok, but @ f11 girls wont like you that much.

[GaryMulcahey]

Thanks pakodominguez,

Hmmm. Too sharp you say? Is that even possible? I will be shooting this wide open with a very shallow depth of field. I will also get the CZ 85mm but I don't think it focuses close enough for this style of shoot we are after.

G

[Dr. Harout]

What kind of portrait shooting do you mean, Gary?

[GaryMulcahey]

What kind of portrait shooting do you mean, Gary?

They won't be single image portraits even though a single image should be able to stand on it's own for this job. These will be multi(8-10) image character studies using expressions and facial gestures shot close up. They will be b&w images in the end. I can't show you the layout I received from the AD for obvious reasons but when the job is complete I will post a few of the out takes if you like and I will put the complete finished pieces up on my site, if I ever update it and if I shoot it with the a900.

G

[Dr. Harout]

I think I understand what you mean. And if I'm on the right path, then yes you might consider the 100/2.8 Macro, but think of the 85/1.4 and, why not, you might even use a wide angle lens which focuses very near to the subject sometimes distorted or exaggerated perspectives do add a good impact.

[GaryMulcahey]

Doc,
A wide angle is not in the cards for this job. I'm not apposed to wide angle as a tool for shooting people. Just not for this job.

G

[01af]

For classic portraiture, 90 - 105 mm macro lenses are good and bad at the same time. From a purely technical point of view, they should be perfect. The focal length is just right for a nice perspective on the human face---not too close and not too far away. The lens' minimum focusing distance will never get in your way, unlike with so many non-macro lenses. And the lens speed of most modern telephoto macro lenses is more than fast enough for accurate focusing, convenient framing, and selective focus if required.

Still ... somehow, the imaging characteristics of macro lenses does not suit portraiture work really well. Too sharp, and too contrasty. Portraits taken with a fast 85 mm lens or a typical telephoto zoom lens will look smoother, more natural, nicer overall. Of course, in our digital times you can always tone down sharpness and/or contrast in post-processing. But it takes some care to get it 'right,' or it will look deliberately soft-filtered rather than natural. When using Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom then try a small amount of negative Clarity (e. g. -5 .. -15).

However when shooting close-ups of parts of faces---like isolated lips, noses, eyes---then a macro lens will do just fine.

-- Olaf

[Javelin]

I saw a technique where one shot is taken sharp of a subject and the next slightly defocused. then they were combined in post the resulds were very nice. sort of sharp with a nice glow.

[artington]

I am contemplating buying this lens too. However, I have also considered the recent KM (D) or the Minolta RS version but read somewhere that the coating on these lenses does not work well to eliminate reflected sensor images when they are used with digital cameras. Is it best to go with modern macro lenses when using DSLR bodies?

[pakodominguez]

I am contemplating buying this lens too. However, I have also considered the recent KM (D) or the Minolta RS version but read somewhere that the coating on these lenses does not work well to eliminate reflected sensor images when they are used with digital cameras. Is it best to go with modern macro lenses when using DSLR bodies?

the 50mm 2.8, not the 100mm 2.8
For more info look at the archives on http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Minolta/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[artington]

Thanks, Pako, but of course I know that Minolta lenses work on Sony Alpha cameras. The point of my question is "Do Minolta macro lenses have coatings which work properly with KM / Sony DSLRs given the risk of sensor reflections at short focus distances?" I would hope that KM lenses are fine but the KM (D) macro lenses were designed for film cameras and were not (as far as I am aware) re-coated for digital cameras, assuming that this is necessary. And I guess that this is the question. Do digital cameras require special coatings for short focus (macro) lenses? Thanks, anyway, for your kindness in responding.

[pakodominguez]

Thanks, Pako, but of course I know that Minolta lenses work on Sony Alpha cameras. The point of my question is "Do Minolta macro lenses have coatings which work properly with KM / Sony DSLRs given the risk of sensor reflections at short focus distances?" I would hope that KM lenses are fine but the KM (D) macro lenses were designed for film cameras and were not (as far as I am aware) re-coated for digital cameras, assuming that this is necessary. And I guess that this is the question. Do digital cameras require special coatings for short focus (macro) lenses? Thanks, anyway, for your kindness in responding.

Most Minolta AF lenses works fine on digital. Some of them aren't that good on the A700 or higher pixel count, mostly because those lenses can't resolve that resolution, not because ghosting. I have both Macro lenses, both Minolta and they work perfectly on the A700 and A900.

In the case of the reflexion (ghosting) that you mention, it applies to the 50mm macro, not to the 100mm macro. The 50mm 1.4 have apparently the same issue and, when I did a test, I found that the 50 1.7 has his issues too.

I sent you dig onto the archives of the Minolta group at yahoo because Ray (sybersitizen) did a test, that he share on his website, and he explained this issue very well.

[artington]

That's great and very helpful. Thank you both.

[01af]

In the case of the reflexion (ghosting) that you mention, it applies to the 50 mm macro, not to the 100 mm macro.

Not true. If the conditions are right, the Minolta AF Macro 100 mm 1:2.8 can show a bright hot-spot at the frame's center, too. However the 100 mm is not as prone to ghosting as the 50 mm is. Still it's not immune.

For portraiture, this is not going to be a problem. If the ghosting occurs then it'll be at small apertures, like f/16 or f/22. Portraits usually are shot at wide or medium apertures where ghosting won't be an issue.

-- Olaf