Jonas Rask’s review and example pictures helped me make the decision.
tl;dr Is it worth its price? If you’re into macro photography I’d say yes.
- It’s heavy!
- The sound and feeling as if something in the lens is loose is normal and disappears when you turn on the camera
- Too little haptic feedback for my taste when turning the aperture ring
- Make sure your camera‘s firmware is up to date
It took me a long time to find the best settings for macro. At the moment I think it’s around f11.
f2.8, f9, f22
Comparing the 80mm to the 60mm macro
Finally the weather was good enough for a direct comparison outside.
Straight out of camera; the bees are handheld, the Pulsatilla with a tripod. All on the X-T10 with identical settings.
I think it’s safe to say: yes, the 80mm is the better macro lens. As it should be for that price!
Comparing the 80mm 2.8 to the 35mm 1.4
In my eyes the 80mm’s f2.8 can easily match the f1.4 from the 35mm. And you don’t have to be that close to the subject. But you carry 750 gr instead of 218 gr.
Fountain with fable animal by Erwin Knöll, entrance to Basel Kunstmuseum
Side door of Basel Münster
Basilisk by Ferdinand Schlöth at Wettsteinbrücke
Comparing the 80mm to the 50-230mm
It’s a draw for picture quality, and the 50-230 is more versatile and lighter.
I still like my Lego comparison photos from a while ago, so here are some more.
The 60mm without extension tube never felt like a real macro lens to me, despite its name.
- 60mm with the extension tubes MCEX-11 and MCEX-16; older examples here and here.
- 80mm with the extension tubes MCEX-11 and MCEX-16 – not something I plan to do.