Macro Tubes or Filters?

[Violet1991]

Hello,
I'm looking into getting either some macro tubes, or some filters, and wanted to know which would be best? I'm only looking at the cheap ones on ebay.

I realise an actual macro lens would be much better, but I can't afford one and can't see me affording one for some time. So I'm justing looking for something that will do a fairly good job without me paying a bomb for a lens - for now.

What's your experiences with both of these items?

thanks for any advice!

Vi x

 

[Daysleeper40]

My experience with this has been very good:

Raynox 250

If you search the macro forums you can see lots of examples using the Raynox clip on lenses - or have a shufty at my flickr, although mine are by no means the best examples!

 

[scraggs]

You would be better off using tubes although a decent auto set ain't cheap now, although I believe there is now a cheap copy of the auto tubes. if you are going to use filters then use decent ones like Raynox, the glass quality on the cheap ebay ones is going to leave you rather dissapointed with IQ imo.

 

[Daysleeper40]

You would be better off using tubes although a decent auto set ain't cheap now, although I believe there is now a cheap copy of the auto tubes. if you are going to use filters then use decent ones like Raynox, the glass quality on the cheap ebay ones is going to leave you rather dissapointed with IQ imo.

I should have said - I've never tried extension tubes but as Scraggs said I think you would be looking at more money than with the filters.

 

[Alan Neilson]

Not used filters, so can't really comment on them but have used tubes. Mine are Jessops ones and work fine with on my 5D used them with Tamron 90mm and Canon 50mm. The quality I think should be better using tubes and you will be able to get closer. Although they are more expensive I would go for tubes. If you not sure macro is for you then try with filters then see where you want to go from there.

 

[patrickeaton]

I have used Kenko tubes and close up filter type lens converters by Tiffen. The primary advantage of the tubes is no glass which removes the risk of deterioration to image quality that may occur using the converters. Budget is possibly a consideration but the tubes are not that expensive. So my vote is tubes.

 

[chris321]

Go for the tubes, a bit more expensive but you're just putting air in between the lens and the camera, instead of cheap and nasty glass that will deteriorate the image!

 

[Violet1991]

Thanks all, very helpful, Tubes it will be

Vi x

 

[HoppyUK]

Thanks all, very helpful, Tubes it will be

Vi x

Tubes are better, but when you say cheap ebay ones, don't get the very cheap manual-only ones as it's a right faff to change the lens aperture - it will drive you mad.

For forty quid, you can't beat the Raynox.