Raynox or Kenko Extension Tubes?
- Thread starter Tinkie
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,172
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't have experience with extension tubes but hear they're a bit of a b****r to set up shots due to body/lens interfacing (e.g. metering etc.). If you serch for 'Raynox' here on TP you'll find many threads from the macro & close-up section you'll find plenty of example piccies that provide a good indication of it's capabilities (and limitations). Compared to other add-on solutions, imo the Raynox gives very good 'bangs for the buck' in terms of value for money 
Hi Andy,
Thanks for sharing your views. I had researched both the Raynox and Kenko opinions on the forum but was still undecided which offers the better option.
In terms of usage, the Raynox appeals as it goes on the end of the lens as opposed to between the lens and body.
As you mention, it is more comptitively priced as well which is always a bonus of course!
Best wishes,
Tracey
Thanks for sharing your views. I had researched both the Raynox and Kenko opinions on the forum but was still undecided which offers the better option.
In terms of usage, the Raynox appeals as it goes on the end of the lens as opposed to between the lens and body.
As you mention, it is more comptitively priced as well which is always a bonus of course!
Best wishes,
Tracey
I tried the extension tubes and never got the hang of them so bought the Raynox DCR-150 and the DCR-250 and didn't take long to get the knack and personally i think they cannot be beaten for the money! check out the Raynox groups on Flickr some amazing shots there. Out of the 2 I think the DCR-150 would be better suited for a beginner as they offer a little more range from critter (around 12") the DCR-250 is around 6" working distance.
The lens quality is excellent, just switch to manual focus and focus by moving closer to object until sharp then fire away!
The lens quality is excellent, just switch to manual focus and focus by moving closer to object until sharp then fire away!
- Messages
- 4,399
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
only had mine two weeks so still learning, but first impressions are good
- Messages
- 4,399
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
hi Tracey i got the raynox, tried extension tubes just could not get on with them, mind you they were cheapies no electrical contact with the camera
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Raynox - cheap, easy to use, quality not up to critical work.
Tubes - not too expensive, fiddly to use, good quality.
Pukka macro lens - expensive, but a doddle to use and excellent quality.
TBH, anybody just wanting to explore a bit of macro for the first time, the Raynox is an unbeatable bargain And you might never want for anything more shooting flowers and butterflies and garden critters. You can't go far wrong for £40. I think the slightly lower powered DCR-150 is more generally useful and the one to go for, unless you really want mega close-ups.
If you want to get more serious, I would then buy a cheap ringflash like the Marumi ahead of upgrading to tubes or a full-on macro lens.
Tubes - not too expensive, fiddly to use, good quality.
Pukka macro lens - expensive, but a doddle to use and excellent quality.
TBH, anybody just wanting to explore a bit of macro for the first time, the Raynox is an unbeatable bargain
And you might never want for anything more shooting flowers and butterflies and garden critters. You can't go far wrong for £40. I think the slightly lower powered DCR-150 is more generally useful and the one to go for, unless you really want mega close-ups.If you want to get more serious, I would then buy a cheap ringflash like the Marumi ahead of upgrading to tubes or a full-on macro lens.
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you get a set of auto tubes (like the Kenko ones) they are a very easy to use - you fit them between the camera and lens and forget them, the camera will work exactly the same as it did without them. The cheap ebay tubes are pain to use and a waste of effort.
As tubes have no glass in them you will not lose any IQ when using them, unlike the raynox which will affect IQ.
As I've only used tubes with prime lens's I'm not sure how well they will work with the lens in your kit bag, but with a nifty 50 you would get a bit more than 1:1, about the same as a true macro lens, and if you got a 100mm true macro lens you could still use the tubes giving you about 2:1.
If you do a forum search on raynox you will see some excellent results produced by the raynox but the lens you stick it onto will influence the IQ.
As tubes have no glass in them you will not lose any IQ when using them, unlike the raynox which will affect IQ.
As I've only used tubes with prime lens's I'm not sure how well they will work with the lens in your kit bag, but with a nifty 50 you would get a bit more than 1:1, about the same as a true macro lens, and if you got a 100mm true macro lens you could still use the tubes giving you about 2:1.
If you do a forum search on raynox you will see some excellent results produced by the raynox but the lens you stick it onto will influence the IQ.
- Messages
- 2,154
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I can tell you that with any zoom lens you're going to have to spend time playing to ascertain just how close you need to be to your subject, and how little depth of field you've got, at each zoom length.
From experience, you will probably find this easiest at home, in excellent light, tripod mounted and with something like a piece of newsprint fixed to a vertical surface. Oh and have a tape measure and a notepad handy 'cos you're never going to remember it all
- Messages
- 7,969
- Name
- Sara
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have both the Raynox and Kenko tubes. The tubes get far and away the most use. They are more versatile as I use them to lower the minimum focussing distance of my long lens, so my bugs and butterflies are bigger in shot. For macro use they are good and I just stuck them on the 50mm to get something a little different for a change. There is nothing difficult about them at all and IQ is maintained.
The Raynox are good value for money saying that though.
If I had to rate the macro experience I would go for
1) dedicated macro lens and flash
2) Extension tubes
3) Raynox
HTH
The Raynox are good value for money saying that though.
If I had to rate the macro experience I would go for
1) dedicated macro lens and flash
2) Extension tubes
3) Raynox
HTH
Hi HoppyUK, Paul, Tikkathreebarrel and Sara,
Thanks very much to you all for sharing your opinions; it is greatly appreciated.
Much food for thought still; the most immediate piece of advise i will follow is to get the notepad and pencil but use it to note down the "fors" and "againsts" that you have all mentioned!
Best wishes,
Tracey
Thanks very much to you all for sharing your opinions; it is greatly appreciated.
Much food for thought still; the most immediate piece of advise i will follow is to get the notepad and pencil but use it to note down the "fors" and "againsts" that you have all mentioned!
Best wishes,
Tracey
- Messages
- 7,969
- Name
- Sara
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The Raynox has an adjustable adaptor. I have used it on the nifty fifty, which has a 52mm thread and the 100mm macro with a 58mm thread.
The adaptor is a quick and easy snap into place, no screwing into place. It isn't big enough for the 77mm thread of a lot of L glass though.
HTH
The adaptor is a quick and easy snap into place, no screwing into place. It isn't big enough for the 77mm thread of a lot of L glass though.
HTH
jgs001
Brian Cox
- Messages
- 12,646
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've used cheap tubes and they are a pain in the .... More expensive tubes that allow you control of the lens would be far better..
I went for the Raynox as it was far cheaper than the Auto tubes. With my 55-250 I can get up to 2.5x magnification, and the IS on the lens helps a lot.
I'd love a proper macro lens, but it's not going to happen in the short term (especially having got used to have 2.5x mag, I want the MPE65... and that means a proper ring flash too).
The Raynox will clip onto the filter threads of lenses with threads between 49mm and 67mm I think. The main benefit, if you're out and about, you can convert your telephoto fitted camera from telephoto to macro in a couple of seconds, and back again. Without having to open the body to the elements. All my Macro shots are taken with the DCR250...
Here's a couple of examples shot with my Raynox, shot handheld.
I went for the Raynox as it was far cheaper than the Auto tubes. With my 55-250 I can get up to 2.5x magnification, and the IS on the lens helps a lot.
I'd love a proper macro lens, but it's not going to happen in the short term (especially having got used to have 2.5x mag, I want the MPE65... and that means a proper ring flash too).
The Raynox will clip onto the filter threads of lenses with threads between 49mm and 67mm I think. The main benefit, if you're out and about, you can convert your telephoto fitted camera from telephoto to macro in a couple of seconds, and back again. Without having to open the body to the elements. All my Macro shots are taken with the DCR250...
Here's a couple of examples shot with my Raynox, shot handheld.
Hi RV, Sara and John,
Thanks for your posts.
I also have the 55-250 lens so it is interesting to see the photographs taken with them. I also feel the point John makes about being able to add the Raynox when out and about is a positive for choosing that option.
Decisions, decisions!
Best wishes,
Tracey
Thanks for your posts.
I also have the 55-250 lens so it is interesting to see the photographs taken with them. I also feel the point John makes about being able to add the Raynox when out and about is a positive for choosing that option.
Decisions, decisions!
Best wishes,
Tracey