Having read a slew of less-than-favorable reviews about the SEL30M35, along with the bitching and moaning of several folks who claim to have used it, I decided to see if it's
really as bad as people say.
First thing I noticed when I unboxed it didn't give me much hope: no markings whatsoever on the outside of the lens, neither distance nor magnification. Well, first time I shot it, I kinda figured out why. Sony makes no bones about the working distance being less than an inch at 1:1 reproduction. But--along the lines of both the 60mm and 105mm AF-D Nikkor macros--this lens has focus breathing, the upshoot of which is that even if you go to 1:2, 1:3, 1:4, your working distance isn't gonna increase by much. No wonder they didn't wanna mark this. As long as it's that pretty silver color, nobody cares, right?
Next thing I noticed is that the lens just plain
refuses to AF at close distances. Given the long focus throw--with no hard stop at either end--there's another challenge. But, hey, every macro lens has its idiosyncrasies, and the IQ is all that matters in the long run.
As most of you know, an extremely short macro is best suited
not for 1:1 reproduction, but for backing off, stopping down, and getting ALL of your flower in focus. Forget shooting bugs and small critters, right? Well, that's what all the "experts" say, anyway.
So . . .
let's go find some critters!
N.B.: The photos below are not posted as examples of "good" macro shots, but rather for illustrating the capabilities of the lens in natural light. All are cropped at 100% magnification.
This little critter was trusting enough to let me put the end of the lens less than 5cm from his face, almost touching his left wing. I'm guessing I got about 1:3 here. The unevenness of the lighting underscores one of the hazards of shooting with this lens at close range in direct sunlight.
Next I found a grasshopper who didn't mind sharing its profile. I'm guessing I got about 1:2 here. The two photos show how narrow DOF is at this distance. You can either get the eye in focus . . .
. . . or you can get the side of the face in focus . . . but not both.
After looking at what I'd shot, I realized that I need to dial focus peaking to "Low." Below is an example in which the greatest amount of peaking yielded an almost-but-not-quite-focused shot:
I think it's a strength of the lens, not a weakness, that causes peaking to show such a volume of contrast at such a short working distance. In addition to dialing back the peaking level, I'll probably shoot RAW next time. When I saw that most of my jpegs were in the 4mp range, I realized I'm probably losing some details. Curiously, the NEX-7 has no "extra fine" jpeg option, but I guess folks who want the best quality would shoot RAW anyway.
I wonder sometimes if some of the people who review macro lenses are actually shooters or just "measurebators" who look at numbers and spout off some credible-sounding babble about how good (or not) a lens is. On my first serious outing with this lens, in spite of the limitations imposed by the way I shot, it produced some decent images. By tweaking the peaking (sorry, couldn't resist! :embrass
and shooting RAW next time I expect even better results.
