FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS lens

[Bob Parsons]

........................Looks reasonably quick in close quarters like that. He's using the A7s. I wonder how much it would hunt at portrait lengths though.

With the A7II at portrait distances it doesn't appear to hunt at all. If you've already had one go at AF focusing subsequent attempts seem to be instantaneous with no perceptible delay or hunt. It's too quick to estimate. To focus from one end of the range to the other takes about 1 second or maybe slightly less. If you move backwards or forwards by about a foot at full head portrait distances refocusing takes perhaps 1/8 sec or less, again it's difficult to estimate.

With no hood when the camera is on a flat surface the camera base tilts forwards by about 2 deg, with a hood on the base is level.

Very pleased, looks like a winner

Bob.

Edited to add: Correction, focus does hunt, but it's almost too fast to notice. You can see it if you focus on a close up flat textured oblique surface.

 

[Annna T]

I'm using a Tamron 90mm 1:1 macro SP AF DI in EOS mount; it weight 405gr and is 71.5x97mm with a filter size of 55mm. It can be focused with the Metabones adapter but AF is very slow and can hunt on the A7r. It fill very light in the hand even with the Metabones adapter. However it is incredibly sharp till the corners. Only nit : it shows quite a lot of purple fringing.

I do also have a Zeiss Contax G 90mm F2.8. It is even lighter and smaller (280gr !). I use it less, because the Techart adapter I have got is not working very well for AF (it is tricky) and MF with that adapter isn't very comfortable. I should probably get a simple MF adapter for my Contax Zeiss lenses.

 

[Annna T]

Is there a focus limiter on the lens ? That is frequent on macro lens and improve focus speed quite a lot.

 

[Bob Parsons]

Is there a ficus limiter on the lens ? That is frequent on macro lens and improve focus speed quite a lot.

Yes. Full, Infinity - 0.5m and 0.5m - 0.28m

The lens/camera remembers the last focus position so in most instances it's very quick if focus distance hasn't moved too much between shots.

Bob.

 

[biglouis]

I caved and bought one yesterday from UKdigital here in the UK and just received it.

My first observation is that this is not a walk-around lens.

The manual focussing is very nice - it automatically brings up the focus magnifier and if anything the focus ring is too smooth (I would have preferred more stiffness).

The lens is sooo big and long that the minimum focus distance is pretty much up to the front element (well I exaggerate but it is damn close).

I'll seriously use the lens tomorrow and post some examples.

LouisB

 

[Bob Parsons]

In my previous post I should have mentioned that I had "Setting Effect" set to OFF. On A7II: Menu/Cog Wheel/3/Live View Display - Setting Effect/OFF. This means during focusing the lens is at full aperture giving the best focus performance. If "Setting Effect" is ON and the lens aperture is set to be stopped down then focus performance depends on the aperture set.

Louis, I haven't checked, but I don't think the distance between the front of the lens and subject is any less (maybe slightly) than similar circumstances with the 100mm Leica Macro Apo Elmarit-R with/without the special 1:1 Elpro lens attachment.

I've noticed if you fully "open" the aperture and look into the front of the lens the aperture is slightly stopped down. (You need "Setting Effect" set to ON to see this). I guess this is to maintain performance at full aperture.

Bob.

 

[biglouis]

Bob

Thanks for the tip. Actually, I only realised after posting this that I was forgetting the bl&*dy great big lens hood. So the distance from the front element is as you state.

I've had a lot of problems with hunting so far but I think that is me getting used to the lens. I have an A7R, I wonder if I too have the same 'setting effect'.

AMENDED: just checked, I do but it is on menu 2.

Louis

 

[biglouis]

I've been trying out the FE 90/2.8 for a couple of days. Here is a result, taken with my A7S on a tripod of a small Viola ("Chicky Chicks") at iso64. You can click through to a full-size jpeg exported from Lightroom. This is as close to 1:1 as I could get.



My feeling is this. The Sony colours are beautiful, the ergonomics of the lens - especially the manual focus and the exact distance scale and focus throw - are excellent and aid taking macro photographs. I just wish it had the punch and sharpness of my Sigma DP3M. The point is that I suspect that outside of pixel peeping the Sony is always going to return the more beautiful of the photographs even if the DP3M is better in terms of absolute sharpness.

Just my two cents.

LouisB

 

[pttdds]

I have had this lens for 3 days now. It is so far the easiest to use macro lens I have ever used. Autofocus actually works well. A first for me with macro. The push pull auto to manual is nice, smooth, and very easy to use. The quality of images is also, as expected, of very high standard. If I can figure out how to post to this site, I'll post a shot.

 

[Knorp]

I've been trying out the FE 90/2.8 for a couple of days. Here is a result, taken with my A7S on a tripod of a small Viola ("Chicky Chicks") at iso64. You can click through to a full-size jpeg exported from Lightroom. This is as close to 1:1 as I could get.

My feeling is this. The Sony colours are beautiful, the ergonomics of the lens - especially the manual focus and the exact distance scale and focus throw - are excellent and aid taking macro photographs. I just wish it had the punch and sharpness of my Sigma DP3M. The point is that I suspect that outside of pixel peeping the Sony is always going to return the more beautiful of the photographs even if the DP3M is better in terms of absolute sharpness.

Just my two cents.

LouisB

Hi there Louis,

not doubting your statement regarding the sharpness of the DP3M, but isn't the razor thin DOF, as a result of 1:1 combined with the larger sensor, not to blame for perhaps the lack of "punch and sharpness" ?
Perhaps you should post some more samples

Kind regards.

 

[biglouis]

Hi there Louis,

not doubting your statement regarding the sharpness of the DP3M, but isn't the razor thin DOF, as a result of 1:1 combined with the larger sensor, not to blame for perhaps the lack of "punch and sharpness" ?
Perhaps you should post some more samples

Kind regards.

Knorp

Yes, you could be very right about that. This is a satisfying lens to experiment with and I agree with ptdds's comment about the ease with which you can use this lens.

I find the autofocus hunts quite a bit so I would like ptdds to expand on his comment about how well it works.

LouisB

 

[Mark Muse]

I do also have a Zeiss Contax G 90mm F2.8. It is even lighter and smaller (280gr !). I use it less, because the Techart adapter I have got is not working very well for AF (it is tricky) and MF with that adapter isn't very comfortable. I should probably get a simple MF adapter for my Contax Zeiss lenses.

Do get the Fotodiox Pro for manual focus adapter. It is lighter and less expensive than the metabones adapter. I have the 45 and 90 Zeiss G lenses, both superb, but not macro at all. I wonder how the 90 would do with an extension tube? I don't think there are floating elements in it. But for macro I have the Zeiss 100 and 50 f2.0 Makro-Planar ZF.2 (really love the 50 Makro-Planar) and a Pentax-A 120 f4 645 that does 1:1.

 

[Annna T]

Do get the Fotodiox Pro for manual focus adapter. It is lighter and less expensive than the metabones adapter. I have the 45 and 90 Zeiss G lenses, both superb, but not macro at all. I wonder how the 90 would do with an extension tube? I don't think there are floating elements in it. But for macro I have the Zeiss 100 and 50 f2.0 Makro-Planar ZF.2 (really love the 50 Makro-Planar) and a Pentax-A 120 f4 645 that does 1:1.

My experience with extension tubes wasn't so good : first they are more effective on short lenses than on longer ones, so the 45mm would be a better candidate. Then they are rather tricky to focus, unless you have a geared tripod or a rail (which I don't). I had a pair for MFT and the best candidate was the Panasonic 20mm F1.7 or the Panasonic 25mm F1.4. But for the A7r, I'm perfectly happy with the Tamron 90mm F2.8 when it comes to macro. Curiously, when digitalizing my slides, I got better results with the Canon 6D plus 90mm Tamron, than with the A7r plus the same lens. I think that my slides weren't so sharp and the added resolution wasn't bringing anything to those slides, while my sharpening technique with the A7r could have been better. My slides are often very contrasty and I thought that the better DR of the A7r would help.

I will get a photodiox or a Kipon, I have had good experiences with Kipon adapters on MFT.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

The 90MM macro is in stock right now at Amazon 13 left. It certainly is tempting but I think I will get the 85 Batis

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Actually in stock at B&H which can save some folks sales tax. ME


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?N=11126140&InitialSearch=yes&sts=pi

 

[biglouis]

Guy

I really think the BATIS is more your style. I do little or no portrait photography and I have always had a macro lens with my system because... shucks... I like taking photographs of pretty flowers and bugs.

Looking at the BATIS samples I'm tempted to have both but I think you would find that working all day long with the FE 90 your arm would drop off, whereas you might just get away with the BATIS.

Just my two cents.

LouisB

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Yea have to agree. I need the speed too both in lens and AF. This is a perfect model lens

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I am also considering either the Batis 85 and the Macro 90. I have seen very good reports on both, so it is no easy choice. I have a Minolta 100/2.8 Macro and I guess it will do for a while. I am shooting on tripod mostly, so weight is not really an issue for me.

I have that Batis on order, but I can easily change.

Best regards
Erik

 

[biglouis]

Erik

I'll state again that if you need a short telephoto for portraiture you should go for the Batis 85/1.8, imho.

If, like me you like macro photography and as a by product your lens would do nice portraits, then you will be happy with the FE 90/2.8. I can't fault its sharpness wide open at f2.8. It is excellent. But you can only get a strong separation of background by being closer to your subject.

Incidentally, if anyone asks me to do a portrait of them, I just use my FE 55/1.8 but that is another matter altogether.

In an ideal world you would own both but you would also need deep pockets.

I might get a Batis 85/1.8 at some point but I have been waiting for months (in fact is it a year?) for a proper macro lens for the Sony system so you can see my relative priorities.

LouisB.

 

[ohnri]

Erik

I'll state again that if you need a short telephoto for portraiture you should go for the Batis 85/1.8, imho.

If, like me you like macro photography and as a by product your lens would do nice portraits, then you will be happy with the FE 90/2.8. I can't fault its sharpness wide open at f2.8. It is excellent. But you can only get a strong separation of background by being closer to your subject.

Incidentally, if anyone asks me to do a portrait of them, I just use my FE 55/1.8 but that is another matter altogether.

In an ideal world you would own both but you would also need deep pockets.

I might get a Batis 85/1.8 at some point but I have been waiting for months (in fact is it a year?) for a proper macro lens for the Sony system so you can see my relative priorities.

LouisB.

I have just ordered the 90 macro and should get it on Friday.
What are you using for lighting?
I have a nice macro flash kit I use on my Nikons.

Take care,
Bill