Best macro for Sony E-mount (in your opinion)

[Ian]

I currently have a Minolta 50mm f1.something that'll serve me fine but I'm interested in something in the 30-35mm range that can serve as a macro and 50mm equivalent walk-around prime lens.

Sony seems to push the SEL30M35 30mm f/3.5 e-mount Macro Lens as the lens for this job but it seems kind of slow and reviews seem to be pretty meh.

The Sony 35mm f/1.8 OSS seems like a better option as does the Zeiss 32mm f/1.8.

Am I missing something? Thoughts? Other options?

Both are more expensive, I'm not pretending to be rich, but I'd rather save my lunch money to "buy once cry once" if they'll serve me better.

Edit to add Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN into the fray for consideration and opinions.

[Josiah]

What sort of macro shots are you looking for? I have the SEL35F18, but haven't really tried macro with it. I can take some test shots and post them if you're interested.

I use the 55-210 with a close up "lens" for macro and have been really happy with it.

sample

[Drowned Lemming]

http://www.zeiss.co.uk/camera-lenses/en_gb/camera_lenses/touit/touit2850m.html ?

[Ian]

"What sort of macro shots are you looking for?"

Bugs. Flowers. Close ups of my son's diorama of Lego vlad the impaler vanquishing/beheading his enemies.

I have the Sony 16mm which is the lens I take backpacking. I thought about buying that zoom lens, and may someday, but I'm finding that I really prefer a faster wide angle primes over carrying a zoom. Since I'm doing 99% landscapes and want to do more closeups of flora and fauna, at this time, I've made buying a telephoto lens my lowest priority.

Edit to add: if you do have some macro shots with the Sony 35mm F1.8, I'd sure love to see them.

Re: Zeiss 50mm

That's a nice lens and one I'll probably consider later on when I'm ready to upgrade my portrait lens since it's 75mm equivalent. Right now I have a Minolta 50mm. The reason why I'm looking at the 30-35mm range right now is because a) macros, and b) it's 45-50mm equivalent when paired with my APSC sensor which would be great as an urban walk-around lens.

The big picture for my backpacking kit is I want to have a wide angle (which is my 16mm) and a macro which is my 50mm Minolta at the moment but looking for something in the 30-35mm range.

[Nico .]

Most likely not the best macro option, but it's an out of the box option to consider…

I have limited experience with it (I don't shoot macro very much) but I use a Raynox DCR Macro adapter lens with various E-mount lenses like the Sigma 30 f2.8. Raynox offers both a 1.5x and 2.5x adapter.

It can be fit onto the 49mm filter thread size of most the E-mount lenses with the included fitting. To connect it to the smaller filter thread sizes of the Sigma lenses, I use a step-down ring. Can't remember the sizes off the top of my head.

Anyway, this might be an option to look into.

[Ian]

Thanks Nico. That wasn't on my radar but I'll check that option out.

[Nathan Wernette]

Ian, for the money the sigma 30mm can't be beat. local shop here sells the older version for around 145ish. I am thinking of adding it to my collection.

Like you i do not have 1000 dollars to drop on just one lens.

In my kit I have a 2 50mm minolta's a f2 and a recently picked up f1.4.

I also have the kit lens for the older camera. SEL1855. It is lighter than the power zoom 16-50 and doesn't drain the battery as fast as the power zoom does.

I also found a minolta 200mm prime at a film shop around metro detroit. but if it isn't bright enough the pictures will be out of focus (a downside IMO of the A6000/NEX is the image stabilizer is in the lens)

These are what I have and use.

What I want to get is the trio of sigma lenses. possibly the 55-210 or 18-200 for the right price.

I have not done macro on any of these lenses but would suspect that my 200mm would do just fine if it was bright enough out.

Look at a minolta 135mm? or a minolta 35mm lens. might be a cheaper option?

[Ian]

I was checking out some of the Minolta and Sony Alpha mount lenses on Ebay yesterday. The Minolta f 2.8 seems to be reasonably priced but the f2.0 is priced high enough (pushing $450+) that I'd probably go with the Zeiss for a couple hundred more. The Sony alpha mount 35 1.8 seems to be the best deal of the three at $170.

I'll definitely try the Sigmas at some point, and maybe now as they have a reputation for being a great lens for the money.

I'm really enamored with the old Soviet era lenses and the RF JUPITER-12 2.8/35mm M39 really appeals to me at $125 on ebay. Certainly not the best lens on the market but built to Zeiss specs and I think the lens and the pictures they produce have a lot of character.

Of the primes out there, 50mm equivalent is one where I don't mind having a few of them to play around with and compare, especially if I can get them at the right price… which of course contradicts my earlier battle cry of "buy one cry once."

I'm flakey like that.

[Ian]

While it certainly won't be my last 35mm lens for my A6000, at $27 shipped from China including e mount adapter, it was hard to say no to this option.

[Nathan Wernette]

Ian look at this.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1320348

[Ian]

Great price but bad timing for me. I should judge a lens on its end user reviews and performance, not numbers, but while it can focus within an inch, F3.5 seems odd for a lens where I'll oftentimes want a shallow depth of field.

Thanks for the lead though.

[Eric Lundquist]

Ian, I shot this a while back with my NEX-5 and a Pentax M 50/f2.0 with a +2 or +4 close up filter (I can't remember which). The close-up filter was a good compromise while backpacking and still wanting the ability of some psudo macro shots.

[Ian]

That's a nice shot Eric!

[Author]

Posts