100mm F4 Macro

[mww]

Anyone have experiences with this lens? It seems to be affordable. I am wondering how it compares to the 60 and later APO 100.

 

[troy]

I've got this lens, the 100mm/f4 macro and have been real pleased with it. I've also got the 60mm Macro(also a nice lens). The f4 is pretty reasonalby priced and I've really enjoyed using it for portraits. I'm not sure how it compares to the APO 2.8, but again, for the price difference, I think it's a great lens. troy

 

[jem]

> [Macro Lenses, I bought one of these and found it disappointing compared to my 60mm. Predominately it lacked contrast but that could be because it needs internal cleaning. It was bought very cheap and has some dust inside. My previous experience suggested that the amount of dust wouldn't be that much of a problem but it was disappointing in comparison. I have every confidence that a lens in as new optical condition would be a delight, however. regards, Jem]

 

[petermcwerner]

> Anyone have experiences with this lens? It seems to be affordable. I > am wondering how it compares to the 60 and later APO 100.

I bought one recently with a bellows and am rather disappointed. I much prefer the 60mm which has much better contrast. I have no experience with the APO. My favorite macro lens (for what I use it: pictures of orchids) is still the old 4/300 Macro Tele Kilar on a bellows or with extension rings.>

 

[leicaman83]

I tested one new and found it was corrected for close work. Distance required f8 to be sharp.

the 2.8 APO is significantly better at all distances and works well as a landscape lens if you like the extreme sharpness of the new lenses. Hidiously sharp for portraits.

If you don`t, find a 90 2.0 or original 2.8 for general work.