Recently, I scored a Tokina at-x 90mm f2.5 Macro on ebay. It is a marvelous lens for sure and I love the results it provides on my OM-D. But it is probably too heavy for travel so I have a Raynox DCR-150 which I use on some of my other lenses. But of course one does want to have the best glass with them at all times and I wanted to know how the Tokina stacked up against my other lenses. I did some outdoor tests on a Potato with some buds poking through the red skin of a russert in the backyard. The Tokina was sharper than just about every lens I had except the Sigma 30mm f.28. They were about even at all apertures. But I wanted a real macro test, so I bought a flower put it in my home lightbox, and tested the following lenses: 1. Pentax-A 50mm f1.7 + Raynox 2. Pentax-M 100mm f2.8 + Raynox 3. Tokina at-x 90mm f2.5 4. Sigma 30mm f2.8 + Raynox 5. Panasonic 20mm f1.7 + Raynox 6. Pentax-M 200mm f4 + Raynox https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/...407&sqsi=8cda7a67-4ecb-41e3-a88c-66c060e0771c Of course I really didn't compare bokeh, which is important, but I had everything mounted on a tripod, with IBIS turned off for maximum clarity, shot at 200 ISO, in a well controlled environment. I recorded working distances between 5" for the 50mm to 9" for the Tokina. All photos were shot at f8. I took other shots at other apertures but didn't include them here. Unfortunately the metadata for the photos doesn't show focal length for the manual focus photos so they are in the order as per above. The results are pretty interesting. In terms of sharpness, the variance is not as great as one might imagine. I don't think I need to take my Tokina on the road with me. What do you think?