The media could not be loaded.
First, the bad:
- The optics are smaller than more expensive macro lenses and especially at smaller apertures, it can really struggle to get enough light onto the camera sensor, so make sure you have some extra bright lighting if you need a lot of depth-of-field.
- It is quite heavy. It is both the smallest lens I own, but also the heaviest.
Neither of those are bad enough to matter in my opinion however. It still isn't that heavy, and you can always add more light. And it is not really a problem at wider apertures.
The good is a much longer list:
- Value. This is a whole lot of lens for the price. Rather than reducing the quality of the optics to reduce cost, they just reduced the size of the optics but retained the quality. This is not really a problem for a macro lens, and it was good trade-off.
- Build quality. I mentioned this was heavy... well, that's because its built like a brick sh-t house. The body is all metal and not especially thin walled either. I am not even entirely sure how this lens is as heavy as it is... its a dense boi, that's for sure.
- The results. You can actually photograph features that are microscopic with this lens. Without a microscope.
I attached a 'die shot', a photo of a silicon die (a microchip). In the bottom right corner, there is a millimeter scale. The thing being photographed is an inkjet print head and some of its control circuitry. This was done with nothing but this lens and a Sony ZV-E10, no other special equipment.
I also attached a video, a close up inspection of a circuitboard. This one isn't quite as easy to get a sense of scale, but there are a couple of black square things with a bumpy surface and silvery blobs around the edges - those blobs have a 0.5mm pitch. So the center to center distance of two adjacent blobs is half a millimeter.
