Macro Lens Comparison (for Wildlife Photography)

[NancyP]

Michael, I thank you again for your informative articles. I have found the Voigtlander 125 mm to be a perfect general-use outdoor macro lens, good for hand-held (following a moving insect) as well as tripod-based shots. For handheld shots of moving insects I move myself to focus (sway forward or back) and use fast shutter speed and burst mode. I like the long focus throw on tripod. The light weight makes it the perfect macro lens in a multi-lens hiking kit, along with one or two wide angle lenses for landscapes. It is one of my most-used, if not the most-used, lenses. The only puzzling feature is that for some reason it doesn't like my center focus point for focus confirmation - but I have 10 other perfectly good points to use (Canon 6D).

[HSakols]

I am seriously considering an Olympus 60mm (equiv. to 120mm) for hand held macro work.  It is light and from what I hear quite sharp.  Although, I still must have the 75mm 1.8 lens, but it is not a macro.   

[Sean H]

Here is one of hundreds of thousands of outdoor shots I have made with the CV-125.

Michael - The green(s) are gorgeous on my monitor and I like how the background leaves turn into a semni-abstraction in the upper half of the image. Oh, and the insect is razor sharp. A fascinating creature and a beautiful shot.

Sean

[John Koerner]

Here is an article comparing the Voightlander 125 mm APO to the Zeiss 100 mm Makro.

If you can get passed the author's constant misuse of the word its (he repeatedly uses it's when its is correct), it's a pretty interesting article

He pretty much says what Michael has said: they're both razor-sharp, they both create fine bokeh (edge to Voightlander), but the color-corrected Voightlander never produces color-fringing, while the Zeiss does so quite often.

[Michael Erlewine]

I would not spend that much time on the CV125/Zeiss 100mm Maktro-Planar because IMO there is no comparison. I have both lenses, although I am going to sell the Zeiss 100mm. It is not that the Zeiss 100mm lens is a little uncorrected. It is big-time uncorrected, enough so that every time I give it one more chance I am reminded of why I have to sell it. It is well built and reasonably sharp, but that's it.

Here are some notes written elsewhere and earlier. We have been discussing this lens over on NikonGear.com.

Lens: Voigtlander 125mm f/2.5 Macro APO-Lanthar
Focal Length: 125mm
Widest Aperture: f/2.5
Narrowest Aperture: 22
Aperture Blades: 9
Filter Size: 58mm
Hood: Included, Square
Close Focus Distance: 14.96 inches (38 centimeters)
Reproduction Ratio: 1:1
Focus Throw: ~ 630º
Weight: 28 ounces (794 grams)
Pros: Very fast lens, very sharp lens, 9 blades, close focus, goes 1:1, long focus throw.
Cons: None. Perhaps a little heavy.

I could write a book about this lens, but I will spare you. Next to the new Zeiss Otus-style lenses, the CV-125 is, hands down, the best macro lens I own and I use it all the time, even though I have a shelf full of some of the best macro lenses in the world at the ready. It has no major negatives. It is very fast, very sharp, focuses close, has a long focus throw, reproduces to 1:1, has 9 blades (great bokeh) – the works. If I want to complain, it is a tad on the heavy side, but I am always happy to carry this piece of glass in the field.

The lens is very difficult to find in the Nikon format and also very expensive, with copies now going for $2500 or so. Despite all the good qualities, probably the features that set this lens apart from other fine macro lenses are the fact that it is truly apochromatic (APO) and has such exceptional bokeh (lovely out-of-focus blur in the background).

Of course, IMO, I would add that it has a “magic” quality that words can’t express and a very-long focus throw that makes macros and stacked-photos so very easy. I find it very stable when it comes to handling various types of light in the same frame, like shade with rays of sunlight. This is real workhorse and I have used mine day in and day out for years.

It focuses to 1:1 and lets you get very close in on your subjects. A feature not often mentioned about this lens is that it is also very sharp at mid-range and even at landscape distances. This is the little lens that could and it does. If you ever find one, buy it. You will never be sorry.

[John Koerner]

Thank you very much ... I intend to get one soon.

My only remaining question at this point is, how does it handle Extension Tubes?

Thank you again for all the info.

[bjanes]

Lens: Voigtlander 125mm f/2.5 Macro APO-Lanthar
Focal Length: 125mm
Widest Aperture: f/2.5
Narrowest Aperture: 22
Aperture Blades: 9
Filter Size: 58mm
Hood: Included, Square
Close Focus Distance: 14.96 inches (38 centimeters)
Reproduction Ratio: 1:1
Focus Throw: ~ 630º
Weight: 28 ounces (794 grams)
Pros: Very fast lens, very sharp lens, 9 blades, close focus, goes 1:1, long focus throw.
Cons: None. Perhaps a little heavy.

The lens is very difficult to find in the Nikon format and also very expensive, with copies now going for $2500 or so. Despite all the good qualities, probably the features that set this lens apart from other fine macro lenses are the fact that it is truly apochromatic (APO) and has such exceptional bokeh (lovely out-of-focus blur in the background).

This is the little lens that could and it does. If you ever find one, buy it. You will never be sorry.

This lens receives rave reviews everywhere, but why did they stop making it? I understand that it was made in Japan by Cosina, who are still in business and make the Zeiss Otus line and the 135 f/2 APO.

Bill

[Michael Erlewine]

Thank you very much ... I intend to get one soon.

My only remaining question at this point is, how does it handle Extension Tubes?

Thank you again for all the info.

In my experience, extension has more to do with the length of the lens than anything else. At 125mm and going to 1:1, why would we need extension? Like all lenses I know, extension never enhances a lens, but only degrades it, if only by a small amount. In the case of the CV-125, extension does not help the lens. I tend to use extension only on mid-range lenses, like the Zeiss Otus 55mm, where I use 5.8mm extension, what is called that K-1 extension ring. Sometimes I use a little more extension like the PK-12, which is 14mm extension.

[Michael Erlewine]

This lens receives rave reviews everywhere, but why did they stop making it? I understand that it was made in Japan by Cosina, who are still in business and make the Zeiss Otus line and the 135 f/2 APO.

Bill

The stopped making it as part of a deal with Zeiss NOT to make it and compete with lenses like the Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar. The two lenses were at one time made in the same factory in Japan. My hope is that Zeiss will make an Otus macro lens.

[John Koerner]

In my experience, extension has more to do with the length of the lens than anything else. At 125mm and going to 1:1, why would we need extension? Like all lenses I know, extension never enhances a lens, but only degrades it, if only by a small amount. In the case of the CV-125, extension does not help the lens. I tend to use extension only on mid-range lenses, like the Zeiss Otus 55mm, where I use 5.8mm extension, what is called that K-1 extension ring. Sometimes I use a little more extension like the PK-12, which is 14mm extension.

I often photograph arthropods at are smaller than a grain of rice.

You simply need greater-than-1:1 magnification to fill the frame and see any detail.

I don't often go more than 2:1, so I use either the Canon MP-E 65mm or extensions on my current 180mm.

I am aware there's a degradation, but it should be smaller on a high-quality lens.

[John Koerner]

The stopped making it as part of a deal with Zeiss NOT to make it and compete with lenses like the Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar. The two lenses were at one time made in the same factory in Japan. My hope is that Zeiss will make an Otus macro lens.

Weird why they would stop making the better lens (Voigtlander).

Despite the intriguing image quality of this lens that is consistently reported, and the fact it is better than the Zeiss (and a true 1:1), the major drawback to me is the lack of a tripod collar ring (and the fact it can't even be fitted for one), underscoring its usefulness as a studio lens more so than a wildlife lens.

To have a tripod collar for nature photography is a compositional necessity I would say at least 60% of the time.

If I hand-hold to make the adjustments, then I open the doors for the need of IS or flash. Hand-holding also minimizes the effectiveness of the extreme, precision-focusing the Voigtlander offers.

If I use a tripod + remote switch, to take advantage of mirror-lockup and the extreme focus throw of the Voigtlander lens ... even with an L-Bracket on my camera, this reduces me to a "horizontal" or "vertical" compositional choice for camera placement ... thereby losing the freedom of 360° of rotational options that a tripod collar gives me.

Often (more often than not, actually) butterflies, spiders, praying mantids, etc. are naturally positioned in a cockeyed fashion ... on a flower or leaf ... neither aligned properly for a horizontal, nor a vertical, shot.

One of the great aspects of the Sigma, for wildlife (as well as any long telephoto), is the tripod collar which allows you to make quick, precise compositional adjustments ... without taking your camera off the tripod or being forced to hand-hold.

Jack

[Michael Erlewine]

Weird why they would stop making the better lens (Voigtlander).

Despite the intriguing image quality of this lens that is consistently reported, and the fact it is better than the Zeiss (and a true 1:1), the major drawback to me is the lack of a tripod collar ring (and the fact it can't even be fitted for one), underscoring its usefulness as a studio lens more so than a wildlife lens.

As mentioned, it was contractual. They wanted to remove competition as I understand it for what they must have felt was a better lens, their Makro-Planars or whatever. I have written to Zeiss, repeatedly, asking for an Otus Macro lens. Not sure where they stand now that the see the Otus lenses are marketable, but in the beginning they told me they probably would not mace an Otus macro, BECAUSE they have to justify selling 10,000 copies... and it might not.


As for the tripod-collar, that is not essential IMO, but maybe for you it is. You might try some form of gimbal setup or, as we have kind of talked this to death, perhaps just cross the CV-125 of your list. You like the Sigma macro, just use that is my suggestion.

[NancyP]

I have no problems with the balance of the CV 125mm macro lens when I attach the camera (Canon 6D - used lens cost more than the new camera!) to the tripod ball head via the camera's L bracket. It isn't a heavy lens. L bracket is on the camera 100% of the time anyway.

Another greater than 1:1 option, if you don't like / want the MPE-65, is bellows and microscope-mount lens or bellows macro lens or enlarger/repro lens (all used). Enrico Savassi (microfossils) has a great site for this sort of information. Some of the coin photographers and metallurgic/materials science photographers also have useful info. I can't imagine taking a bellows in the field.
http://www.savazzi.net/photography/default.htm

[Michael Erlewine]

I can't imagine taking a bellows in the field.

I do all the time. Just remember the large view cameras.

[John Koerner]

As mentioned, it was contractual. They wanted to remove competition as I understand it for what they must have felt was a better lens, their Makro-Planars or whatever. I have written to Zeiss, repeatedly, asking for an Otus Macro lens. Not sure where they stand now that the see the Otus lenses are marketable, but in the beginning they told me they probably would not mace an Otus macro, BECAUSE they have to justify selling 10,000 copies... and it might not.

Thanks for the info.

As for the tripod-collar, that is not essential IMO, but maybe for you it is.

Not essential, but highly-preferable.

You might try some form of gimbal setup

Gimbal heads operate off of tripod collars ... which brings us back to the deficit in the Voigtlander.

or, as we have kind of talked this to death, perhaps just cross the CV-125 of your list.

Well, I have been saving for quite awhile to upgrade my camera system.

I was patiently waiting for Canon to produce (what I considered to be) the perfect, lightweight nature photography camera, but (with the advent of the D500) Nikon beat them to it, so I am switching from Canon to Nikon.

I have just ordered the D810 (which is $1000 less than the 5DSr + extras) and have pre-ordered the D500.

With this system switch means I have to switch lenses too (selling old, buying new).
This has created a window of opportunity for some non-standard considerations also.
Because of your rave reviews of the Voigtlander 125 APO macro, and your seeming lifetime of lens experience, I have been coveting the color/clarity/bokeh enhancements that seem implicit in this choice ... and yet I want to be mindful of its limitations as well.

The tripod collar limitation is a serious one (IMO) for quick wildlife framing while using a tripod.

I thought you might have had a viable solution, but if my constant questions are frustrating you, then I won't trouble you any more.

You like the Sigma macro, just use that is my suggestion.

I love the Sigma 180 mm APO Macro.

It remains the single best, most well-rounded, multi-purpose, ZERO-limitation, wildlife-functional, macro lens I have ever used.

However, I do lots of studio stacks also (mostly on spiders too small to photograph properly in-situ), so I am still very interested in the Voigtlander 125 APO for that purpose.

Thanks for all the information you have provided on this lens.

Jack

[Michael Erlewine]

I thought you might have had a viable solution, but if my constant questions are frustrating you, then I won't trouble you any more.

Not frustrated, but I have told you everything I know about it I have used the CV-125 for hundreds of thousands of photos. It is the best all-around lens I know of, short of the Zeiss Otus series.

[John Koerner]

I have no problems with the balance of the CV 125mm macro lens when I attach the camera (Canon 6D - used lens cost more than the new camera!) to the tripod ball head via the camera's L bracket. It isn't a heavy lens. L bracket is on the camera 100% of the time anyway.

Can you share some of the impromptu, wildlife macro photos you've taken with this setup?

I have an L-bracket too, as mentioned, but it is not even on the same planet (convenience-wise), for wildlife photography, as a tripod ring.

The very action of removing the camera, replacing it vertically, clamping, etc. means lost time + added motion ... if you have a subject that is only going to "stay still" for a very brief period of time.

For example, Michael shows a very rich-colored photograph of a fly on a leaf with the APO 125.

However, taking a photograph of a fly in your backyard is a zero-loss proposal.
(If it "flies" off, no big deal. Wait for the next one. Try again.)

However, if you've just driven several hours into another state ... and a rare butterfly suddenly lands on a flower or leaf right next to you (and is of the type which is highly-flighty and will be gone the next second) ... you don't have a bunch of time to take cameras off, set a different way, etc. You might not even want a tripod at all ... and just want to hit AF and nail SOME kind of shot before it flies away.

My point is, if you decide to use a tripod, you can position, rotate/compose, AF, nail the shot.
(If the subject stays, you can then perhaps take some time, use live view, MF, and try stacks.)
But if it's gone the next second, at least you have something.

If you're using the Voightlander, you have no AF and no tripod ring.
You have to manually crank-out 680º to focus, with no IS.

So, while the Voightlander may possess a hair more APO color correction and bokeh ... if you miss the shot completely, fiddling with camera adjustment, having to get closer, and having no AF to quickly and efficiently zero-in on the target (while it's still there) ... what difference does the slightly-better color characteristics make?

That was your moment ... the only one you had ... and it's gone now

So, again, with flowers and studio shots (over which you have compositional control + all the time in the world) I can see the advantage.
I guess my point is, after a long drive to a special place, and with but a fleeting window of opportunity laid before you ... (of something you've NEVER seen before ... and quite likely will never see again) ... I'd rather have ADVANTAGES in this regard AF, IS + tripod ring (backed by very high quality lens characteristics) ... than maybe having slightly higher lens characteristics (but founded upon deficiencies that might cause me to lose the shot altogether).

This is why I continue to regard the Voightlander lens as a studio, not wildlife, lens.

Another greater than 1:1 option, if you don't like / want the MPE-65, is bellows and microscope-mount lens or bellows macro lens or enlarger/repro lens (all used). Enrico Savassi (microfossils) has a great site for this sort of information. Some of the coin photographers and metallurgic/materials science photographers also have useful info. I can't imagine taking a bellows in the field.
http://www.savazzi.net/photography/default.htm

Thank you.

This is a very valuable resource.

Bookmarked!

Jack

[Michael Erlewine]

If you are shooting bugs on the fly, the CV-125mm is not what you want, although I have done it many time. Use your Sigma 180mm macro or the old reliable Micro-Nikkor 105mm VR for that kind of stuff. The Sigma should do the job and you already are happy with it. Or get the old Micro-Nikkor 200m Macro and use that.

The CV-125 is way more than a “studio” lens, as any number of photographers probably would testify to. Unfortunately, the world of photography gear is not designed for just one person’s needs. I use a variety of lenses, depending on what kind of work I am doing.

I seldom shoot fast-moving insects, so the ones I have are in deep storage.

Here is an insect shot with the CV-125.

[John Koerner]

If you are shooting bugs on the fly, the CV-125mm is not what you want, although I have done it many time. Use your Sigma 180mm macro or the old reliable Micro-Nikkor 105mm VR for that kind of stuff.

Which is exactly the point of my original post, back in the beginning

For these exact reasons, my blog post labeled the Sigma and the Nikon 105 #1 and #2 respectively.

The Sigma should do the job and you already are happy with it. Or get the old Micro-Nikkor 200m Macro and use that.

It does do the job, superbly.

The old Micro-Nikkor is hampered by slower AF and no IS, but is superb where quick action isn't needed ... but long reach, and isolating the background, is.

The CV-125 is way more than a “studio” lens, as any number of photographers probably would testify to. Unfortunately, the world of photography gear is not designed for just one person’s needs. I use a variety of lenses, depending on what kind of work I am doing.

I agree the CV-125 "can" be used for wildlife, but it is highly-limited for the reasons already stated.

It will never be a "quick on the draw" lens, nor was it designed to be.

It is a thoughtful, "take your time" lens ...

The Sigma carries high degrees of both ...

I seldom shoot fast-moving insects, so the ones I have are in deep storage.

I don't do too many fast moving subject either ... but many "fly away quickly," after landing for a sec.

Here is an insect shot with the CV-125.

Two comments: 1) Something must have happened to the upload, as the image is shot; 2) Again, this is a common honey bee (seen often and, if missed, no worries as you'll see another in a few second/minutes).

The elements I have tried to cover was wildlife, UNcommon finds, and being prepared to capture what you can with a fully-capable macro lens (as opposed to a supremely capable lens in some respects, while utterly lacking in others).

Jack

[NancyP]

Yes, for insects, AF is good and more focal length (working distance) is also good. I have handheld the CV 125 for chasing around slow-moving (hovering, sipping, walking) insects. Lens racked out to desired magnification. Fine focus achieved by moving camera back or forward, paying attention to the AF confirm (which does work). Not as convenient as AF, to be sure, but it will do. I happen to do a fair amount of plant and mushroom photography, MF on tripod is fine. And I like MF as a process - I grew up when all lenses were MF, and it's natural for me to use MF for things not involving high speed action. I'd rather take a relatively lightweight (~600 grams) lens like the CV 125 on a hike, although I have taken the Canon 180mm (1200 grams) out on hikes. Yes, I need to work out more, I am a 115 pound weakling.

Basically, different tools for different purposes. I am grateful to have good tools. I am currently missing my outdoor macro shooting - winter - not too much going on.