A true Macro is 1 to 1 but..... half lifesize is dam close :) The question is... have you ever used or use often at full one to one ? It could be that half life size is more than enough. If you get desperate you can always crop too. Just a thought :)

karinatwork said:

I have two macro lenses with my Nikon camera, the 60 and the 40, and I love taking macro pictures of flowers and stuff. I love how close I can get with the Nikkor macro lenses. Now I am very interested in getting the Fujinon 60 mm, but I am reading it's not a 1:1, but a mere 1:2 magnification. Plus, it doesn't let me get close (26 cm). I am hesitant to buy it now, because I am worried it's not letting me produce the same quality of pictures.
Do you own this lens? Will it be a good macro lens?
Thanks for any info!

I shoot lots of macro and you'd be better off buying an adapter to use your nikon 60mm if you are really concerned about 1:1. I have the Fuji 60mm for general purpose macro and I enjoy the nice working distance. In fact it's considered a good trait of a macro lens if there is some useful Front Working Distance (FWD) which is the space between front element of lens and subject. This is desireable for the sake of lighting the subject and not frightening off flying insects and spiders. The Nikon 60mm (and the 40mm is even worse) has such a short FWD that the shadow cast by the lens barrel can creep into the image area. It is also very difficult with those lenses to use flash when focusing in the 1:1 range.
Right now I'm using the Fuji 60mm for general purpose and it's a wonderfully sharp and capable lens though unfortunately very susceptible to flare when shooting in strong light even with the hood in place.
When I need more magnification than 1:2 I break out my B+W +10 diopter close up filter. This doesn't degrade the quality of the lens too much as I have a 58mm and I use a stepping ring to get it to 39mm and so I'm using the middle (best part) of the close up filter. This gets me in the neighbourhood of 1:1 with still decent working distance.
If I need 1:1 with higher quality I'll use my Nikon adapter and a BR-2A reversing ring to reverse my Nikon MF 50mm 1.8 AIS lens.
If I need 2:1-4:1 (double to four times life size) I'll use extension tubes with the reversed 50mm which cuts down the FWD but gives good magnification.
If I need 9:1 or greater I reverse my Zeiss 25mm f/2.0 lens (picking up a used Nikkor MF 28mm f/2.8 E series for this won't set you back much and is surprisingly good when reversed) and extension tubes for massive magnification but you'll need a super rigid tripod and a macro focusing rail to attempt such high magnifications. Plus FWD disappears pretty quick as you increase the magnification of the reversed wide angle using extension tubes, to the point you have to watch out for your point of focus drifting into the inside of your lens (becoming virtual focus) and rendering your setup useless forcing you back a step in magnification.
Here is a 1:2 shot of part of a Canadian $10 bill from the 60mm for you to have a peek at:

I think 1:1 in FF isn't the same as in APS-C, right? In FF it means, that you can take a sensor-size photo from a 36mm long subject (ca. 24mm in APS-C). So 1:2 in APS-C means 48mm, that's a 1:1.3 ratio in terms of FF. Not that bad... Or am I wrong??
Nice arachnaphobia-therapie-shot by the way!

ollipro1 said:

I think 1:1 in FF isn't the same as in APS-C, right? In FF it means, that you can take a sensor-size photo from a 36mm long subject (ca. 24mm in APS-C). So 1:2 in APS-C means 48mm, that's a 1:1.3 ratio in terms of FF. Not that bad... Or am I wrong??
Nice arachnaphobia-therapie-shot by the way!

The lens' ability to project a 1:1 image is unaffected by the sensor size. Imagine you had a projector (lens) set up to project an image onto a screen (sensor) where an image of a person was a full length life size projection. Now if you reduced the size of the projector screen (crop sensor) to only display the head and shoulders of the person the screen would display less of the projected image but the image would still be life size. Only if we move the projector (lens) can we affect magnification. For instance moving the projector (lens) further away from the screen (sensor) will make the image grow in size and is how extension tubes work, they move the optical centre of the lens further from the imaging plane thus causing an enlarged imaging circle.

veejaycee said:

Your figures are correct but as we're talking macro and ultra careful manual focus - how about using your Nikons via an adapter? The 40mm becomes your 60mm and you get a 90mm from the 60.

Second this.

oops forgot link
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=raynox+on+fuji+x-e1&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=GJL2UN-kAabZ0QWh3IGIBA&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAA&biw=1477&bih=807#hl=en&safe=off&tbo=d&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=raynox+on+fuji+60mm+macro&oq=raynox+on+fuji+60mm+macro&gs_l=img.3...7832.9804.0.9981.10.10.0.0.0.0.64.514.10.10.0...0.0...1c.1.FcrwSvzOuSw&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41018144,d.d2k&fp=faa378aa84978c96&biw=1477&bih=807

Hi Karinatwork - thanks for asking this question. I am considering selling all my Canon gear because I love the Fuji X lenses but I need a decent macro for shooting jewellery and the reviews of the 60mm for macro work have not been flattering. Markdphotoguy's answer is really useful and makes me feel more comfortable about using this lens with a diopter.

PeterPrism said:

I use a set with +1, +2, +3 dioptric lenses (alone or tighter)
This is the result Your text to link...

That is hellish good Peter - may I inquire as to your method of focusing?
Vic

Deanmessenger- how do you mount the DCR 250 to the 60mm lens? According to their site Raynox do not make a 39mm adapter ring

Anyone use this lens for portraits as well as macro?

Colin_Nicholls said:

Anyone use this lens for portraits as well as macro?

Me!
you can see here some portraits. Your text to link...

img src="" alt="" />
img src="" alt="" />

More casual macro, but still good enough to get some fun shots of flowers and stuff in. I haven't done any serious bugs or anything yet, but I was satisfied with what I got from this as a macro lens, and the portrait is superb in good light.

Hey Tyler, no not OOC. I used aperture and vsco film 02 with some tweaks to tinting and highlights and contrast curves, sharpening of the eyes etc. Also the first shot was using vsco film as well. I honestly don't like the processing of the first one, and just didn't get around to changing it back. I was just messing around with the new presets when I took it. But honestly the portrait wasn't too terribly far off. It wasn't a drastic change, just a lot of subtleties. The camera and lens really did nail it pretty much right off the bat. The lens isn't for everyone, but any time I'm doing any outdoor portrait work where I have some room to move, this lens comes with me.