Fuji Macro lens options?

[johnagon]

I would like a long macro like the Minolta MD 100mm f4 for my X-E1. I think Tamron and other off brand name lenses also have versions. The ideal is to have something not huge and still able to do 1:1 with good quality. Adapters exist for most brands so do you have any idea other than the Monilta I'm already trying to find? The Fuji 60mm is a nice lens but I need something longer, at 1:1, and not so big as to overwhelm the X-E1.

Any ideas much appreciated.

John

 

[Markdphotoguy]

If you plan on being at 1:1 most of the time and don't mind a slightly shorter front working distance consider using a Adapted lens on a reversing ring. Most reversed 50mm lenses do a bit better than 1:1 and have the advantage of also being used the correct way around as a short tele. I often carry my Nikon 50mm f/1.2 and a Nikon BR-2A reversing ring instead of the 60mm when I need to shoot short tele but need better than 1:2 magnification.
Otherwise adapt over a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 as it is good optically has nice bokeh and can be picked up cheaply on the used market in just about any mount you please.

 

[zapatista]

I have two main macro lenses I use (while hopping from different mirrorless systems):
Konica Hexanon 55mm f3.5 for general macro stuff (flowers or static scenes) & a Canon FD 200mm f4 for insects.

The Konica is 2:1 (like Fuji 60mm f2.4) and is often sold with the matching extension tube for around $100 on flea bay.
The Canon is 1:1 native and weighs a little under 2 pounds--they don't come on sale too often but are usually not cheap if the seller knows what they have.

Both are optically very good and I have no problem using the Konica as a sub for the 60mm f2.4.

 

[Gary]

The Tamron 90mm is a super macro, but not very cheap.

 

[Markdphotoguy]

The Tamron 90mm is a super macro, but not very cheap.

Last one I sold used in my shop was under $300 and brand new they go for under $500 when on sale. I'm in Canada though so it could very well be more expensive in other parts of the world. The new stabalizer version is very expensive at close to $900 but why pay extra for a stabalizer that won't work via adapter. The old f/2.5 version I've seen go for around $150 used as well. All good choices.

 

[OdzBodkinz]

I use two old 40 yr old Nikkors. I have. A 55mm 3.5 and a 105 f/4. Both are sharp and focus very nicely. Check KEH for some vintage glass that can be adapted easily n

 

[phrenic]

I would like a long macro like the Minolta MD 100mm f4 for my X-E1. I think Tamron and other off brand name lenses also have versions. The ideal is to have something not huge and still able to do 1:1 with good quality. Adapters exist for most brands so do you have any idea other than the Monilta I'm already trying to find? The Fuji 60mm is a nice lens but I need something longer, at 1:1, and not so big as to overwhelm the X-E1.

John

FWIW, I've enjoyed using the Minolta MD 100mm macro (I have the bellows version but I imagine they are fairly similar optical designs).

Handheld and through a dirty filter :/ I expect that it performs better in controlled conditions.

 

[carcrafter22]

I've been using my minolta 50mm 3.5 macro for a while, its a very sharp lens and good to get my feet wet in the macro world although I found it too short. I just recently picked up a vivtar 105mm 2.5 1:1 macro lens, its got a little purple fringing wide open but stopped down to 3.3 or better and it is very sharp with a creamy bokeh. The price was cheaper than most other macro lenses (probably since its not the famous 90mm tamron).