Macro Bellows?

[Alpha]

I do some portrait work with my 35mm, and my 55mm prime is okay, though I do occasionally use my telephoto, which is surprisingly sharp. Anyway, I'd like to get some good closeups with the prime lens without getting up in my subject's face, and without shelling out for a longer, expensive pentax smc prime. Are macro bellows appropriate for portrait work, or only super closeups like product shots?

 

[Alpha]

bump? Somebody has got to know the answer to this?

 

[Rob]

In short, the answer is no. Bellows or extension tubes won't allow the depth of field or focal distance that you will need to do a portrait. They are more approriate for product and desktop composition subjects.

Rob

 

[selmerdave]

Max,

The longer SMC Pentax primes are not that expensive, the SMC-M 200/4 generally sells for around $100 or less, and the 135/3.5 is usually not that much more, and they are both superb lenses. Save money on the aperature, don't spring for the larger ones as these are optically as good or better.

Dave

 

[Alpha]

My local shop, which usually has amazing prices, has something like a 100mm smc prime for about 250 bucks. What an effing ripoff.

 

[selmerdave]

Well, that might be about right for a 100mm Macro. Of the lenses in that rough area, macro excluded, the 100mm and 105mm are the highest on the price scale. So that's why I'd look for the 135/3.5 or 200/4.

Dave

 

[Alpha]

135 would be alright...I like to be relatively close to my subjects. 200 is way too long. I don't wanna be down the street during a photo shoot.

 

[selmerdave]

Well a 200 would give you a pretty tight head shot from about 10 - 15 ft. Not really great for most portraits (not to mention the "flattening" effect), but if you want to be tight on the subject without being right on them, it is an option. I would certainly agree that the 135 gives much more versatility that way.

Dave