Mike Gammill 
, Feb 11, 2012; 08:33 p.m.
The longer focal length macros (90 to 100mm) have had the greater following, maybe because in addition to serving in macro capacity, these lenses could double as portrait lenses as well. While the longer macros had a more comfortable working distance, the 50mm macro could probably come close to being the ideal single focal length lens if you could only carry one lens (unless you specifically wanted wide or tele). Since the f2.8 versions offer more flexibility due to speed over the f3.5 to 4 versions, I'm including some from the Maxxum 50mm f2.8. I used a Maxxum 5 (which really makes the 50mm look huge.)
Maxxum 5 with 50mm f2.8 Maxxum Macro
Mike Gammill , Feb 11, 2012; 08:36 p.m.
Maxxum also had a slower and more compact f3.5 macro, but there isn't much of a price advantage on the used market now. Also, it only goes to 1:2 whereas the 50mm f2.8 reaches 1:1 without any additional accessoriies.
Early morning pond, Fuji 200, program AE
Mike Gammill , Feb 11, 2012; 08:39 p.m.
With the Maxxum 5 and similar cameras the f2.8 focuses fast enough for most subjects so the 50mm f1.7 isn't really needed.
Late afternoon flags, same film
Mike Gammill , Feb 11, 2012; 08:41 p.m.
flags, slightly different view
Mike Gammill , Feb 11, 2012; 08:43 p.m.
Now for some shots in the macro range (we've been wait for these, haven't we?).
Mike Gammill , Feb 11, 2012; 08:47 p.m.
Mike Gammill , Feb 11, 2012; 08:49 p.m.
I used the pop up flash on the Maxxum 5. Many experienced macro shooters say "no" to built in flash, but going back to get my 3500 xi flash means the cat would have probably followed me.
Remus up close
Mike Gammill , Feb 11, 2012; 08:51 p.m.
And of course the flat field of a true macro is always good.
sunlit rug, program AE
Stephen Lewis 
, Feb 11, 2012; 09:19 p.m.
Nice shots. I fell in love with the 50 macro several years ago, and agree they are really underappreciated by many photogs.
JDM von Weinberg 
, Feb 12, 2012; 12:18 a.m.
Nice work. I've not seen this one before.
