Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-29-2010, 10:34 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,679
Question about Raynox options but not as a macro...

I am almost completely sold on getting one or both Raynox whatever you wanna call them, but my lenses are what you see in my sig and basically I only get by with the 43ltd and 77ltd for now. My best money maker lense was my 35ltd which I happily traded for a 43ltd since I "knew" would be able to replace it by mid-January, eh, I was ready this week, or so I thought.

Right now, I need to fill the gap for product shots...my question is obvious and simple...with of these will let me shoot images of objects in the 0.5" to 3" range that will fill the frame? I don't want macro I want to fill the hole in my lineup I created when trading my 35ltd and because of some expenses this past week, my funds I had saved for a new 35ltd are gone for at minimum a month but I cannot be w/o the 35ltd any longer because it was my money maker...I need a stop gap and cash is tights thanks to this weeks surprises...

I have ordered a set of regular close-up filters and since they cost almost nothing and will get here this coming Monday, I figured until I understand the Raynox options better and I need something by yesterday, sooooo, what the heck they were cheap, if they suck, I can use them to fry ants (and I believe I live on SoCal's BIGGEST anthill...hehehehe) or the neighbor's dog when he is crapping in my yard...the dog not the 70yr old cross-dressing Paraguayan who posses said cute but poorly cared for dawggie.

Given the two 55mm's I have, the 43ltd and the 77ltd, can I use either Raynox, the 150 or the 250 to get anywhere close enough for filling the frame with pieces the size I mentioned? I just have not figured out the info on calculating the actual mag ratios for diopters...Marc, forgive me my brother mathematician, but I suck at applied stuff (I dropped physics 3x because I might have gotten a "B" blowing my GPA while STILL learning nothing...yeah, I am that horrid at physics and could not bear to get a grade while not really increasing my understanding)....so any light would be much appreciated...!!

01-30-2010, 10:44 AM   #2
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
so you need something for close-focusing, right?

I think the Raynox would be fine, you cheap basturd !

anyway, careful though, because you must also consider the thin DOF at higher apertures.
01-30-2010, 11:56 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,679
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
so you need something for close-focusing, right?

I think the Raynox would be fine, you cheap basturd !

anyway, careful though, because you must also consider the thin DOF at higher apertures.
OK...who you bean tawking to over cawfee? Or is it the BC Bud?

Right I just want close focusing and the Raynox stuff looks good enough for now, until I have the case in a couple weeks for a new 35ltd. I hear ya bout the DOF though I am a macro shooter for the fun of it, I just have not gotten a macro with a longer working distance that the 35ltd since applying for citizenship in Pentaxistan.

So, the 150 should reduce the minimum WORKING distance, don't care about MFD, but MWD matters to me...anyway, do I have that correct?

I did follow the Raynox Club, man I am even afraid to write that word...Gus might hunt me down and beat me over the head with one of them there Russkie lenses of his... Of course I do agree with him...

I found a reasonable price for the 150 eBay of $50 less 8% less 1.5% in eBay Bucks so about $45 with shipping hard to find a better deal still it will take around a week and I just don't have the time to wait, and in the mean time I'll take shots of let cheaper pieces using the close-up filters, the buyers for those are always the biggest problems anyway so I have stopped even trying to make them happy, got dinged the other day with a one star for shipping & handling fee and it was FREE SHIPPING, I give up.....plus I need to get my ebay bucks account up to $2.00 for when I grab the new 35ltd. That extra $6.00 off the lens will make all the difference...I swear eBay must think we are all Botards!

In the mean time, no sign of the new laptop dang it...it might have missed the deadline to be here today...figures, the critical need circuity kicked in big time!

Oh, and thanks for the info about the Raynox...oh, one last thing, how do they fit on the lenses I have to use, figure the 43ltd and the 77ltd? I prolly want to use the 77ltd but either will be fine...of course I also have an eye on the Marumi stuff, they are only about $20 more each than the Raynox and there is now attachment concern. Either way I only want to buy ONE for now...I mean already spent $14 on the close-up set...remember I be cheap 'n stuff...
01-30-2010, 12:18 PM   #4
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by brecklundin Quote
OK...who you bean tawking to over cawfee? Or is it the BC Bud?

Right I just want close focusing and the Raynox stuff looks good enough for now, until I have the case in a couple weeks for a new 35ltd. I hear ya bout the DOF though I am a macro shooter for the fun of it, I just have not gotten a macro with a longer working distance that the 35ltd since applying for citizenship in Pentaxistan.

So, the 150 should reduce the minimum WORKING distance, don't care about MFD, but MWD matters to me...anyway, do I have that correct?

I did follow the Raynox Club, man I am even afraid to write that word...Gus might hunt me down and beat me over the head with one of them there Russkie lenses of his... Of course I do agree with him...

I found a reasonable price for the 150 eBay of $50 less 8% less 1.5% in eBay Bucks so about $45 with shipping hard to find a better deal still it will take around a week and I just don't have the time to wait, and in the mean time I'll take shots of let cheaper pieces using the close-up filters, the buyers for those are always the biggest problems anyway so I have stopped even trying to make them happy, got dinged the other day with a one star for shipping & handling fee and it was FREE SHIPPING, I give up.....plus I need to get my ebay bucks account up to $2.00 for when I grab the new 35ltd. That extra $6.00 off the lens will make all the difference...I swear eBay must think we are all Botards!

In the mean time, no sign of the new laptop dang it...it might have missed the deadline to be here today...figures, the critical need circuity kicked in big time!

Oh, and thanks for the info about the Raynox...oh, one last thing, how do they fit on the lenses I have to use, figure the 43ltd and the 77ltd? I prolly want to use the 77ltd but either will be fine...of course I also have an eye on the Marumi stuff, they are only about $20 more each than the Raynox and there is now attachment concern. Either way I only want to buy ONE for now...I mean already spent $14 on the close-up set...remember I be cheap 'n stuff...
are you willing to be the first MARUMI genuie pig?

some people are interested about the results of that one, me included.

01-30-2010, 12:50 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,679
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
are you willing to be the first MARUMI genuie pig?

some people are interested about the results of that one, me included.
Geeze, maybe I could then...worst that could happen is I hate it...when I get the cheap close-up set on Monday I can get and idea which would work better for me the +3 or the +5...I mean they are not that much more and since nobody had tried them why not? Lemme sleep and figure it out...

I have actually NEVER used a close-up filter always opting for a true macro instead....should be fun!
01-30-2010, 01:07 PM   #6
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Minimum focus distance with the 150 is about 6-8 inches, depending on the lens' own minimum focus distance. Minimum focus distance with the 250 is about half that. You'd need a very high diopter to get 0.5" focus distance, assuming that's actually important. Not sure what kind of products you shoot that close - or did I misunderstand? I also don't understand what you mean when you say you don't want macro but you just to focus within half an inch - that's about as macro as you can get!

EDIT: oh wait, now I think I get it. You mean, you want pictures of objects that are 0.5 - 3" inches long. APS-C makes this calculation easy. The sensor is basically an inch across. So if you fill the frame with an object an inch long, that 1:1. I think the 250 combined with the 77 will about do that. If you fill it with an object two inches long, that's 1:2 - the 43 with the 250 would about do that. Filling it with an object half an inch long - that's 2:1. Not going to happen unless you use the 250 with a medium telephoto lens (maybe in the 135-200 range). Now you're not only talking macro, but "super" macro.

Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 01-31-2010 at 01:50 PM.
01-30-2010, 01:28 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by brecklundin Quote
Geeze, maybe I could then...worst that could happen is I hate it...when I get the cheap close-up set on Monday I can get and idea which would work better for me the +3 or the +5...I mean they are not that much more and since nobody had tried them why not? Lemme sleep and figure it out...

I have actually NEVER used a close-up filter always opting for a true macro instead....should be fun!
if you are using below 100mm, a +5 diopter would be an ideal choice given the lower MFD usually of those lenses. above 100mm, a +3 would be ideal. although a +3 would be fine or good enough for shorter mm lenses if your not really up to a 1:1 or higher magnification macro size subject or if your concern is MWD as you would call it.
01-31-2010, 12:15 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,679
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Minimum focus distance with the 150 is about 6-8 inches, depending on the lens' own minimum focus distance. Minimum focus distance with the 250 is about half that. You'd need a very high diopter to get 0.5" focus distance, assuming that's actually important. Not sure what kind of products you shoot that close - or did I misunderstand? I also don't understand what you mean when you say you don't want macro but you just to focus within half an inch - that's about as macro as you can get!

EDIT: oh wait, now I think you get it. You mean, you want pictures of objects that are 0.5 - 3" inches long. APS-C makes this calculation easy. The sensor is basically an inch across. So if you fill the frame with an object an inch long, that 1:1. I think the 250 combined with the 77 will about do that. If you fill it with an object two inches long, that's 1:2 - the 43 with the 250 would about do that. Filling it with an object half an inch long - that's 2:1. Not going to happen unless you use the 250 with a medium telephoto lens (maybe in the 135-200 range). Now you're not only talking macro, but "super" macro.
Hey Marc,

YES...thanks for working through my rambling. What I wrote reads as a pretty ambiguous attempt at describing what I was hoping to achieve, replace the close focus ability of the 35ltd not achieve macro results. I was wanting to get as close to filling the frame as I could with objects in that 0.5" - 3" object size range with a minimal cropping as possible.

I Really apologize for the less than clear explanation of the needs/situation. Here is the page with the calculators and some diagrams which actually did help me visualize what I understand about how it works:

What is a close-up filter?

But my sleep deprived brain as not really getting a grasp on those simple explanations let alone trying to wrap my brain around the whole optics part of the thing.

I got it now thanks for the concise and simplified answer...


QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
if you are using below 100mm, a +5 diopter would be an ideal choice given the lower MFD usually of those lenses. above 100mm, a +3 would be ideal. although a +3 would be fine or good enough for shorter mm lenses if your not really up to a 1:1 or higher magnification macro size subject or if your concern is MWD as you would call it.
I see that now...perfect complement to Mark's explanation as well. Because I am after close focus not true macro shots. I discovered none of my lenses come close to what I am after, though with a minimum number of tubes I can get some items. But these manual tubes are a pain to work with, focus wide open, stop down, then, even with the magic green button, pray I get the exposure right, man am I dependent on the metering or what? My prob has been I almost always need to use flash in order to get the look I am after...yeah, what a whiney candy-arse, huh? hehehehe....

Now I need to flip a coin over the Marumi Achromat's or the Raynox...sigh, nothing is easy anymore...and my new laptop did not make it today as we had hoped...won't have it until Monday...I will also get my uber, ahem, expensive, Close-up set from Amazon on Monday. Cost like $18 with my $3.99 next day shipping. I was actually just going to use them to decide what diopter will give the best results with each lense. Then would order the better add on...hopefully only one would be needed...

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
43ltd, 77ltd, dog, frame, k-mount, pentax lens, physics, raynox, slr lens, week
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Raynox Macro club audiobomber Lens Clubs 827 09-25-2017 12:39 PM
Raynox 150 not giving me better macro :( SirJangly Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 09-24-2010 10:56 AM
Magnification Question: Reversed 50mm vs. Raynox 250 twokatmew Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 2 07-18-2010 04:15 PM
First Raynox Macro Shots moovinfast Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 08-29-2008 03:55 PM
New to Macro - Want to try a Raynox but which one? JRock Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 08-17-2008 12:49 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:15 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top