My first live subjects!

AshMashMash

AshMashMash

Messages
2,043
Edit My Images
Yes
Shock horror, I know, no drops today.

So I got some cheapy (£9 ish) macro filters to play with off Ebay. Came as a 1,2,4 and 10X. So, took some pictures of some stick insects I've got which are just hatching out at the moment. I forget which species exactly... it's not the point for this forum anyways :p

Not the most amazing subjects or composition, I know. It was more a test of the filters, which actually were quite good :) Some impressive magnification when viewed at 100%. For comparison, diameter of that hole in the second picture is 3-4mm.

StickInsects2.jpg


StickInsects1.jpg


StickInsects3.jpg
 
Last edited:
i was edging on getting some of those cheap filters.... whats your verdict?? images look good to me :) shame #2 wasn't on some vegitation really!

Vi x
 
Violet1991 said:
i was edging on getting some of those cheap filters.... whats your verdict?? images look good to me :) shame #2 wasn't on some vegitation really!

Vi x
Click to expand...

For £9, if you use them once and never again, I say it's worth it :p

But in all seriousness, yeh, they allow you to get some nice close up pics, DOF doesn't seem too horrific either :) Took some of these icicles today, think this was with the 4X one:

PalmIcicleOne.jpg


And yeh... haha, but it just seemed so perfectly sitting there. The others were all in very awkward positions...
 
Last edited:
cool pics, can you tell me more about the filters? never seen them and quite curious ...... do they come in a 2x 3x etc?

could be interesting to stick them on my macro lens with the Kenk extension tube, that give me 2.5:1
 
Robbo said:
cool pics, can you tell me more about the filters? never seen them and quite curious ...... do they come in a 2x 3x etc?

could be interesting to stick them on my macro lens with the Kenk extension tube, that give me 2.5:1
Click to expand...

Look on Ebay for "Canon Macro Filters". As I say, mine were £9 or so, inc. p+p I think. Mine came as a set, labelled +1, +2, +4, +10. So I assume the +1 is 2X maybe? And the +2... erm... 3X? 'Cos 1X would just be the same wouldn't it?

But yeh, for a few quid it's worth a play isn't it? :LOL: See how close you can get...
 
They are +1 dioptre +2 dioptre etc IIRC from school physics, dioptre of a lens is reciprocal of focal length (in metres).

What does this mean? It means adding +1 +2 etc to a lens effectively makes it "short sighted" so it can focus closer than it otherwise would be able to. (I am short sighted - I can read right close to my eyes and need -4.5 dioptre contact lens to correct it. This is the exact opposite)

The actual magnification you get would depend very heavily on what lens you put the dioptre on and how close you are to the subject. It doesn't correspond to x1, x2 etc.

Dioptre lenses are perfcetly acceptable for some applications if you are on a budget - and can be lots of fun. But for best results with minimal distortion a true macro lens is the thing to use. :)
 
Last edited:
Myszolow said:
They are +1 dioptre +2 dioptre etc IIRC from school physics, dioptre of a lens is reciprocal of focal length (in metres).

What does this mean? It means adding +1 +2 etc to a lens effectively makes it "short sighted" so it can focus closer than it otherwise would be able to. (I am short sighted - I can read right close to my eyes and need -4.5 dioptre contact lens to correct it. This is the exact opposite)

The actual magnification you get would depend very heavily on what lens you put the dioptre on and how close you are to the subject. It doesn't correspond to x1, x2 etc.

Dioptre lenses are perfcetly acceptable for some applications if you are on a budget - and can be lots of fun. But for best results with minimal distortion a true macro lens is the thing to use. :)
Click to expand...


as thats all above my brick head.....If i have a macro lens with extension tube with a ratio of 2.5:1 and had a total of filter to give +17, roughly how much would that give me extra?
 
nice shots :) I have used those filters in the past, i dont have them now as i sold them with my bridge camera. I got best results with the 4x. I will be getting another set soon for my D90'
 
Robbo said:
as thats all above my brick head.....If i have a macro lens with extension tube with a ratio of 2.5:1 and had a total of filter to give +17, roughly how much would that give me extra?
Click to expand...

What's the focal length of the macro lens?

I wouldn't have thought that there was much if any benefit to using dioptres AND tubes simply because tubes get you so close to the action that there is usually no need for dioptres. Also, since tubes add no optical components there is no degradation of image quality (apart from a loss of light due to the added length.)
 
Last edited:
Myszolow said:
What's the focal length of the macro lens?

I wouldn't have thought that there was much if any benefit to using dioptres AND tubes simply because tubes get you so close to the action that there is usually no need for dioptres. Also, since tubes add no optical components there is no degradation of image quality (apart from a loss of light due to the added length.)
Click to expand...

60mm

I know I probably would use the tubes and the filter together much, im just curious how much closer they would get me.....ish lol
 
Not bad considering the cheapo filters Ash. The stickys look like young Giant Prickly Stick Insect (Extatasoma tiaratum).
 
Myszolow said:
They are +1 dioptre +2 dioptre etc IIRC from school physics, dioptre of a lens is reciprocal of focal length (in metres).

What does this mean? It means adding +1 +2 etc to a lens effectively makes it "short sighted" so it can focus closer than it otherwise would be able to. (I am short sighted - I can read right close to my eyes and need -4.5 dioptre contact lens to correct it. This is the exact opposite)

The actual magnification you get would depend very heavily on what lens you put the dioptre on and how close you are to the subject. It doesn't correspond to x1, x2 etc.

Dioptre lenses are perfcetly acceptable for some applications if you are on a budget - and can be lots of fun. But for best results with minimal distortion a true macro lens is the thing to use. :)
Click to expand...

Oh I see! Yes of course, I get it now. I am a vet student, so we use dioptre lenses for looking at animal's retinas :) Thanks for the explanation, makes more sense :D

damage said:
nice shots :) I have used those filters in the past, i dont have them now as i sold them with my bridge camera. I got best results with the 4x. I will be getting another set soon for my D90'
Click to expand...

Thanks. Cool, yeh, they're good little things to play with I think :)

Ajophotog said:
Not bad considering the cheapo filters Ash. The stickys look like young Giant Prickly Stick Insect (Extatasoma tiaratum).
Click to expand...

Aye thanks Alby :) And on, they're not E. tiaratum I don't think... though I have had those in the past. I just can't remember what they are! Pretty sure it is in Australian species... my friend who gave me the eggs knows.
 
Nice ones you have there! (y) I tried the ebay cheap filters on my canon too..It was pretty ok considering the price you paid for them..Sometimes the seller says that you can even stack the filters to get higher magnification..I've tried this too but the IQ was rubbish, probably because the optic quality of the filters are quite low they only give decent IQ when used one at a time..
 
mameemonsters said:
Nice ones you have there! (y) I tried the ebay cheap filters on my canon too..It was pretty ok considering the price you paid for them..Sometimes the seller says that you can even stack the filters to get higher magnification..I've tried this too but the IQ was rubbish, probably because the optic quality of the filters are quite low they only give decent IQ when used one at a time..
Click to expand...

Thanks :) Yeh, I hadn't tried using them together yet... for that very reason...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top