Question: Alternatives for fuji 60mm

Discussion in 'Fuji' started by pniev, Aug 24, 2013.

  1. pniev

    pniev Student for life

    May 13, 2013
    Hi all,

    After using the lens for a while, I've concluded that the 60mm fuji lens does not really work for me. So I am looking for an alternative. As I do not have any adapter yet, I am open to any kind of lens that can be mounted on the x-pro1. Which (preferably 1:1) macro lens(es) would you recommend in the 90-180mm (35mm eq.) range? Obviously the Voigtlander Lanthar 125mm would be a fantastic choice (see Gwen's flower shots!) but that lens is very expensive. Are there any hidden gems that are a bit more affordable?


  2. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    I wish Fuji would make a nice stabilized 105mm 1:1 macro.
  3. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Most macro lenses are either 50-55mm or 90-100mm (actual, not equivalent focal lengths). My favourite was the Vivitar 55mm f/2.8 macro, which was also sold under various other brand names like Komine and Kiron and available in all of the popular SLR lens mounts. It is not the smallest of the ~50mm macros (most of which are only f/3.5 or f/4 anyway) but is very well built, has a long and precise focus throw, and is well renowned optically.
  4. wt21

    wt21 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 15, 2010
    Peter, curious what you don't like about the 60mm. As I ponder whether to buy into Fuji, this is one lens I would want, so would love to hear your thoughts.
  5. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    the AF is miserable....and I don't want to be a macro snob, but it's also not true macro (using a fairly common definition of 1:1 being macro photography)
  6. RoyUK

    RoyUK Regular

    Jul 30, 2013
    Blackpool UK
    If you can get hold of a good condition sample of the Tamron 90mm f/2.5 macro it would give good results on a Fuji X.

    I've a decidedly rough-looking one which is optically and mechanically fine - a bit soft wide open but nice and sharp from f4 to f16

    It goes down to 1:2 and a tube gets you closer. I have the Tamron 2x extender which turns it into a 1:1 180mm which again works fine when stopped down a bit.

    I regret selling a manual M42 50mm Takumar which I used on my Nikon DSLR some years ago. This focussed continuously to 1:1 and was pleasingly light and sharp.

    That would be my choice now if I could find one.
  7. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    I have a Lester A. Dine 105mm (also sold as Kiron and others) that I really like, but a focal length that long on an unstabilzed is no fun I have learned so I usually only use it a m43 body, but it's workable on the Fuji for static objects and tripod work (and a much more pleasurable manual focus experience to the native Fuji 60mm).
  8. wt21

    wt21 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 15, 2010
    Didn't realize the Fuji 60 wasn't 1:1. I'm assuming then it's 1:2? Which is pretty much every 50mm macro from any other system, so I don't think that's a huge loss, though I think that most 100mm eq. macros are indeed 1:1.

    On FL and macros: I don't know this, but I would think anything that does 1:1, if you are on highest magnification, they all need a shutter speed of X, regardless of focal length. That is, it doesn't matter if the FL is 60mm, 105mm or 200mm, if it's all 1:1, then you need the same shutter speed to get the shot. I don't know what that shutter speed is, btw, but I gotta think focal length is a non factor, because the effective magnification is all the same???
  9. wt21

    wt21 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 15, 2010
  10. pniev

    pniev Student for life

    May 13, 2013
    1. Like Luke said, the AF is miserable also after the recent firmware upgrade. I never had issues with AF except with this lens. It is not a showstopper because for macro-work I like to use MF anyway.

    2. It is not 1:1 which turns out to be more of an issue than I originally expected, especially for watch photography. The 60mm basically requires cropping to view the details.

    2. My biggest problem is that I just don't like the results of close-range/'macro' flower shots. I get better results with the 35mm. I have not been able yet to make the lens shine in nature shots. And Gwen's flower shots with the VL taught me that there is a huge gap between the fuji 60mm and the VL 125mm Lanthar. Perhaps I expect too much but it would be nice to have something in the middle. And perhaps it is just me and I am not skilled enough to use the 60mm well.

    I was quite pleased though with the results of some watch/product shots. Below a few cropped shots (some posted earlier).

    I haven't tried portraits with the 60mm yet because I like the 35mm (±50mm eq) too much.

    Some watch shots with the 60mm:

    Full shot:

    Crops of this photo:
    View attachment 74831
  11. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    I think (and I could be wrong, obviously) that all the X cams are now in the same ballpark with regard to focus speed. After their firmware updates, I don't think anyone would call them slow. But the 60mm is slow not because of the body, but the long range of focus it must go through. They could have helped this along by including a focal range limiter.
  12. pniev

    pniev Student for life

    May 13, 2013
    You're right! (of course :smile:). Thanks for mentioning it

  13. Lightmancer

    Lightmancer Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2011
    Sunny Frimley
    Bill Palmer
    So... my "90" is a Leica 60mm Elmarit-R that I have converted to Nikon F with a Leitax mount and then use on my X-E1 with a Novoflex adaptor. It is not the lightest of lenses but it is an exceptional performer.

    Sent from another Galaxy
  14. phrenic

    phrenic Regular

    Nov 14, 2012
    I've been using a minolta MD macro 100mm f4 lens on a bellows setup with my XE1. Perhaps a bit silly looking when walking around with it, but I think it works fairly well..and the price was pretty cheap.

    <a href="" title="DSCF2913 by illvilliaNY, on Flickr"> 9393120493_be0207a077_b.jpg "1024" height="683" alt="DSCF2913"></a>

    <a href="" title="P1050652-Edit by illvilliaNY, on Flickr"> View attachment 74845 "1024" height="768" alt="P1050652-Edit"></a> (actualy this one might be with my panny g5, crop factor might be off)

    <a href="" title="DSCF2939 by illvilliaNY, on Flickr"> 9395888494_536c8576b7_b.jpg "1024" height="683" alt="DSCF2939"></a>
  15. pniev

    pniev Student for life

    May 13, 2013
    Great shots and sharp! Thanks
  16. Most macro lenses that I am aware of are going to slower in terms of AF speed then a non-macro lens of the same focal length. It is just the nature of the beast. They not only tend to have more mass, but unlike normal lenses that have a short focus throw from close to infinity, they are designed w/ a much longer throw to get that fine focus for that macro shot.

    I tend to use macro lenses in manual focus mode as well.. They are ok for general purpose lenses.. I have never worried about af speed on a macro lens. I do agree, I wish it was a 1:1..

  17. I agree.. Focus limiter would have been the right solution when this lens is used as a normal 60.

  18. mnhoj

    mnhoj gee aahrr

    Jan 27, 2012
    Some of the lenses I've tried.

    The 90mm 2.5s in Tokina and Vivitar are heart stoppers. AKA Bokinas.
    1:2 without the matched adapters but would probably work well with blank tubes.

    The Nikkor 105s are great. The F4 version is only 1:2 but a great value. The 1:1 adapter PN1/1 has a tripod mount which is a nice feature.

    Tamron makes a MF adaptall F2.8 that goes to 1:1. I believe it shares the same optical formula as the newer AF version = very good.
    The F2.5 version is nice. Small and sharp.