Question (Macro)

mattchewone

mattchewone

Suspended / Banned
Messages
884
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Guys & Gals,

I am wanting to do some macro shots, of insects, plants etc. But I dont have a lot of ££ to spend on a new lens, whats the best way to do it for less than £100?

I currently have a Canon 17-85mm IS, Canon 50mm 1.8, and a Sigma 70-300mm.

I want to be able to take a picture of an insect and it fill the shot, I cant get close enough with any of the lenses I have. Any suggestions would be very much appreciated.

Regards
 
Not familiar with the Canon lineup but there's three routes you can go that won't cost you as much as a lens.

Option 1: Extension Tubes - These go between lens and camera body and reduce the minimum focus distance at the expense of infinity focus. Kenko is the go-to brand typically. Be aware that some extension tubes maintain the electrical contacts (and so AF and metering) whilst others require manual operation.

Option 2: Reversing ring - This allows you to mount a lens backwards and will get you really close. Similar to extension rings, check for electrical connections for metering.

Option 3: Close-up/Macro Filters - These attach to the end of your lens like any other screw in filter and have a magnification effect. Probably your cheapest option but also going to do the most harm to image quality.

I'd go for option 1 or 2. Perhaps give them both a google, do a little reading and see which suits you and your lenses best :)
 
Thank you, what lens would you say would be the best option to use?

Regards
 
I agree with Roly. I think your best bet for either extension tubes or a reversing ring is to use them with your 50mm lens.
 
TriggerHappy said:
Option 3: Close-up/Macro Filters - These attach to the end of your lens like any other screw in filter and have a magnification effect. Probably your cheapest option but also going to do the most harm to image quality.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree most strongly with your comment re the quality of "close-up filters". - actually supplementary close-up lenses (SCLs).

By using good quality SCLs - especially achromatic ones, the quality will be better than using extension rings, because the light path through the lens will be nearer that which it is designed for. I speak from practical experience of using SCLs for many years, as well as extension tubes, bellows and dedicated macro lenses.

Reversing adapters certainly work well, but unless they are of sophisticated design - with transfer of electrical contacts, you lose all the automatic features of your lens.
 
Somelier said:
I have to disagree most strongly with your comment re the quality of "close-up filters". - actually supplementary close-up lenses (SCLs).

By using good quality SCLs - especially achromatic ones, the quality will be better than using extension rings, because the light path through the lens will be nearer that which it is designed for. I speak from practical experience of using SCLs for many years, as well as extension tubes, bellows and dedicated macro lenses.

Reversing adapters certainly work well, but unless they are of sophisticated design - with transfer of electrical contacts, you lose all the automatic features of your lens.
Click to expand...

So which would you suggest, extension tubes or SCL's?

Many Thanks for all of your responses
 
I use a Raynox DCR-250. Cheap piece of kit for starting out !! £43 on amazon. :)
 
the raynox dcr-250 is ok, used it a few times on my old D60, however, it won't fit on the FF lenses of the D700. :(
 
Been reading a few reviews from searching raynox vs ext tubes and it seems to be people sway more towards tubes as they give better IQ.

Is this true?
 
If you are serious about macro then stop trying to find the 'bargain option'. Honestly - save your pennies and buy a 1:1 macro lens, I highly recommend the Tamron 90mm

shot hand held with flash

Butterfly-Farm-Stratford-18-06-L.jpg


Butterfly-Farm-Stratford-18-06-L.jpg


Butterfly-Farm-Stratford-18-06-L.jpg


Be the best bit of glass you buy for a long time, my wife uses her 90 for racing as well - Metzler 1000 Superstock # 3 John McGuiness Brands Hatch last year

964897249_CtdBU-L.jpg


# 66 Tom Sykes
964900935_3PZFj-L.jpg


.DAVID.
 
Last edited:
The raynox series are good but I would prefer extension tubes as these will work with most, if not all, of your lenses and would not be limited to the ring size of the lens.

Following is with the Canon 135mm + 62mm of tubes:

5808850038_cca3aa9229_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
mattchewone said:
Thank you, what lens was used for those shots in your Flickr?

That looks very impressive! Would you say this is better than a set of extension tubes?
Click to expand...

That's not my Flickr - it's the DCR-250 pool. Raynox will work on all the lenses you listed, probably best around 100-200mm.

Tubes usually give better image quality, but as you can see the Raynox can be pretty good, especially at higher f/numbers which you will want to use anyway to get decent depth of field.

Tubes cost two or three times the price.

Harvey_nikon said:
the raynox dcr-250 is ok, used it a few times on my old D60, however, it won't fit on the FF lenses of the D700. :(
Click to expand...

Raynox works on most lenses from about 50mm upwards. If the adapter isn't big enough, use a stepping ring.
 
but that's just more expense, personally, rather save the money and move towards the proper macro lens.

Is 1:1 the best macro lens you can get?
 
hmmmm, but if you make a living out of them it would be a good investment, even with a canon to nikon converter :D
 
Unfortunately it's not something I can afford to save for.

I only have a bit of cash from my birthday which I can splash and am looking for something to take a few exciting macro shots.

After seeing shots of both I'm not to sure which will better, will I be able to use either a kenko or raynox on my 17-85mm lens as this is my best lens. I find my sigma quite soft and very slow it always hunts.

Thank you all so far!
 
mattchewone said:
Unfortunately it's not something I can afford to save for.

I only have a bit of cash from my birthday which I can splash and am looking for something to take a few exciting macro shots.

After seeing shots of both I'm not to sure which will better, will I be able to use either a kenko or raynox on my 17-85mm lens as this is my best lens. I find my sigma quite soft and very slow it always hunts.

Thank you all so far!
Click to expand...

I may be incorrect in this but I think the 17-85 will only work with the raynox as kenko tubes are EF mount and the 17-85 is an EF-S mount lens...

Matt
MWHCVT
 
mattchewone said:
After seeing shots of both I'm not to sure which will better, will I be able to use either a kenko or raynox on my 17-85mm lens as this is my best lens. I find my sigma quite soft and very slow it always hunts.
Click to expand...

Don't worry about it being slow to focus. You'll want to use manual focus for macro anyway, so a fast autofocus isn't an issue.

With regard to softness, and whilst I've not used the Sigma lens, my Canon 70-300 seems to give quite soft results when used 'normally', but with the Raynox I manage pretty sharp results. I agree with Hoppy that it works best between 100 and 200mm. EDIT: Lots of Raynox shots in my Flickr link below, if you want a look.

I can't comment on the merits of extension tubes or reversing rings etc, having never used them.
 
Last edited:
I think I'm going to try the raynox as I can use it with all my lenses and can always invest in some second hand extension tubes later if needs be.

Just out of interest could you use tubes and the raynox?
 
mattchewone said:
Just out of interest could you use tubes and the raynox?
Click to expand...

In theory there's no reason why not, just keep in mind that the more you stack these things up the more they will inevitably amplify the loss of image quality.
 
mattchewone said:
Unfortunately it's not something I can afford to save for.

I only have a bit of cash from my birthday which I can splash and am looking for something to take a few exciting macro shots.

After seeing shots of both I'm not to sure which will better, will I be able to use either a kenko or raynox on my 17-85mm lens as this is my best lens. I find my sigma quite soft and very slow it always hunts.

Thank you all so far!
Click to expand...

For forty quid, you can't beat the Raynox. It will work fine on the 17-85 at the long end, but try it on your other lenses. The focusing ring doesn't make much difference with these things, but the zoom ring does and gives you a little flexibility on working distance.

Switch the lens to manual focus, as mentioned above - it's much better. Frame up the shot roughly, then move your body back and forth very gentle and watch the sharp zone of focus move across the image. It will be very shallow, so you need to use a higher f/number to get more depth of field.

The upside side of this is your lens will also be sharper when used at f/8-f/11, but this will probably run you into problems with long shutter speeds. Macro is not easy! So try to use good light and bump up the ISO as necessary, or a tripod.

This is why flash is popular for macro, eg ring-flash. You can get something like the Marumi for about £120, but a cheaper alternative might be the new LED ring-lights - I've seen them on Amazon for £30. I don't think they're as bright as flash, but everything helps and of course you can see what you're doing better as they're continuous light. Might be worth looking at.

Edit: you can get EF-S tubes, which have a larger internal baffle to clear the rear of the lens, but you need to check. If they don't say EF-S then they're probably not.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top