Close-up lens?

Teko · 03-03-2007, 07:14 AM

Hi everybody,

I want to get some close-up lens to use MACRO, I have DA 50-200 and M 50mm F/1.7... one is 52mm and another is 49mm.

Which is more practical for MACRO use? 49mm or 52mm? 50-200 hs more zoom capacity and auto focus, 50mm is a faster lens with F/1.7...

Also any good brand recommandation? I've heart people use Canon 250D closeup lens with 50-200 and great result. I also saw Hoya 49mm for 35$ on ebay.

Thx a lot...

MPrince · 03-03-2007, 07:28 AM

I don't think the filter thread diameter has any relevance here, but I could be wrong. I have a set of 58mm close-up lenses. I use a step-up ring to use them with my smaller diameter lenses.

I have gotten good results with my DA18-55 lens and my M 50mm 1.4 lens, but have not gotten good results with my DA 50-200. Haven't worked at it too hard yet, though.

FotoPete · 03-03-2007, 09:04 AM

The DA50-200mm has a minimum focusing distance of like a little over a metre so its going to be a bit had to do macro shots.

If you really wanted a quick macro solution, get a 49mm reverse ring for your 50/1.7. they only cost like $5-10 on ebay.

roy · 03-03-2007, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by FotoPete

The DA50-200mm has a minimum focusing distance of like a little over a metre so its going to be a bit had to do macro shots.

If you really wanted a quick macro solution, get a 49mm reverse ring for your 50/1.7. they only cost like $5-10 on ebay.

or make one with a twist in body cap and ring.
f1.7 is rather useless when doing macros. you want DOF so smaller apertures are wanted. i've got a set of hoya's +!,+2,+3 if you want them.

Teko · 03-04-2007, 01:50 PM

roy: for what size? 49mm or 52mm?

I never like the idea of reverse ring...

I guess I will go with closeup lens with 50-200...

roy · 03-04-2007, 03:12 PM

they are 62mm. i got them large so i could use them on different lenses. you'll need a stepup ring to use them and i'd suggest a 62mm lens hood. you're in canada tho so postage is higher.

Rolly · 03-04-2007, 11:08 PM

It all depends (as usual) on what you want to achieve, where, when and how.
For an easy to use 'quick fix', supplimentary lenses that screw onto the filter threads can be quite good but they will degrade the image due to the increased number of reflecting surfaces and will usually produce distortion and softness at the edges, especially at wider apertures.
In the field my preference was for extension tubes which are mounted between the lens and camera body. They are relatively robust, do not interfere with the light path and can be bought with fully automatic coupling.
They are limited in that they come in fixed distances and therefore some manipulation of the lens to subject distance (moving the whole outfit to and fro) might be neccessary.
For studio work, the bellows extention, fitted between lens and body, is the ultimate. These can be combined in series or with other tubes/rings to produce extreme magnifications.
N.B. Where the lens to film/sensor plane distance becomes greater than the lens to subject distance reversing the lens by means of an adapter makes the most of the lens design. i.e. The lens is designed to have the film/sensor close by and the subject some greater distance away. This reversing usually requires that you go completely 'manual'.
Lighting and exposure is most often a case of trial and error althought there are formulae for calculating them. As always, I suggest hunting down the relevant topic in your local library or elsewhere.
As I mentioned in a comment in a previous thread, chilling/freezing subjects like flies and insects can gain you time to make adjustments before they re-animate and buzz off. The old plastic film canisters made excellent containers for this purpose.
I hope that this helps a little

Ciao 4 Nao

Rolly

roentarre · 03-04-2007, 11:19 PM

Close up filters or lenses would require aperture stopping down to at least f8 to get sharper images. Image quality does compromise to an extent, worse than what you get with extension tubes

Examples of failed shost from 2+ filters ...

Shot with Fa 77 ltd f2.0 - doesn't this shot look a bit dizzy

Then stopping down to f9.5

Rolly · 03-04-2007, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by roentarre

Close up filters or lenses would require aperture stopping down to at least f8 to get sharper images. Image quality does compromise to an extent, worse than what you get with extension tubes

Examples of failed shost from 2+ filters ...

Shot with Fa 77 ltd f2.0 - doesn't this shot look a bit dizzy

Yea, indeed, but what an opportunity to use abberrations like this to creative effect.
I must have a bit of a play with this sometime.

roentarre · 03-05-2007, 02:10 AM

Originally posted by Rolly

Yea, indeed, but what an opportunity to use abberrations like this to creative effect.
I must have a bit of a play with this sometime.

Yeah, it could be fun but hard to predict the quality of the shots with filters.

Somehow I love close up filter 3+ the most since it gives a lot of unpredictable results. Close up filters are quite cheap anyway and they tend to give the effect of a soft focus lens

GLThorne · 03-09-2007, 11:36 AM

Some say that a $40 kit of close up filters can in no way match that of a true macro lens. I say, that if you can use them and make them look good, who cares!

All three of these come from the 18-55mm kit lens and a hoya +4 filter at F5.6. The 3rd one was actually taken at the first of the series but the wind was blowing a bit much so I popped up the built in and strapped on the diffuser panel and shot the rest.

03-03-2007, 07:14 AM	#1
Teko Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montreal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 67	Close-up lens? Hi everybody, I want to get some close-up lens to use MACRO, I have DA 50-200 and M 50mm F/1.7... one is 52mm and another is 49mm. Which is more practical for MACRO use? 49mm or 52mm? 50-200 hs more zoom capacity and auto focus, 50mm is a faster lens with F/1.7... Also any good brand recommandation? I've heart people use Canon 250D closeup lens with 50-200 and great result. I also saw Hoya 49mm for 35$ on ebay. Thx a lot...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Close-up lens	elandel	Photographic Technique	9	04-25-2011 01:13 PM
Close Up Lens	CateKerr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	04-23-2011 03:49 PM
S25 close up lens	jolepp	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	12-16-2010 08:32 AM
Close-up lens	rodneysan	Pentax Medium Format	11	06-01-2010 03:59 PM
Close up lens for a K1000?	RottenLuck	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	02-06-2010 11:44 AM

03-03-2007, 07:28 AM	#2
MPrince Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: WV Posts: 1,495	I don't think the filter thread diameter has any relevance here, but I could be wrong. I have a set of 58mm close-up lenses. I use a step-up ring to use them with my smaller diameter lenses. I have gotten good results with my DA18-55 lens and my M 50mm 1.4 lens, but have not gotten good results with my DA 50-200. Haven't worked at it too hard yet, though.

03-03-2007, 09:04 AM	#3
FotoPete Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,774	The DA50-200mm has a minimum focusing distance of like a little over a metre so its going to be a bit had to do macro shots. If you really wanted a quick macro solution, get a 49mm reverse ring for your 50/1.7. they only cost like $5-10 on ebay.

03-03-2007, 09:53 AM	#4
roy Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: D/FW area, Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,712	Originally posted by FotoPete The DA50-200mm has a minimum focusing distance of like a little over a metre so its going to be a bit had to do macro shots. If you really wanted a quick macro solution, get a 49mm reverse ring for your 50/1.7. they only cost like $5-10 on ebay. or make one with a twist in body cap and ring. f1.7 is rather useless when doing macros. you want DOF so smaller apertures are wanted. i've got a set of hoya's +!,+2,+3 if you want them.

03-04-2007, 01:50 PM	#5
Teko Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montreal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 67 Original Poster	roy: for what size? 49mm or 52mm? I never like the idea of reverse ring... I guess I will go with closeup lens with 50-200...

03-04-2007, 03:12 PM	#6
roy Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: D/FW area, Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,712	they are 62mm. i got them large so i could use them on different lenses. you'll need a stepup ring to use them and i'd suggest a 62mm lens hood. you're in canada tho so postage is higher.

03-04-2007, 11:08 PM	#7
Rolly Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 295	It all depends (as usual) on what you want to achieve, where, when and how. For an easy to use 'quick fix', supplimentary lenses that screw onto the filter threads can be quite good but they will degrade the image due to the increased number of reflecting surfaces and will usually produce distortion and softness at the edges, especially at wider apertures. In the field my preference was for extension tubes which are mounted between the lens and camera body. They are relatively robust, do not interfere with the light path and can be bought with fully automatic coupling. They are limited in that they come in fixed distances and therefore some manipulation of the lens to subject distance (moving the whole outfit to and fro) might be neccessary. For studio work, the bellows extention, fitted between lens and body, is the ultimate. These can be combined in series or with other tubes/rings to produce extreme magnifications. N.B. Where the lens to film/sensor plane distance becomes greater than the lens to subject distance reversing the lens by means of an adapter makes the most of the lens design. i.e. The lens is designed to have the film/sensor close by and the subject some greater distance away. This reversing usually requires that you go completely 'manual'. Lighting and exposure is most often a case of trial and error althought there are formulae for calculating them. As always, I suggest hunting down the relevant topic in your local library or elsewhere. As I mentioned in a comment in a previous thread, chilling/freezing subjects like flies and insects can gain you time to make adjustments before they re-animate and buzz off. The old plastic film canisters made excellent containers for this purpose. I hope that this helps a little Ciao 4 Nao Rolly

03-04-2007, 11:19 PM	#8
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,788	Close up filters or lenses would require aperture stopping down to at least f8 to get sharper images. Image quality does compromise to an extent, worse than what you get with extension tubes Examples of failed shost from 2+ filters ... Shot with Fa 77 ltd f2.0 - doesn't this shot look a bit dizzy Then stopping down to f9.5

03-04-2007, 11:27 PM	#9
Rolly Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 295	Originally posted by roentarre Close up filters or lenses would require aperture stopping down to at least f8 to get sharper images. Image quality does compromise to an extent, worse than what you get with extension tubes Examples of failed shost from 2+ filters ... Shot with Fa 77 ltd f2.0 - doesn't this shot look a bit dizzy Yea, indeed, but what an opportunity to use abberrations like this to creative effect. I must have a bit of a play with this sometime.

03-05-2007, 02:10 AM	#10
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,788	Originally posted by Rolly Yea, indeed, but what an opportunity to use abberrations like this to creative effect. I must have a bit of a play with this sometime. Yeah, it could be fun but hard to predict the quality of the shots with filters. Somehow I love close up filter 3+ the most since it gives a lot of unpredictable results. Close up filters are quite cheap anyway and they tend to give the effect of a soft focus lens

03-09-2007, 11:36 AM	#11
GLThorne Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA - South Carolina Photos: Gallery Posts: 373	Some say that a $40 kit of close up filters can in no way match that of a true macro lens. I say, that if you can use them and make them look good, who cares! All three of these come from the 18-55mm kit lens and a hoya +4 filter at F5.6. The 3rd one was actually taken at the first of the series but the wind was blowing a bit much so I popped up the built in and strapped on the diffuser panel and shot the rest.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search