8-Lens Macro Shoot-Out

[Harold Gough]

I found this when looking for review for my (Lester Dine) Kiron 105mm:

http://makingnottaking.blogspot.co.uk/2 ... t-out.html

(Copy and paste the above link in your browser)

Lenses featured:

Nikon Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 with PK-13
Vivitar Series 1 90mm f/2.5 with 1:1 macro extender
Vivitar 90mm f/2.5 MC 1:1
Kiron 105mm f/2.8 1:1
Lester A. Dine 105mm (Kiron) f/2.8 1:1
Vivitar Series 1 105mm (Kiron) f/2.5 1:1
Nikon Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/4 with PN-11
Tokina 100mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro


Based on the results with my lens, I would dispute this statement:

"Not surprisingly by f/22 and f/32 these lenses are useless. Even f/16 is pretty poor."

Harold

[ray_parkhurst]

There's a link at the very bottom of the page you linked to that takes you to the multi-lens shootout.

The author did some explaining of his f/22...f/32 comment in that the lenses still produce good images with good DOF but just not so sharp, which is true. It's all about what you are looking for.

[Harold Gough]

Yes, Ray.

I have been round the loop already.

The author is careless with some of his remarks. Not so sharp is a long way from "useless or even "poor", "very good" being more instructive and consistent ratings to be expected in such tests elsewhere.

As for this "I have only chosen to include the wide open performance crops. Stopped down, these lenses are excellent. Certainly as sharp as most anyone will need." (My bold font). So he has shown the only test results which are of no interest to the user of a lens for macro!

"Didn't ever use the Nikon 105mm despite people like Bjorn Rorslett boasting it to be one of the best macros ever designed." So why did he sell it if he had no experience of using it? Potentially it was better then the 90mm he glorified so much.

Unless I missed it, he overlooked that (on my version anyway) there are DOF markings for all focal lengths and distances at f16 (blue) and f32 (green). Worth a mention!

For the only time in my life, by coincidence, I have some dollar bills. Maybe I should take some test shots, with the lens stopped down, and post them large enough to be viewable and self-explanatory.

Harold

[ray_parkhurst]

Yes, Ray.

I have been round the loop already.

The author is careless with some of his remarks. Not so sharp is a long way from "useless or even "poor", "very good" being more instructive and consistent ratings to be expected in such tests elsewhere.

"Didn't ever use the Nikon 105mm despite people like Bjorn Rorslett boasting it to be one of the best macros ever designed." So why did he sell it if he had no experience of using it? Potentially it was better then the 90mm he glorified so much.

Unless I missed it, he overlooked that (on my version anyway) there are DOF markings for all focal lengths and distances at f16 (blue) and f32 (green). Worth a mention!

For the only time in my life, by coincidence, I have some dollar bills. Maybe I should take some test shots and post them large enought to be viewable and self-explanatory.

Harold

Well, sorry to state the obvious, but it did seem like you missed his qualification, which says:

"Of course you can use these lenses at high apertures and get good images. Sometime you really do want the most DoF you can get. I was just speaking in terms of sharpness. If you want the sharpest image you can get (for what is in focus), these higher apertures will be affected by diffraction will not yield as sharp of results as the middle apertures of the lens."

That said, he did not recant the earlier statements, which would have been better than adding a qualifier later.

Personally I enjoy both doing and reading about comparisons, as every time I do them I tend to learn something new about the lenses I own (or should own), test techniques, etc. I've never owned or tested a Lester Dine, but many of the lenses listed in the linked blog have been part of my testing in past shootouts. Of those listed, the clear winner has always been the 90VS1, with extensions rather than the 1:1 converter. That said, it took me quite a while to acquire a copy of that lens good enough to show respectable contrast, though sharpness has been stellar even for the hazy/dusty/scratchy/moldy copies I went through from ebay purchases. Note though that the 90VS1 I'm referring to is a Tokina, not Komine...Ray

[Harold Gough]

To be honest, Ray I got a bit weary of the way he has set out his information and didn't spend as much time there as I should have done.

These lenses are widely known to be not very good at the wider apertures so testing those was never going to give encouraging results.

All lenses with variable (not fixed) aperture give less resolution either side of an optimum aperture. With a zoom I suppose this could vary with focal length. This lens (and variants) has a fixed maximum aperture at all focal lengths, another thing I look for in a lens, especially when using manual flash.

If this is accurate: "each of these lens variations contains an identical optical formula and is manufactured by Kino Precision" perhaps he is testing only between-copy variation? (He makes some remark about such variation).

Anyway, it is a good introduction to this lens and its variants but should be read with caution, and together with other sources.

Harold

[ray_parkhurst]

To be honest, Ray I got a bit weary of the way he has set out his information and didn't spend as much time there as I should have done.
...
Anyway, it is a good introduction to this lens and its variants but should be read with caution, and together with other sources.

Sounds like I unknowingly got in the middle of something here, but your words of caution are well-taken. Many folks have "pet lenses" (I certainly do) and it takes a few folks saying the same thing for me to give credence, and then a test on my own to join the believers.

[Harold Gough]

Many folks have "pet lenses" (I certainly do) and it takes a few folks saying the same thing for me to give credence, and then a test on my own to join the believers.

Me too The term "go-to" is popular for such a pet. However, my pet of five years ago is largely neglected these days. That is my Tamron SP 90mm 2.5 MF. For anything vaguely "close-up" to macro was shot with it, often with it matched x2 TC behind in, latterly sometimes on an extension. It also gives respectable performance as a short telephoto.

I have been in a search to replace that lens with something of better performance for macro. The Elmarit 60mm 2.8 macro was the first step forward and the Kiron now seems likely to push that aside. Amid this is seeing what high quality supplementaries will do, a Raynox MSN-202 is the next purchase, as well as looking again at TCs.

I am accumulating various "pets", mostly still not fully evaluated, some not at all, taking more of specialist approach, looking for the best performance for an application.

Harold