Macro Raynox 250 + Cheap 'n Nasty Sigma DL 100-300

Raynox 250 + Cheap 'n Nasty Sigma DL 100-300 · 05:04 PM

I just got my Raynox 250 off ebay today for $46AU

Must say the Raynox 250 is quite a suprise quality wise, I didn't expect to get as good results with an add-on attachment.

The lens is pretty bad though, if anyone bothers to look up a review on the DL 100-300 it's universally panned.

Was no easy to get my cat to hold still and with the shallow DOF made it trick.

Christopher M.W.T · 12-29-2009, 10:37 PM

Anyone care to comment what other lens combo's the Raynox 250 works well with?

JohnBee · 12-29-2009, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes

Anyone care to comment what other lens combo's the Raynox 250 works well with?

I own three Raynox filters which were used pretty much exclusively on a 55-200.
However, after purchasing a 100mm macro lens, I don't really use them anymore.
The biggest drawback with the raynox filters was with the narrow DOF.
Which lead me to get focus stacking software to get around it but it was alot of work and often times came at the cost of motivation.

**Ash** · 12-29-2009, 11:17 PM

The tiny DoF is evident in your shots too CW.
Sharp and clear, just hard to appreciate non-flat subjects not perpendicular to the sensor's axis.

Christopher M.W.T · 12-29-2009, 11:26 PM

Very true, hard to get images in focus.

Next purchase will be a 90mm Tamron or Sigma 105 EX as this has given me a really good taste of macro and its potential.

Here's a good example of how thin the DOF is with the FA50 @ f3.5

Christopher M.W.T · 12-30-2009, 03:37 AM

Has anyone used the Raynox on the DA* 50-135?

Christopher M.W.T · 12-30-2009, 05:53 AM

Originally posted by JohnBee

I own three Raynox filters which were used pretty much exclusively on a 55-200.
However, after purchasing a 100mm macro lens, I don't really use them anymore.
The biggest drawback with the raynox filters was with the narrow DOF.
Which lead me to get focus stacking software to get around it but it was alot of work and often times came at the cost of motivation.

Whats you use for focus stacking?

[wide]

Christopher M.W.T · 12-30-2009, 06:03 AM

And another..........no mystery as to what this is :P

The bokeh is amazing, you can't even make out anything on my couch lol.

JohnBee · 12-30-2009, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes

Whats you use for focus stacking?

[wide]

Helicon Focus - extended depth of field, focus stacking, 3D visualization

I never saw this sample before, but I think this is a very impressive example of focus stacking!

audiobomber · 12-30-2009, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes

Very true, hard to get images in focus.

Here's a good example of how thin the DOF is with the FA50 @ f3.5

F3.5 is not an aperture generally used for macro, except when you're going for artistic effect. It doesn't matter if you're using a Raynox or a dedicated macro lens, you'll get razor thin dof with such a large aperture. With the Raynox I typically use f14 or smaller.

Christopher M.W.T · 12-30-2009, 09:52 PM

Yer I can understand why now, how does the Raynox at F14 compare against a dedicated macro lens though?

Mechan1k · 12-31-2009, 08:19 AM

I was tempted to get a Raynox at one point.

But for now though I managed to get M42 Extension Tubes which I have been playing around with tonight.

And DOF is so thin ... even though I have stopped down ... and no tripod either. Fun.

You did well with the cat though ... can never trust animals to sit still.

I was shooting at f/8 and DOF was still thin ... but that was using a 28mm lens with 55mm stacked tubes. So magnification was pretty decent.

One thing I found ... you need light ... lots of it.

audiobomber · 12-31-2009, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes

Yer I can understand why now, how does the Raynox at F14 compare against a dedicated macro lens though?

It's very complicated to say, because DOF varies with focal length, so which macro lens are we to reference and which Raynox on which main lens? IME only (i.e. not researched or scientific in any way), I'd say that a Raynox 250 on a DA 55-300 gives about 50% dof compared to my D FA 100mm macro at 1:1 magnification. A dedicated macro lens is easier to use because of this, but if you look at the Raynox Club thread, you'll see that lots of people have gotten some pretty impressive results with the inexpensive Raynox.

I don't know what settings you used for the cat's eye, but if you were at infinity focus and 300mm, you were getting about 2.7:1 macro, far beyond what you'll get with a dedicated macro lens, and far less dof at this high magnification and long FL.

audiobomber · 12-31-2009, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by JohnBee

I own three Raynox filters which were used pretty much exclusively on a 55-200.
However, after purchasing a 100mm macro lens, I don't really use them anymore.
The biggest drawback with the raynox filters was with the narrow DOF.
Which lead me to get focus stacking software to get around it but it was alot of work and often times came at the cost of motivation. [/IMG]

I have a D FA 100mm, but I still use my Raynox 150 and 250 diopters for their portability and versatility. I always have a Raynox in the bag, because sometimes carrying the macro lens is inconvenient, and sometimes I'd rather pop a Raynox on for a coupe of shots than change lenses. I particularly like the Raynox 250 on a prime, sometimes even with my D FA 100 for greater than 1:1 macro.

50mm 1.4 + Raynox 250:

100mm macro + Raynox 250:

Christopher M.W.T · 12-31-2009, 11:37 PM

I definately prefer using the Raynox on the zoom lens as it offers a lot of flexibility however I am limited to the DL sigma until I get my 50-135,

Has anyone successfully used the Raynox on something like a DA* 50-135?

Christopher M.W.T
	View full profile
	Find other posts by Christopher M.W.T
	Find threads started by Christopher M.W.T
	Find threads in which Christopher M.W.T has posted

12-29-2009, 11:26 PM	#5
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689 Original Poster	Very true, hard to get images in focus. Next purchase will be a 90mm Tamron or Sigma 105 EX as this has given me a really good taste of macro and its potential. Here's a good example of how thin the DOF is with the FA50 @ f3.5 Last edited by Christopher M.W.T; 12-30-2009 at 06:10 AM.

12-30-2009, 06:03 AM	#8
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689 Original Poster	And another..........no mystery as to what this is :P The bokeh is amazing, you can't even make out anything on my couch lol. Attached Images Last edited by Christopher M.W.T; 12-30-2009 at 06:09 AM.

12-31-2009, 09:43 AM	#13
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes Yer I can understand why now, how does the Raynox at F14 compare against a dedicated macro lens though? It's very complicated to say, because DOF varies with focal length, so which macro lens are we to reference and which Raynox on which main lens? IME only (i.e. not researched or scientific in any way), I'd say that a Raynox 250 on a DA 55-300 gives about 50% dof compared to my D FA 100mm macro at 1:1 magnification. A dedicated macro lens is easier to use because of this, but if you look at the Raynox Club thread, you'll see that lots of people have gotten some pretty impressive results with the inexpensive Raynox. I don't know what settings you used for the cat's eye, but if you were at infinity focus and 300mm, you were getting about 2.7:1 macro, far beyond what you'll get with a dedicated macro lens, and far less dof at this high magnification and long FL. Last edited by audiobomber; 12-31-2009 at 09:49 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 70-200 & 100-300 for DA 60-250	OrenMc	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	01-05-2010 06:17 PM
Tamron adaptall 300/2.8 or Sigma 100-300/4	pinholecam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	11-07-2009 05:52 AM
Tamron 300/2.8, Sigma 100-300 F4, 1.7 AF TC images: A link to the DPR froum.	pcarfan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	02-07-2009 08:48 PM
Wildlife & sports tele: DA*300 vs Sigma 100-300 f4	dspdx	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	08-28-2008 09:27 PM
Sigma 100-300 APO vs New Pentax 300	dylansalt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	07-24-2008 05:44 AM

12-29-2009, 10:37 PM	#2
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689 Original Poster	Anyone care to comment what other lens combo's the Raynox 250 works well with?

12-29-2009, 10:59 PM	#3
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes Anyone care to comment what other lens combo's the Raynox 250 works well with? I own three Raynox filters which were used pretty much exclusively on a 55-200. However, after purchasing a 100mm macro lens, I don't really use them anymore. The biggest drawback with the raynox filters was with the narrow DOF. Which lead me to get focus stacking software to get around it but it was alot of work and often times came at the cost of motivation.

12-29-2009, 11:17 PM	#4
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	The tiny DoF is evident in your shots too CW. Sharp and clear, just hard to appreciate non-flat subjects not perpendicular to the sensor's axis.

12-30-2009, 03:37 AM	#6
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689 Original Poster	Has anyone used the Raynox on the DA* 50-135?

12-30-2009, 05:53 AM	#7
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689 Original Poster	Originally posted by JohnBee I own three Raynox filters which were used pretty much exclusively on a 55-200. However, after purchasing a 100mm macro lens, I don't really use them anymore. The biggest drawback with the raynox filters was with the narrow DOF. Which lead me to get focus stacking software to get around it but it was alot of work and often times came at the cost of motivation. Whats you use for focus stacking? [wide]

12-30-2009, 10:18 AM	#9
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes Whats you use for focus stacking? [wide] Helicon Focus - extended depth of field, focus stacking, 3D visualization I never saw this sample before, but I think this is a very impressive example of focus stacking!

12-30-2009, 10:30 AM	#10
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes Very true, hard to get images in focus. Here's a good example of how thin the DOF is with the FA50 @ f3.5 F3.5 is not an aperture generally used for macro, except when you're going for artistic effect. It doesn't matter if you're using a Raynox or a dedicated macro lens, you'll get razor thin dof with such a large aperture. With the Raynox I typically use f14 or smaller.

12-30-2009, 09:52 PM	#11
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689 Original Poster	Yer I can understand why now, how does the Raynox at F14 compare against a dedicated macro lens though?

12-31-2009, 08:19 AM	#12
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	I was tempted to get a Raynox at one point. But for now though I managed to get M42 Extension Tubes which I have been playing around with tonight. And DOF is so thin ... even though I have stopped down ... and no tripod either. Fun. You did well with the cat though ... can never trust animals to sit still. I was shooting at f/8 and DOF was still thin ... but that was using a 28mm lens with 55mm stacked tubes. So magnification was pretty decent. One thing I found ... you need light ... lots of it.

12-31-2009, 10:56 AM	#14
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by JohnBee I own three Raynox filters which were used pretty much exclusively on a 55-200. However, after purchasing a 100mm macro lens, I don't really use them anymore. The biggest drawback with the raynox filters was with the narrow DOF. Which lead me to get focus stacking software to get around it but it was alot of work and often times came at the cost of motivation. [/IMG] I have a D FA 100mm, but I still use my Raynox 150 and 250 diopters for their portability and versatility. I always have a Raynox in the bag, because sometimes carrying the macro lens is inconvenient, and sometimes I'd rather pop a Raynox on for a coupe of shots than change lenses. I particularly like the Raynox 250 on a prime, sometimes even with my D FA 100 for greater than 1:1 macro. 50mm 1.4 + Raynox 250: 100mm macro + Raynox 250:

12-31-2009, 11:37 PM	#15
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689 Original Poster	I definately prefer using the Raynox on the zoom lens as it offers a lot of flexibility however I am limited to the DL sigma until I get my 50-135, Has anyone successfully used the Raynox on something like a DA* 50-135?