I want to buy a macro lens for my Olympus E-PL1. I could buy the Panasonic, but I prefer using MF macro lenses using adapters, since I could continue to use them, if I decided to change to a NEX or some other EVIL. BTW, there is no native µ4/3 lens which is as good as the Leica Summicron 50mm I love to use on my E-PL1. At the moment I have two options: The first option is a 100mm macro by Canon (FD). The owner of this lens used to drive with his Land Rover through the desert. His camera (and this lens) was positioned in the glove box. That means, that the lens was shaken thoroughly for a long time and exposed to much dust. There are several scars and there is no paint at some edges and it was very dusty, but the lens was cleaned in the shop, because I wanted to test it in the botanical garden. It really looks like a lens which was in a glove box of a Land Rover in the Sahara, but it could still be worse. The mechanics seems to be fine and the optical quality seems to be fine, too, but I have to test it further. The (very competent) sales person said, that this kind of lenses is built well enough to withstand this kind of strain. I need not buy it and may wait for the second option. Next week a used Leica 60mm macro will be brought from their other shop, but I expect it to be in a worse condition, if the codes of their homepage are correct (they are a little bit inconsistent). I do not need to buy it, either, and will be able to test it. I have found a shop in an other town, which offers hundreds of used lenses (as it seems). There are several used macro lenses by Canon including pictures on their home page. I want to visit that town at the end of this month and could visit that shop. The lenses which are sold there look better, but they are more expensive. A Canon FD 100mm macro which looks fine on the photo costs about twice as much as the lens I mentioned above. I need a second opinion. What do you think?