Some Macro lens advice

Praestigium · 06-11-2010, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by dantuyhoa

Get a Vivitar Series One 105/2.5 Macro .

oicwutudidthar

NeverSatisfied · 06-12-2010, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

"Good" working is a relative term. If you want more than 1:1, you're dealing with inches. How many inches depends on focal length - 1:1 at 200mm is achieved at a much longer working distance than 1:1 at 50mm. So the longer the focal length the better as far as that goes. But you're still going to need skill and patience, as we're talking a matter of maybe 6-8 inches for 1:1 at 200mm, versus maybe 1-2 inches for 1:1 at 50mm.

That's a nice thing about the use of a closeup lens like the Raynox (and reversing stacks are similar in principle, I guess - just a lot more awkward to deal with). Unlike extension tubes, they provide more magnification with longer focal lengths. So if you've already got a 200mm lens, any attachment that makes it 1:1 means you'll have a "decent" working distance by macro standards. Whereas trying to achieve the same magnification starting with a 50mm lens means much smaller working distances.

The DA*300 has a much closer minimum focus distance than some of the older Pentax 300mm lenses. I like this lens a lot and it with just a little cropping it can give pretty good results, but it's not really "macro". What do you think of a Raynox 250 on this lens?

Meanwhile, a lot of my lenses (including the wonderful D-FA 100 WR Macro) have no aperture ring and of course Kenko no longer makes their auto extension tubes in Pentax mount. (Why???

) BUT, I think I've found an uber-cheap solution, just ordered a 49mm-49mm reversing ring for about $5. I'll be trying the F50/1.7 and FA35/2, reversed on the D-FA 100. Can't wait to try that!

So what is the opinion about the 300 + Raynox? I'm just thinking it would offer very good working distance...

NeverSatisfied · 06-12-2010, 09:06 AM

Hey what about reversing either the F50 or FA35 on the DA*300?

Whaddya think? I've got enough step-up rings, might vignette like crazy though (49 up to 77!).

SOldBear · 06-12-2010, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by NeverSatisfied

So what is the opinion about the 300 + Raynox? I'm just thinking it would offer very good working distance...

Don't know about 300 + Raynox.

But here's a test photo of DA* 60-250 (at 250) + Raynox 250. The pencil lead on the left is 5mm. Distance is about 3 ft.

For comparison, here's a 1:1 photo from the Sigma 50mm macro. Distance is about 3 in.

Last edited by SOldBear; 06-12-2010 at 10:47 AM.

NeverSatisfied · 06-12-2010, 02:02 PM

Hhmm, that 60-250 + Raynox looks pretty good! Thanks SOldBear. Do you use that combo much?

Oh,,, after a search I see the Raynox only accomodates up to 67mm filter diameter. Too bad.

newarts · 06-12-2010, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by Praestigium

........
@Marc: I think I've finally grasped what the Raynox does. Assuming I invest in a macro lens, it would be wiser to grab/use extension tubes instead of the Raynox on it?..............

The problem with the Raynox is that it destroys sharpness at the edges. There's a circular area with diameter equal to the height of the frame in excellent focus, but the perimeter is quite soft. Here's an example with a Tamron 90:

Without the Raynox the image is sharp at the edges - trust me, I didn't want to burn the bandwidth width to show you.

This often doesn't matter at all unless you are shooting really flat subjects like stamps or integrated circuits. For life macros of 3D subjects the edges seldom matter because the DOF is so shallow.

Dave

PS I don't mean to dissuade you from getting a Raynox. I use the DCR 150 with my DA 55-300 more than my fine macro lenses.... Plus it is so easy to carry in one's kit! The working distance of 8" is pretty good.

newarts · 06-12-2010, 04:50 PM

Simply reversing the DA 18-55 kit lens does a creditable job with macros. You can take control of the aperture by slipping a small PVC or rubber tube over the aperture lever - friction with the lever shield will hold the aperture lever in place.

Dave in Iowa

PS "clearance" = working distance

RioRico · 06-12-2010, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by NeverSatisfied

Oh,,, after a search I see the Raynox only accomodates up to 67mm filter diameter. Too bad.

Think, STEP-DOWN RING (~US$5).

NeverSatisfied · 06-12-2010, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

Think, STEP-DOWN RING (~US$5).

Hey why not!? If I was gonna try to reverse an F50 (49mm) onto my 300, stepping down from 77mm to 67 is certainly worth a try!

(Already have that ring, too!) Thanks!

Praestigium · 06-12-2010, 07:41 PM

Ok guys just to clarify guys, I want to buy a reverse ring for my two lenses.

The Pentax 18 - 55 has no aperture ring and is 52mm

The Sigma 28 - 90 has an aperture ring and is 55mm (it also has a macro "switch" on the lens)

What measurements should the reverse ring be and which lens should I make the primary?

Thanks!

yeatzee · 06-12-2010, 07:46 PM

Keep in mind, you will probably be disappointed IQ wise using sub par zooms for reversing

Praestigium · 06-12-2010, 07:53 PM

What do you suggest then? Buy a true macro lens and then go about using a reverse ring?

yeatzee · 06-12-2010, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by Praestigium

What do you suggest then? Buy a true macro lens and then go about using a reverse ring?

Its all about primes

If you plan on only reversing that buy some cheap primes or just one prime and some manual extension tubes.

Praestigium · 06-12-2010, 08:10 PM

Understood!

Any recommendations? I have a $300 budget :S

yeatzee · 06-12-2010, 08:26 PM

if i were you, i would get my feet wet with a K/M 50mm F/1.8/F/1.7 and M/K 28mm F/2.8/F/3.5 and some extension tubes. These shouldn't cost you much and will give you a wide variety of magnification possibilities.

These primes are essential in everyday shooting and work great as reversed primes for macro also.

06-12-2010, 09:01 AM	#32
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella "Good" working is a relative term. If you want more than 1:1, you're dealing with inches. How many inches depends on focal length - 1:1 at 200mm is achieved at a much longer working distance than 1:1 at 50mm. So the longer the focal length the better as far as that goes. But you're still going to need skill and patience, as we're talking a matter of maybe 6-8 inches for 1:1 at 200mm, versus maybe 1-2 inches for 1:1 at 50mm. That's a nice thing about the use of a closeup lens like the Raynox (and reversing stacks are similar in principle, I guess - just a lot more awkward to deal with). Unlike extension tubes, they provide more magnification with longer focal lengths. So if you've already got a 200mm lens, any attachment that makes it 1:1 means you'll have a "decent" working distance by macro standards. Whereas trying to achieve the same magnification starting with a 50mm lens means much smaller working distances. The DA*300 has a much closer minimum focus distance than some of the older Pentax 300mm lenses. I like this lens a lot and it with just a little cropping it can give pretty good results, but it's not really "macro". What do you think of a Raynox 250 on this lens? Meanwhile, a lot of my lenses (including the wonderful D-FA 100 WR Macro) have no aperture ring and of course Kenko no longer makes their auto extension tubes in Pentax mount. (Why???) BUT, I think I've found an uber-cheap solution, just ordered a 49mm-49mm reversing ring for about $5. I'll be trying the F50/1.7 and FA35/2, reversed on the D-FA 100. Can't wait to try that! So what is the opinion about the 300 + Raynox? I'm just thinking it would offer very good working distance...

06-12-2010, 09:06 AM	#33
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	One more idea! Hey what about reversing either the F50 or FA35 on the DA*300? Whaddya think? I've got enough step-up rings, might vignette like crazy though (49 up to 77!).

06-12-2010, 02:02 PM	#35
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	Hhmm, that 60-250 + Raynox looks pretty good! Thanks SOldBear. Do you use that combo much? Oh,,, after a search I see the Raynox only accomodates up to 67mm filter diameter. Too bad. Last edited by NeverSatisfied; 06-12-2010 at 03:50 PM.

06-12-2010, 04:43 PM	#36
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	Originally posted by Praestigium ........ @Marc: I think I've finally grasped what the Raynox does. Assuming I invest in a macro lens, it would be wiser to grab/use extension tubes instead of the Raynox on it?.............. The problem with the Raynox is that it destroys sharpness at the edges. There's a circular area with diameter equal to the height of the frame in excellent focus, but the perimeter is quite soft. Here's an example with a Tamron 90: Without the Raynox the image is sharp at the edges - trust me, I didn't want to burn the bandwidth width to show you. This often doesn't matter at all unless you are shooting really flat subjects like stamps or integrated circuits. For life macros of 3D subjects the edges seldom matter because the DOF is so shallow. Dave PS I don't mean to dissuade you from getting a Raynox. I use the DCR 150 with my DA 55-300 more than my fine macro lenses.... Plus it is so easy to carry in one's kit! The working distance of 8" is pretty good. Last edited by newarts; 06-12-2010 at 04:54 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Thinking on a new Macro lens. Advice?	Ouroboros	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	04-15-2010 05:04 PM
Please advice (macro lens)	Recercare	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	02-19-2010 10:30 AM
Advice on a macro lens please (Australia)	Just Me	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	01-04-2010 05:11 AM
Advice on Macro lens	Misty	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	03-04-2009 03:46 PM
Getting a macro lens and could use advice.	dws1117	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	06-15-2008 06:53 PM

06-11-2010, 08:04 PM	#31
Praestigium Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 139 Original Poster	Originally posted by dantuyhoa Get a Vivitar Series One 105/2.5 Macro . oicwutudidthar

06-12-2010, 10:41 AM	#34
SOldBear Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Alameda, CA Posts: 3,206	Originally posted by NeverSatisfied So what is the opinion about the 300 + Raynox? I'm just thinking it would offer very good working distance... Don't know about 300 + Raynox. But here's a test photo of DA* 60-250 (at 250) + Raynox 250. The pencil lead on the left is 5mm. Distance is about 3 ft. For comparison, here's a 1:1 photo from the Sigma 50mm macro. Distance is about 3 in. Last edited by SOldBear; 06-12-2010 at 10:47 AM.

06-12-2010, 04:50 PM	#37
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	Simply reversing the DA 18-55 kit lens does a creditable job with macros. You can take control of the aperture by slipping a small PVC or rubber tube over the aperture lever - friction with the lever shield will hold the aperture lever in place. Dave in Iowa PS "clearance" = working distance

06-12-2010, 04:54 PM	#38
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by NeverSatisfied Oh,,, after a search I see the Raynox only accomodates up to 67mm filter diameter. Too bad. Think, STEP-DOWN RING (~US$5).

06-12-2010, 06:55 PM	#39
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	Originally posted by RioRico Think, STEP-DOWN RING (~US$5). Hey why not!? If I was gonna try to reverse an F50 (49mm) onto my 300, stepping down from 77mm to 67 is certainly worth a try! (Already have that ring, too!) Thanks!

06-12-2010, 07:41 PM	#40
Praestigium Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 139 Original Poster	Ok guys just to clarify guys, I want to buy a reverse ring for my two lenses. The Pentax 18 - 55 has no aperture ring and is 52mm The Sigma 28 - 90 has an aperture ring and is 55mm (it also has a macro "switch" on the lens) What measurements should the reverse ring be and which lens should I make the primary? Thanks!

06-12-2010, 07:46 PM	#41
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Keep in mind, you will probably be disappointed IQ wise using sub par zooms for reversing

06-12-2010, 07:53 PM	#42
Praestigium Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 139 Original Poster	What do you suggest then? Buy a true macro lens and then go about using a reverse ring?

06-12-2010, 08:00 PM	#43
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Praestigium What do you suggest then? Buy a true macro lens and then go about using a reverse ring? Its all about primes If you plan on only reversing that buy some cheap primes or just one prime and some manual extension tubes.

06-12-2010, 08:10 PM	#44
Praestigium Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 139 Original Poster	Understood! Any recommendations? I have a $300 budget :S

06-12-2010, 08:26 PM	#45
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	if i were you, i would get my feet wet with a K/M 50mm F/1.8/F/1.7 and M/K 28mm F/2.8/F/3.5 and some extension tubes. These shouldn't cost you much and will give you a wide variety of magnification possibilities. These primes are essential in everyday shooting and work great as reversed primes for macro also.