eBay "macro close up lenses"

Michaelk20

Michaelk20

Messages
431
Name
Michael
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone got any experience of these? Linky

Am I right in thinking that they just allow you to fucus when you are closer to your subject?

Thanks
 
Yeah they allow closer focusing at the expense of image quality.

To do the same without an effect on image quality, extension tubes are a good option. AF ones can be expensive though.

Or you could do similar to what you posted and get a Raynox 250 which is an excellent thing for what it is!
 
+1 on the Raynox. Here's an image taken with it (Panasonic G5/12-35). The image is on Flickr at 2048 x 2048 if you want to see it big...)


P1000740 by arad85, on Flickr
 
Michaelk20 said:
Think i'll be getting a Raynox 250 in the future then! Thanks guys
Click to expand...

good plan..

that said you can get okish results if you just want to dabble, the ones you linked to are about £8 too much though, you should be looking at under a tenner for a set of Neewer ones..

8076875938_1e11226b28_z.jpg


8076875862_d28b4eaf7c_z.jpg
 
You can get good results from the cheopo ones, I have a Kood set that cost £28. They'll never be as good as a macro lens or even tubes but for the price you can't complain.
 
Last edited:
I have a lot of fun with my Raynox 150 - as someone new to macro I got that instead of the Raynox 250 as the lower magnification and greater depth of field makes it much easier to use, especially handheld.

I also got a Hoya close up filter (+3) on ebay for a fiver (new) and thought it would be crap, but it's actually not bad and even works with AF (you will need to focus manually with the Raynox as the AF goes nuts!). Good for things that move around a lot like bees, but for plants etc or insects that stay still long enough I prefer the Raynox 150.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Hoya-49mm-Close-Up-3-Filter-/390295418903?

For web viewing or small prints the £5 Hoya is fine, for bigger prints and more magnification the Raynox (with a decent lens) is a good lower budget option (around £38?) and if you want to get serious about macro then you can always get a dedicated macro lens later on.
 
Last edited:
2Thumbs said:
Yeah they allow closer focusing at the expense of image quality.

To do the same without an effect on image quality, extension tubes are a good option. AF ones can be expensive though.

Or you could do similar to what you posted and get a Raynox 250 which is an excellent thing for what it is!
Click to expand...

You can get a set of Polaroid extension tubes for about £60.00 on Amazon, which have very good reviews.

The one good thing about extension tubes is that they fit on any lens and, having no optics, do not impact upon the image quality.

I personally regard them as indispensable for macro photography.

Having said that it is quite possible to produce very good results from the cheap ebay ones:


11042.jpg

​
Taken with a 350D with +4 Dioptre close up lens on the 18-55mm kit lens and shot at 1600 ISO.


11191.jpg

​
Taken with a 350D with +10 Dioptre close up lens on the 18-55mm kit lens and shot at 1600 ISO

Note that these close up lenses work much better with the smaller filter sizes eg 52mm is much better then 72mm.
.
 
Last edited:
petersmart said:
You can get a set of Polaroid extension tubes for about £60.00 on Amazon, which have very good reviews.

The one good thing about extension tubes is that they fit on any lens and, having no optics, do not impact upon the image quality.

I personally regard them as indispensable for macro photography.

Having said that it is quite possible to produce very good results from the cheap ebay ones.
Click to expand...

What do you prefer? Or it it a "dependant on situation" kind of thing?

Also, I'm from Corby too! :wave:
 
Michaelk20 said:
What do you prefer? Or it it a "dependant on situation" kind of thing?
Click to expand...
Although I can't reply for others, my thoughts for the Raynox were this:

  • I don't do macro very often -> I don't want to tie a lot up in a macro lens.
  • I still want to do macro and when I do, I want good quality
  • Most of my macro will be handheld and without flash -> I need a convenient walkabout solution. I hardly ever carry a tripod and I don't setup with a macro system waiting for something to arrive.
  • Convenience is high on my list of requirements (the clip on Raynox is very convenient!). I don't particularly want to be swapping lenses/extension tubes
  • Macro is only a part of my photography. I am very unlikely to go out for a day of macro -> convenience is good for me.

What you desire in a macro setup is going to depend on your answers to those (and some other I guess) questions. What do you want it for, how critical are you, how easy does it need to be to use etc... The answer I came up with (a £40 clip on with decent quality) may well be different to the right answer for you. But at least you have some questions you can ask yourself...
 
That's massively put things into perspective. Taking all that into account I'm in the same position as you.

Looks like the Raynox is for me!
 
Last edited:
Michaelk20 said:
What do you prefer? Or it it a "dependant on situation" kind of thing?

Also, I'm from Corby too! :wave:
Click to expand...

Personally I prefer the auto tubes because they give such good results with almost any lens even a kit lens.

In fact I traded in my 100mm macro to help buy the Canon 70-300mm L IS USM lens, and I use a set of tubes with that to get close up pics at a distance:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=344817

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=343104

If you're from Corby maybe we can meet up some time when I get back from my holiday - I often go down to the Boating Lake.

.
 
I didn't shoot macro much but wanted to dry so bought the eBay filters


As I shot more, I moved up to the eBay auto tubes (£35 I think) and generally used them with my nifty fifty

The final evolution was to a 100mm macro (old canon one) which now suffices perfectly for my needs.


It was a case of evolving my kit with my photography, and if I were to do it all over I would use exactly the same route!!
 
petersmart said:
If you're from Corby maybe we can meet up some time when I get back from my holiday - I often go down to the Boating Lake.
Click to expand...

That would be good just to tag along to be honest, I'm new to this photography malarky so any experience is good experience!
 
They'll never beat a dedicated Macro lens but they are a cheap way of finding out if you have a real interest in macro shooting. I started out with a set of them and an 18-55 IS kit lens on a 550D and found I had a healthy interest in going to the next step. I got a Canon 100 f2.8 L macro and a set of Kenko tubes and the setup still amazes me now, specially since I got a 5D3 for it to go on. One of the most important things with macro shooting is the amount of light you need which is why I recently bought a Sigma EM-140 ringflash and it's an excellent performer.

I've never had a Raynox and wouldn't really know how to use one so I can't comment on them.
 
Hmm, birthday coming up next week .... think I'll add the Raynox to my list.

Interesting thread folks :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top