Originally Posted By: DWallach
As always, there's a tradeoff. Let's say you're going for the same 1:1 reproduction ratio with both lenses
[...]

Thank you Dan. This is very useful!

Quote:
On the flip side, the 100mm will have less depth of field at the same aperture. Advantage goes to the 50mm.

And, I take this is a disadvantage because in order to increase DoF you need to decrease aperture and therefore you will need more light/longer exposure time, all else being constant. Am I correct? But, I suppose that sharpness or detail level will not be affected directly by this, as they mostly depend on the optics quality?

Quote:

And, yes, there's really not much difference between a 50mm "standard" lens versus a 50mm "macro" lens, except that the macro lens is designed to rack itself further away from the camera body. That's what macro extension tubes are all about. Generally speaking, what really differentiates macro lenses is that they have exceptionally high quality optics but not necessarily the widest aperture.

Ok, I see. So theoretically, at a given magnification level, a Macro lens will produce sharper / more detailed images than a "standard" lens, again holding all else constant: lens build quality, etc.
_________________________
= Taym =
MK2a #040103216 * 100Gb *All/Colors* Radio * 3.0a11 * Hijack = taympeg