Macro Lens Sony Sal-30M28 & Sony Sal-10028M

M

myrm

Messages
2
Name
Myrm
Edit My Images
No
Hi

This is probably a very stupid question but I'll ask it anyway.

I have been given a choice of having the following two macro lenses:

Sony SAL30M28

Sony SAL100M28

Now, I realise that the 100M28 allows you to take the picture from further away than the 30M28 does, but would the 100M28 produce any clearer a picture over the 30M28?

I have a Sony SLT-A58

I am using it to take pictures of small insects.

Thank you for any advice.
 
get the 100mm for small insects, or a 180mm sigma/tamron
ffordes have a few in stock used
 
I bought a second hand screw driven Tamron 180mm F3.5 macro for my SLT-A77 a few years ago. It was a very sharp lens. Unfortunately it had variable front focus which got worse the closer you got to the subject. I had it checked by a friend who had A55 and A900 bodies and agreed that it badly front focused on both his cameras. I called Tamron support who were less than helpful, telling me that I should change my camera and get a Canon or Nikon. So unless you are prepared to shoot without autofocus, or Tamron have changed from their screw driven design I wouldn't get one for your A58.
I have no idea what the Sigma 180mm is like but again, their screw driven Alpha mount lenses are notorious for stripping the AF ring gear. I've had a 400mm Telemacro and 105mm macro both fail with ring-gear problems. Sigma are moving away from screw drive for their lenses so this should reduce such problems but you still have to be wary of second hand versions.
My recommendation would be to get either a second hand Minolta 100mm or new or second hand Sony 100mm macro. Both are superb with excellent colour saturation and sharpness. If you need more reach you can add a teleconverter.
 
Last edited:
I have the Sony 100 macro very happy with it.

As pingu said, you want a longer macro for insects - there's not a lot between the Tamron 90, Sony 100 or Sigma 105 Macros. Sigma and Tamron both make longer Macros, or, if you sport one and can afford it, there is a Minolta 200 macro, which is probably the best option, but far from the cheapest.
 
i think some of the old sigma stuff had plastic gears and didnt cope very well with the faster/higher torque of later model camera's
but the cheap 180 5.6 i picked up seems decent, only downside is screwdrive and 5.6, but its like a quarter the weight of the newest one they do
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top