Thanks for your help Gardenershelper it was a great start and got answers i needed.
Good.
So i bought a crap lens for macro,
No, apart from the vignetting it should work fine with the Raynox. For example, here are some photos captured with a Canon 70D and 55-250 lens with a close-up lens on it (possibly a Raynox 250, but probably a Raynox 150 which is less powerful than the Raynox 250).
These are natural light shots.
The first used ISO 100, f/29 and a shutter speed of 1/2 sec using a tripod and remote release.
The second used ISO 200, f/32 and a shutter speed of 1/3 sec using a tripod and remote release.
The third one used ISO 800, f/22 and a shutter speed of 1/15 sec. Because I was tracking this moving subject I would have had both hands on the camera for this one. At that shutter speed I would have been using the ground or the tripod to provide some support and damp down the hand-shake.
0552 011 Yellow Dung Fly (Scathophaga stercoraria) (male) 2014_04_09 IMG_3447-Edit-2 PS1 PSS3 by
gardenersassistant, on Flickr
0552 046 Myopa 2014_04_09 IMG_3579-Edit-2 PS1 PSS3 by
gardenersassistant, on Flickr
0549 58 2014_04_06 Banded Snail (Cepaea) IMG_2541-Edit PS1 PSS3.75Hi by
gardenersassistant, on Flickr
i read that the kit lens 18-55 with extension tubes can get me macro 1.1 is that true?
Probably, but from the measurements I have just done I don't think I would go down that route.
With my 70D, and a full set of extension tubes (68mm total) with my 18-55, with the lens at 55mm, I can get from a scene width of 18mm wide (a bit beyond 1:1) at a working distance of around 50 mm, to a scene width of about 11mm (around 2:1) at a working distance of around 25mm. These are really short working distances and extremely difficult to work with.
If I reduce the focal length on the 18-55 I can't get very far away from 55mm before I can't focus at all because I can't get close enough. In fact, by 35mm or so the focusing is actually inside the lens!
In contrast, with a Raynox 250 on a 55-250 on my 70D (no extension tubes) I can get from a scene width of 50mm wide (about 1:2) at a working distance of around 115mm, to a scene width of around 13mm (almost 2:1) at a working distance of around 95mm. (These are the sort of working distances I get with the Raynox 250 on whatever camera/lens I use it.) That is a much wider range of magnification at a working distance that is far easier to work with.
A macro lens would give you a reasonable working distance too. For example, on my 70D my Sigma 105 Macro has a working distance of around 130mm at its maximum magnification of 1:1. How much working distance you get with a macro lens depends on the focal length (longer focal length, bigger working distance, but heavier lens) and on the lens.
would it be better than the tamron. Should i sell the tamron and get the 90mm macro version.
People will have different views on that. I am prejudiced because I use close-up lenses almost all the time. You might do best though to get a macro lens in the 90 to 105 mm range (good compromise between working distance and weight) and use extension tubes and/or your Raynox 250 when you want more magnification. If, in addition to a macro lens, you have both the Raynox and extension tubes you can experiment to see whether you prefer using extension tubes or the Raynox to get more magnification. As you get better at macro (it gets more difficult as the magnification goes up) you could use both the extension tubes and the Raynox to get even more magnification.
Hopefully some others will chip in to give some views and advice on this as I'm not familiar with that sort of setup, the practicalities, issues and equipment options. (One of the things about close-up/macro is that there is often more than one way of doing something, and the only way to really find out what works best for you is to try various options.)
The raynox is great piece of kit but as you say is shows alot of vignetting and having to crop alot in to get a decent picture.
That depends on what lens you use it on. For example, on the 55-250 on my 70D there is no vignetting when using the Raynox 250.
Plus can be a pain keep putting it on and off.
It may be even more of a pain to take extension tubes on and off. Doing that exposes your sensor to dust etc. At least with a close-up lens you don't have that issue. And you can get pretty quick about taking a close-up lens on and off, and for that matter with taking extension tubes on and off. Close-up/macro rewards practice so you can do these things smoothly and quickly.
As i always shoot hand held when im out shutter speed is important and sometimes hard to workout what with the wildlife been so small.At the moment im using auto iso maybe i should take your advise and go to manual 800 and put my flash on.
That is something you need to experiment with to find out what works best for you, both in terms of being able to get good looking images and also in terms of how comfortable you are with how the equipment handles (and that is something that can change a lot with practice - to start with some of this stuff may seem to be next to impossible. Don't worry. With practice it gets a lot, lot easier.)
Its the wrong time of year for insects and so finding them is a challenge. But thought by summer i will have a better understanding of macro photography.
Yes, finding insects is a problem now. But there are all sorts of other small things around that you can practice on, indoors and out. While you are familiarising yourself with your equipment and with the techniques and options for close-up/macro it doesn't matter too much what you use by way of subjects.
