From Raynox to Macro lens

damianmkv

damianmkv

Uh oh, a fruit basket!
Messages
6,267
Edit My Images
Yes
Has anyone made the move between the two and if so, can you share your thoughts please, good or bad ?

I've been using the Raynox DCR-250 for about two weeks and have achieved some good results but am finding that I'm having to bump the ISO to 800 all the time which I'm not happy with. Also, I have to be within 4inches of the subject to focus which is spooling the subject matter - can I shoot from further away with a lens and see the same detailed results ?

Obviously, there's a considerable price difference ( +£200 ) so I'm wondering if I'd see the benefit or would I just be into a money pit with requiring a flash and so on ?
 
For more working distance, you need a longer lens - like 150-180mm focal length. Expensive. Most 100mm macros will give you around 13-14cm from the front of the lens at 1:1, or less than that with some of the cheaper ones where the front element is deeply recessed.

With macro, there is no escaping the fact that you need to be close, depth of field is always miniscule, and getting sufficient light on the subject is often a challenge. Flash, or ring-flash, is a popular solution.
 
Oh, ok - so ( eg ) a tamron 90mm says a min focus distance of about 30cm ( or 12" ). Is that not right then ? I'd need to be closer to achieve 1:1 or will it do that at 12" ?
 
damianmkv said:
Oh, ok - so ( eg ) a tamron 90mm says a min focus distance of about 30cm ( or 12" ). Is that not right then ? I'd need to be closer to achieve 1:1 or will it do that at 12" ?
Click to expand...

No, minimum focusing distance is always quoted from the sensor, and that makes a big difference with macro ;) Minimum working distance is the one that matters, but manufacturers never quote that.

There's a detailed review of eight macro lenses in the current edition of Digital SLR Photography magazine that quotes the Tamron 90 (non-VC version) MWD as 9cm.
 
Last edited:
Ah....sneaky..will have to have a look at the magazine, thanks
 
Your best bet, IMO, would be to buy automatic Extension tubes.

I have a set of Kenko tubes for my Canon and would not be without them.

Not only can you use them with any lens you can also use them with any body from the same maker.

I have used mine on a 350D, a 450D and my 1Ds MkII.

They really are the most versatile thing you can buy for macro photography.

And used on my 70-300mm L IS USM lens I can get good close up shots from long enough away so that I do not disturb the insects etc.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157623715955928/
 
Don't know anything about extension tubes ( goes off to read up ) but they look good on your Flickr
 
Have used if on 35mm 1.8 and also the 70-300 ( mostly at 70mm ).

I only have a kit lens, a 10-20 and a 17-50 left..
 
damianmkv said:
Have used if on 35mm 1.8 and also the 70-300 ( mostly at 70mm ).

I only have a kit lens, a 10-20 and a 17-50 left..
Click to expand...

If you have a 70-300, extension tubes on that, at the longer end, will get you a lot more working distance :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top