The Raynox Macro club

Marc Sabatella · 05-19-2010, 08:05 PM

Nothing at all wrong with the sharpness in the second shot there - at least, the small portion of the flower that is actually in focus. The DOF is just very thin. You need to stop down more to get more in focus.

photolady95 · 05-19-2010, 08:38 PM

I was shooting that at F11, at 1/180s. How much should I have stopped down, Marc?

tinabalagosa · 05-19-2010, 09:37 PM

another shot with my 250, I think this is clearer than the firs

Marc Sabatella · 05-20-2010, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by photolady

I was shooting that at F11, at 1/180s. How much should I have stopped down, Marc?

Until you get as much in focus as you want.

mikeSF · 05-20-2010, 10:51 PM

my 150 has not arrived yet. i was hoping to have it in time for the weekend...ah well.
keep posting these pics to whet my appetite.

Byrdman · 06-02-2010, 12:02 PM

This lens works great on flowers. Hard to capture bugs though.

Byrdman · 06-02-2010, 12:05 PM

Another orchid

Attached Images

aliasant · 06-02-2010, 12:55 PM

I did order a Raynox 250 over a month ago but it seems to be sold out in Sweden.
In the mean time I have to suffice with a homemade macro lens combination.
I have a 28mm 2.8 Mamyia Sekor SX on a 2x APK Macro Teleplus MC7 and this ant was shot using he built in flash (Pentax Kx).
The ant was crawling around on a chef knife that I placed outdoors close to a wall so that the flash would bounce on the wall and I guess also the reflecting surfcace of the knife.
Turned out pretty nice

It is a 100% crop ( or very close o that since I had to resize it again for this forum).
I had problems getting close enough since the front of the lens kept crashing into the knife and the ant..... Maybe I can use a 2x teleconverter to get some distance next time?

The flower is shot with a Tamron 103A at I think 5.6.

brecklundin · 06-06-2010, 06:59 PM

alisant:

those are both super shots....thanks. I love the ant quite a bit. Shooting it on the brushed metal background is really different. The "mood" on the flower shot is kinda nice as well.

aliasant · 06-07-2010, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by brecklundin

alisant:

those are both super shots....thanks. I love the ant quite a bit. Shooting it on the brushed metal background is really different. The "mood" on the flower shot is kinda nice as well.

Thank yo very much!
Makes me glad someone liked them

I think I forgot to mention that the ant is not that big an ant.
Less then 2mm in length from head to.. eh. bum?

These are the smallest ants I have ever seen and definitively do not belong in Sweden.
Must have gotten here in a box from ..who knows?
Well. IF someone here knows of really really small yellow ants please let me know what country or region of the world. Just curious..

They only excist in the house Im living as far as I know. They came last fall and seems to live in the walls. They seem to have small scout troopers looking for treasures and when they find something the leave a trace back to it so the rest of the gang can find it. Amazing creatures really. Couple of weeks back I forgot to trash the remains of a banana... When I came back into the kitchen there was this yellow mini trail of ants from my cutting board, down to the floor and then back up and into this tiny little hole under the window... I dusted some cinamon to screw up their trail and after a little while they were gone.... Anyways. Funny little things those are but very hard to frame.

audiobomber · 06-07-2010, 11:32 AM

Originally posted by aliasant

Funny little things those are but very hard to frame.

I don't have trouble framing ants, but getting them in focus is another story. They never stop moving. Nice job for sure.

Your moniker makes me wonder if you have a special relationship with ants. Or maybe you are one.

aliasant · 06-20-2010, 12:08 PM

Been away for a couple of weeks.

Yes.
Ants are hard to catch indeed but since Im one of them they let me....

Naa. I think his was a "scout" ant. I see them maybe once/week often alone but sometimes a pair.. I think they wonder of looking for treasures, what ever that is for them, and when they find something they follow their own breadcrumbs path back and also laying down a new path that says " treasure ahead, follow path" or something.

When I lifted this guy up on my knife I think he lost is own trail. He kept looking for it all around the knife but after a while he gave up and sat down, thinking " how the hell did I get here and how the hell do I get back home?".. Thats when I took that shot

After that I dropped him into a flower pot on my balcony. Hope he found hes way back home somehow.

mackloon · 06-29-2010, 09:27 AM

Hello Fellow Pentaxers:

I am a proud new owner of a Pentax K-x kit with the 18-55/55-300 DAL lenses. I am coming up from my Canon G9, and I am looking to learn the ins and outs on this new camera.

As part of this search I am looking to expand upon the functionality and accessories of this camera, and I am looking to get into some macro photography. Considering the current kit lenses, I have been trying to decide on whether I should buy a set of macro adapters or a dedicated macro lens.

I am in the process of reading through this entire thread, and will continue to do so...but I wanted to post probably a redundant question and when I get to this point, if the answer has not been discovered through reading, perhaps someone would have some pointers or at least a direction to continue my research.

The question is do I get the Raynox 150 or 250 to pair with my current lenses, or both? Or am I better off just getting a dedicated macro lens?

I assume the AF on my kit lenses works well with either, but I was wondering if anyone could comment on actual focus distances with either Raynox adapter, paired with either lens.

I will also be looking at potentially adding a teleconverter if someone could point me in the right direction for that. Glad to be here, liking the camera thus-far, and I am looking forward to learning how to use it to it's fullest potential.

Thanks

-mackloon

twokatmew · 06-29-2010, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by mackloon

Hello Fellow Pentaxers:

I am a proud new owner of a Pentax K-x kit with the 18-55/55-300 DAL lenses. I am coming up from my Canon G9, and I am looking to learn the ins and outs on this new camera.

As part of this search I am looking to expand upon the functionality and accessories of this camera, and I am looking to get into some macro photography. Considering the current kit lenses, I have been trying to decide on whether I should buy a set of macro adapters or a dedicated macro lens.

I am in the process of reading through this entire thread, and will continue to do so...but I wanted to post probably a redundant question and when I get to this point, if the answer has not been discovered through reading, perhaps someone would have some pointers or at least a direction to continue my research.

The question is do I get the Raynox 150 or 250 to pair with my current lenses, or both? Or am I better off just getting a dedicated macro lens?

I assume the AF on my kit lenses works well with either, but I was wondering if anyone could comment on actual focus distances with either Raynox adapter, paired with either lens.

I will also be looking at potentially adding a teleconverter if someone could point me in the right direction for that. Glad to be here, liking the camera thus-far, and I am looking forward to learning how to use it to it's fullest potential.

Thanks

-mackloon

Mackloon, a few months ago, I was where you are, except I have the DAL50-200 instead of the DAL55-300. I'd start with the Ranox DCR150, which I have. It's a bit easier to use and provides more working distance than the DCR250. Further, I've read several comments that the DCR250 vignettes on the DAL55-300 as you increase the focal ength. Unfortunately I can't remember the FL at which the vignetting begins. With the DCR-150 you can still go greater than 1:1 if you choose, and you shouldn't see any vignetting.

That said, I added the DA35 macro to my collection and almost immediately discovered it was much simpler to use (than a zoom with Raynox adapter). IQ is fantastic, too, not that it's bad by any means with the Raynox setup.

Not to long ago I added the DFA100WR macro. I hesitated due to the cost and because I wasn't sure I'd do enough with macro to justify having such a lens around.

There are other less expensive alternatives, such as the Sigma and Tamron macro lenses as well as the non-WR Pentax and older MF macro lenses. Still, I wanted the WR.

I have not been disappointed! It's a great macro lens, very light and with an amazing build similar to the DA Ltd lenses. It takes fantastic photos and is less fiddly when shooting macro (than with a Raynox setup). It's also great as a short telephoto lens, and I'm sure it'll get used a fair amount there as well.

I'm not selling my Raynox, as there are times when it may be very useful, say, if I'm out with only the DAL50-200 and want to shoot a close-up. But ... I'm very happy I splurged and got the DFA100/2.8 WR. So ...I'd say start with a Raynox DCR150 for ~$50 new. Make sure you really want to shoot macros, and then add a dedicated macro lens later if you want. Some shoot absolutely amazing macros with only a zoom and Raynox adapter.

HTH!

mackloon · 06-29-2010, 02:15 PM

Thanks for the information. I am looking to spend about $100 total on whatever macro I get here. Not knowing if that is my bag, I cannot justify the higher spend at this time.

I would also like to invest about $100 in a teleconversion 2x adapter. Something that will take the kit 55-300 out to 110-600/(170-900 equiv). I figure with those 2 addons it will give me what I need to figure out exactly what I like. If I want to shoot more long then I will buy into a better/longer telephoto.

If macro is my thing. I could see myself in a DFA100WR.

Can anyone recommend an 2x teleconversion adapter that will work with the K-X Kit 55-300. I notice that many have fstop issues with the AF. I definitely want to preserve the AF on these...and would most likely only use the long range in sunlight.

Thanks for the information, and glad to be a member here.

05-19-2010, 09:37 PM	#153
tinabalagosa Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: cebu city Photos: Gallery Posts: 38	looks like the moon another shot with my 250, I think this is clearer than the firs

06-02-2010, 12:05 PM	#157
Byrdman New Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minneapolis Posts: 8	Raynox 150 w/55-300 kit lens - one more Another orchid Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Raynox 150 not giving me better macro :(	SirJangly	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	09-24-2010 10:56 AM
Question about Raynox options but not as a macro...	brecklundin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-31-2010 12:15 AM
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

05-19-2010, 08:05 PM	#151
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Nothing at all wrong with the sharpness in the second shot there - at least, the small portion of the flower that is actually in focus. The DOF is just very thin. You need to stop down more to get more in focus.

05-19-2010, 08:38 PM	#152
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712	I was shooting that at F11, at 1/180s. How much should I have stopped down, Marc?

05-20-2010, 03:47 PM	#154
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by photolady I was shooting that at F11, at 1/180s. How much should I have stopped down, Marc? Until you get as much in focus as you want.

05-20-2010, 10:51 PM	#155
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	my 150 has not arrived yet. i was hoping to have it in time for the weekend...ah well. keep posting these pics to whet my appetite.

06-02-2010, 12:55 PM	#158
aliasant Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 634	I did order a Raynox 250 over a month ago but it seems to be sold out in Sweden. In the mean time I have to suffice with a homemade macro lens combination. I have a 28mm 2.8 Mamyia Sekor SX on a 2x APK Macro Teleplus MC7 and this ant was shot using he built in flash (Pentax Kx). The ant was crawling around on a chef knife that I placed outdoors close to a wall so that the flash would bounce on the wall and I guess also the reflecting surfcace of the knife. Turned out pretty nice It is a 100% crop ( or very close o that since I had to resize it again for this forum). I had problems getting close enough since the front of the lens kept crashing into the knife and the ant..... Maybe I can use a 2x teleconverter to get some distance next time? The flower is shot with a Tamron 103A at I think 5.6.

06-06-2010, 06:59 PM	#159
brecklundin Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,674	alisant: those are both super shots....thanks. I love the ant quite a bit. Shooting it on the brushed metal background is really different. The "mood" on the flower shot is kinda nice as well.

06-07-2010, 11:18 AM	#160
aliasant Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 634	Originally posted by brecklundin alisant: those are both super shots....thanks. I love the ant quite a bit. Shooting it on the brushed metal background is really different. The "mood" on the flower shot is kinda nice as well. Thank yo very much! Makes me glad someone liked them I think I forgot to mention that the ant is not that big an ant. Less then 2mm in length from head to.. eh. bum? These are the smallest ants I have ever seen and definitively do not belong in Sweden. Must have gotten here in a box from ..who knows? Well. IF someone here knows of really really small yellow ants please let me know what country or region of the world. Just curious.. They only excist in the house Im living as far as I know. They came last fall and seems to live in the walls. They seem to have small scout troopers looking for treasures and when they find something the leave a trace back to it so the rest of the gang can find it. Amazing creatures really. Couple of weeks back I forgot to trash the remains of a banana... When I came back into the kitchen there was this yellow mini trail of ants from my cutting board, down to the floor and then back up and into this tiny little hole under the window... I dusted some cinamon to screw up their trail and after a little while they were gone.... Anyways. Funny little things those are but very hard to frame.

06-07-2010, 11:32 AM	#161
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806 Original Poster	Originally posted by aliasant Funny little things those are but very hard to frame. I don't have trouble framing ants, but getting them in focus is another story. They never stop moving. Nice job for sure. Your moniker makes me wonder if you have a special relationship with ants. Or maybe you are one.

06-20-2010, 12:08 PM	#162
aliasant Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 634	Been away for a couple of weeks. Yes. Ants are hard to catch indeed but since Im one of them they let me.... Naa. I think his was a "scout" ant. I see them maybe once/week often alone but sometimes a pair.. I think they wonder of looking for treasures, what ever that is for them, and when they find something they follow their own breadcrumbs path back and also laying down a new path that says " treasure ahead, follow path" or something. When I lifted this guy up on my knife I think he lost is own trail. He kept looking for it all around the knife but after a while he gave up and sat down, thinking " how the hell did I get here and how the hell do I get back home?".. Thats when I took that shot After that I dropped him into a flower pot on my balcony. Hope he found hes way back home somehow.

06-29-2010, 09:27 AM	#163
mackloon Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 415	Hello Fellow Pentaxers: I am a proud new owner of a Pentax K-x kit with the 18-55/55-300 DAL lenses. I am coming up from my Canon G9, and I am looking to learn the ins and outs on this new camera. As part of this search I am looking to expand upon the functionality and accessories of this camera, and I am looking to get into some macro photography. Considering the current kit lenses, I have been trying to decide on whether I should buy a set of macro adapters or a dedicated macro lens. I am in the process of reading through this entire thread, and will continue to do so...but I wanted to post probably a redundant question and when I get to this point, if the answer has not been discovered through reading, perhaps someone would have some pointers or at least a direction to continue my research. The question is do I get the Raynox 150 or 250 to pair with my current lenses, or both? Or am I better off just getting a dedicated macro lens? I assume the AF on my kit lenses works well with either, but I was wondering if anyone could comment on actual focus distances with either Raynox adapter, paired with either lens. I will also be looking at potentially adding a teleconverter if someone could point me in the right direction for that. Glad to be here, liking the camera thus-far, and I am looking forward to learning how to use it to it's fullest potential. Thanks -mackloon

06-29-2010, 09:45 AM	#164
twokatmew Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Lansing, MI Photos: Albums Posts: 509	Originally posted by mackloon Hello Fellow Pentaxers: I am a proud new owner of a Pentax K-x kit with the 18-55/55-300 DAL lenses. I am coming up from my Canon G9, and I am looking to learn the ins and outs on this new camera. As part of this search I am looking to expand upon the functionality and accessories of this camera, and I am looking to get into some macro photography. Considering the current kit lenses, I have been trying to decide on whether I should buy a set of macro adapters or a dedicated macro lens. I am in the process of reading through this entire thread, and will continue to do so...but I wanted to post probably a redundant question and when I get to this point, if the answer has not been discovered through reading, perhaps someone would have some pointers or at least a direction to continue my research. The question is do I get the Raynox 150 or 250 to pair with my current lenses, or both? Or am I better off just getting a dedicated macro lens? I assume the AF on my kit lenses works well with either, but I was wondering if anyone could comment on actual focus distances with either Raynox adapter, paired with either lens. I will also be looking at potentially adding a teleconverter if someone could point me in the right direction for that. Glad to be here, liking the camera thus-far, and I am looking forward to learning how to use it to it's fullest potential. Thanks -mackloon Mackloon, a few months ago, I was where you are, except I have the DAL50-200 instead of the DAL55-300. I'd start with the Ranox DCR150, which I have. It's a bit easier to use and provides more working distance than the DCR250. Further, I've read several comments that the DCR250 vignettes on the DAL55-300 as you increase the focal ength. Unfortunately I can't remember the FL at which the vignetting begins. With the DCR-150 you can still go greater than 1:1 if you choose, and you shouldn't see any vignetting. That said, I added the DA35 macro to my collection and almost immediately discovered it was much simpler to use (than a zoom with Raynox adapter). IQ is fantastic, too, not that it's bad by any means with the Raynox setup. Not to long ago I added the DFA100WR macro. I hesitated due to the cost and because I wasn't sure I'd do enough with macro to justify having such a lens around. There are other less expensive alternatives, such as the Sigma and Tamron macro lenses as well as the non-WR Pentax and older MF macro lenses. Still, I wanted the WR. I have not been disappointed! It's a great macro lens, very light and with an amazing build similar to the DA Ltd lenses. It takes fantastic photos and is less fiddly when shooting macro (than with a Raynox setup). It's also great as a short telephoto lens, and I'm sure it'll get used a fair amount there as well. I'm not selling my Raynox, as there are times when it may be very useful, say, if I'm out with only the DAL50-200 and want to shoot a close-up. But ... I'm very happy I splurged and got the DFA100/2.8 WR. So ...I'd say start with a Raynox DCR150 for ~$50 new. Make sure you really want to shoot macros, and then add a dedicated macro lens later if you want. Some shoot absolutely amazing macros with only a zoom and Raynox adapter. HTH!

06-29-2010, 02:15 PM	#165
mackloon Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 415	Thanks for the information. I am looking to spend about $100 total on whatever macro I get here. Not knowing if that is my bag, I cannot justify the higher spend at this time. I would also like to invest about $100 in a teleconversion 2x adapter. Something that will take the kit 55-300 out to 110-600/(170-900 equiv). I figure with those 2 addons it will give me what I need to figure out exactly what I like. If I want to shoot more long then I will buy into a better/longer telephoto. If macro is my thing. I could see myself in a DFA100WR. Can anyone recommend an 2x teleconversion adapter that will work with the K-X Kit 55-300. I notice that many have fstop issues with the AF. I definitely want to preserve the AF on these...and would most likely only use the long range in sunlight. Thanks for the information, and glad to be a member here.