Raynox or Hoya +10 on the DA40 or Helios?

[K206]

I would like to get a close up filter/lens to dabble in macro.

I have seen some pretty good results from the Raynox 250 paired with the DA 40 (from Igilligan I believe). My only concern would be ease of use while taking on and off and using step up/down rings.

However, has anyone compared the quality/magnification of the Raynox to the Hoya +10? I could get it in 49mm and simply screw it on the DA 40. However, I am having difficulty determining which would provide better overall performance (measured by quality and amount of magnification).

In addition, I would likely to be using one of these on either the DA 40mm or the Helios 44k-4. So anyone have any experience with the Raynox on the Helios or the Hoya +10 (or +1,+2,+4 or any combination thereof) on either the DA 40 or the Helios?

The Raynox would likely give me flexibility for both lenses (if indeed the Helios provides decent macro performance). But if the DA 40 would be better anyway, then perhaps if the Hoya +10 is decent it would be the better choice for ease of use/lack of step up ring?

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance...

[indytax]

I haven't used the Hoya close-up filter, but I have used the Raynox 150 (just less magnification than the 250). I chose the Raynox over the virtually universal opinion that the Raynox lens gives better IQ than close-up filters. I would not recommend using multiple close-up filters at the same time as you're just multiplying the image degradation.

Plus, the Raynox is extremely easy to use with multiple lenses due to the clip-on attachment that it comes with (it will fit on some 49mm diameter lenses by screwing the adapter onto the lens instead of clipping it on, or you could go the step-up ring route, too--I've done both with a 49mm diameter lens & I find clipping the Raynox adapter onto a step up ring to be easier than screwing on the plastic adapter directly to the lens). It seems to me that the Hoya is the more difficult operation with the need for multiple step-up or -down rings for different lenses.

From purely a image quality standpoint, however, the Raynox is way to go. Others will undoubtedly cime in about the magnification details.

[imtheguy]

I made the mistake of dabbling in macro by starting with the close up lens. Not a Hoya +10 in fact it was less than half that power. But the IQ lost already compared to the Raynox I bought the next week was sobering. I own 2 close up filters; one came with a lens i bought. Neither is good for anything other than skipping across the lake. Please go with the Raynox.

[flippedgazelle]

Originally Posted by K206

I would like to get a close up filter/lens to dabble in macro.

I have seen some pretty good results from the Raynox 250 paired with the DA 40 (from Igilligan I believe). My only concern would be ease of use while taking on and off and using step up/down rings.

However, has anyone compared the quality/magnification of the Raynox to the Hoya +10? I could get it in 49mm and simply screw it on the DA 40. However, I am having difficulty determining which would provide better overall performance (measured by quality and amount of magnification).

In addition, I would likely to be using one of these on either the DA 40mm or the Helios 44k-4. So anyone have any experience with the Raynox on the Helios or the Hoya +10 (or +1,+2,+4 or any combination thereof) on either the DA 40 or the Helios?

The Raynox would likely give me flexibility for both lenses (if indeed the Helios provides decent macro performance). But if the DA 40 would be better anyway, then perhaps if the Hoya +10 is decent it would be the better choice for ease of use/lack of step up ring?

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance...

With the Raynox, you wouldn't need to use any step-up rings; it comes with a "universal adapter".

[ivoire]

I use the raynox 150 with the da40. works very well with the adapter but it is a tight fit.

[Marc Sabatella]

Or, you could get an appropriate stepping ring and just leave it permanently attached to the Raynox, so it will screw on simply just like the Hoya. That's what I do. It means I can only use it with 49mm filter lenses, but since that's virtually all I use (15, 28, 40, 50, 70, 100, 135), that's fine by me. I do have a 49-52 stepping ring also so I can mount it to my 52mm lenses should I ever wish to. But thering I leave attached to the Raynox is far less bulky, and easier for my to deal with, than the clip-on adapter it comes with.

[SOldBear]

If you prefer to screw in the Raynox to the filter thread of the lens (not using the supplied universal adapter), buy step-down rings (from whatever to 43mm). I have a 49-43 and a 52-43 ring for this purpose.

[wallyb]

Am I crazy or wouldn't it just be best to get an extension tube? No interfering optics?

[Aristophanes]

Originally Posted by indytax

I haven't used the Hoya close-up filter, but I have used the Raynox 150 (just less magnification than the 250). I chose the Raynox over the virtually universal opinion that the Raynox lens gives better IQ than close-up filters. I would not recommend using multiple close-up filters at the same time as you're just multiplying the image degradation.

Plus, the Raynox is extremely easy to use with multiple lenses due to the clip-on attachment that it comes with (it will fit on some 49mm diameter lenses by screwing the adapter onto the lens instead of clipping it on, or you could go the step-up ring route, too--I've done both with a 49mm diameter lens & I find clipping the Raynox adapter onto a step up ring to be easier than screwing on the plastic adapter directly to the lens). It seems to me that the Hoya is the more difficult operation with the need for multiple step-up or -down rings for different lenses.

From purely a image quality standpoint, however, the Raynox is way to go. Others will undoubtedly cime in about the magnification details.

I disagree. Choose neither the Raynox nor the Hoya.

The Raynox pales in comparison to the Canon 250 or 500D close-up lens. The" D" glass is far superior to the Raynox or any other similar close-up adapter:

Canon 500D close-up - Adorama.com

Highly recommended by Bryan Peterson, Scott Kelby, amongst others:

YouTube - Taking great pictures using close-up lens with Bryan Peterson

They have the same issue with stepping up or down using a variety of lenses, unless you buy one for each size filter thread. But the whole point of matching to filter size is to correlate with the actual lens elements for better optical quality.

[Abbazz]

Originally Posted by Aristophanes

I disagree. Choose neither the Raynox nor the Hoya.

The Raynox pales in comparison to the Canon 250 or 500D close-up lens. The" D" glass is far superior to the Raynox or any other similar close-up adapter:

Canon 500D close-up - Adorama.com

Highly recommended by Bryan Peterson, Scott Kelby, amongst others:

YouTube - Taking great pictures using close-up lens with Bryan Peterson

They have the same issue with stepping up or down using a variety of lenses, unless you buy one for each size filter thread. But the whole point of matching to filter size is to correlate with the actual lens elements for better optical quality.

As you say, the Canon doesn't come with a nice universal adapter as the Raynox, requiring the user to buy a close-up lens for every filter diameter. Optically, the Canon is a simple two element achromat, while the Raynox is a three element unit offering better correction over the whole field: the Canon is excellent stopped down but still a step down compared to the the Raynox at full aperture, where the Raynox is sharper in the corners with less chromatic aberrations.

Cheers!

Abbazz

[rparmar]

Originally Posted by imtheguy

I own 2 close up filters; one came with a lens i bought. Neither is good for anything other than skipping across the lake.

While I am sure the Raynox is superior, I have to mention that not all experiences are this negative. This is the FA77 with a simple screw-in adapter. Hand-held to boot.


sweet blue nectar

[flippedgazelle]

Originally Posted by rparmar

While I am sure the Raynox is superior, I have to mention that not all experiences are this negative. This is the FA77 with a simple screw-in adapter. Hand-held to boot.

Looks decent enough to me. Pretty shot.

[flippedgazelle]

Originally Posted by Aristophanes

I disagree. Choose neither the Raynox nor the Hoya.

The Raynox pales in comparison to the Canon 250 or 500D close-up lens. The" D" glass is far superior to the Raynox or any other similar close-up adapter:

Canon 500D close-up - Adorama.com

Highly recommended by Bryan Peterson, Scott Kelby, amongst others:

YouTube - Taking great pictures using close-up lens with Bryan Peterson

They have the same issue with stepping up or down using a variety of lenses, unless you buy one for each size filter thread. But the whole point of matching to filter size is to correlate with the actual lens elements for better optical quality.

Have you actually compared them? From what I've read online, the 500D dpoesn't appear to be any better than the Raynox. But I haven't seen any samples.

[wallyb]

Has everyone forgotten what an extension tube does?

[Eric L]

It just so happens I tried a Hoya 4+ on my DA40 this morning to see if it would be sufficient for casual macros while hiking. Since I only paid $5 for a set of 4, I think the results are OK given the cost. Photo is cropped and reduce x2 for the web, handheld.



Eric