Is this a "macro" lens? I needed a lens for microscopic detail.
304859
No. This lens has a magnification factor of .31. True macro lenses have a magnification of 1X (meaning the object is actual size on the surface of the sensor) or more. I'm not sure how small your intended subjects are but a macro lens might not be powerful enough to reveal truly microscopic details, i.e., great for insects, not so helpful for cellular structure.
2156712
You can do macro like shots that will look good, but will need a real Macro lens for true 1:1 Macro images.
1181727
No.. the macro part is a positive diopter lense while the fisheye section is a negative diopter. Together it is like looking through a telescope backwards. The macro section can be used alone for close shots but there's a lot of distortion (not always bad) and can be fun artistically.
896151
Yes, typical of most macro lenses.. it will have "soft edges" I find that it is a good lens for well lit subjects and I either leave the soft edges because I like the look, or crop it out if it is too distracting.
176771
No, this is not macro lens. It is more portraiture. Olympus makes a 60mm macro lens, which is 1:1.
14468
The specs for this lens are at: http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/macro.html
1361704
I'm really not sure what that is but I absolutely love this lens! Manual focus is better than auto for extreme close up macro and I have taken some gorgeous pictures being an amateur. The hairs of a spider or in focus and the eyes of a grasshopper almost pop of the page. I cannot say how happy I am I made the leap and purchased this lens.
1782140
I think the best option is macro lens. I didn't like so much the close-up lens .
1610125
No- the focusing distance is much too far. Great lens- but not for macro work.
176768
For macro work you would really want a lens ratio of 5:1, but as you can imagine those are a bit pricey. In response to your question of whether or not it is good for macro work, I would say it's alright. There is such a thing as a poor mans macro which is essentially four filters you place on your lens with various levels of magnification. This is a very affordable option as it will probably cost you less than 20 dollars. However, in doing so your depth of field will be very shallow. I suggest googling and doing research about it before you make a purchase.
175963
No macro, but the lens focuses (at the wide angle setting) down to about 6 inches. Its really not designed for close-up photography. Don't know about the warranty, but its probably at least a year.
881738
Yes it is, that is the camera i use it with. the lens i had with the camera broke and this was what i bought to replace it. turned out to be a better lens. It also word withthe macro olypus attachment and others. great purchase.
1048469
This is probably not a great lens for such a purpose. It is a macro lens, meaning that it has a long focus throw and is pretty slow to focus at times. Not sure how long a lens you want, but the Da 70 limited might be a better choice.
2180325
I purchased this in order to make an existing lens a macro(micro). I could not connect the threads of the ring to the lens. so if that is what your aim is just buy the 40mm micro lens about 100.bucks or les. hope this helps
2156713
Not really... It has a minimum focal length of 13 inches zoomed out and about 8 feet when zoomed all the way in. As far as a true macro lens goes, I would I use the Tamron 90 mm macro. In addition if you use the +1, +2, +4, +10 close-up lenses, you can get really really close.
933400
The lens is not a macro lens. It is a very good lens - expensive glass and worth it. My second favorite lens after the Nikon 70-200mm 2.8.
19871
Hi Michael, for some reason I've returned this item...Not because of having any trouble! I've decided to but real macro lens instead of using something like that just because of quality of the image with the Nikon macro lenses. Sorry