[paddy567]

I just paired my Tamron 70-200 f2.8 with DCR250, and I love it!!!

These are terrific by the way.

[jeffshaddix]

I just paired my Tamron 70-200 f2.8 with DCR250, and I love it!!!

Holy macroroni Batman! What do you use for PP? I love it!

I bought the 150 and 250 both recently - and though it's moving into winter here in Sydney, so not a rich cornucopia of bugs, I have been having an absolute ball with the raynox. The ability to take cool images without leaving house makes me understand how macro is so addictive. The depth of field is a challenge at times, I confess, but it's kind of fun at the same time to have such strict limits to work in.

Excellent set! What lenses did you use for these?

[paddy567]

Excellent set! What lenses did you use for these?

I pair both 150 and 250 with my Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and old faithful DAL 55-300mm. Whilst the 250 on the 55-300mm can be challenging, and it vignettes something fierce, you can get some fantastic images out of it, as I feel some of those bubble shots attest.

[erwinsie]

hi guys, Im from sydney, first post here. im basically want to start taking macro shots (bugs, insects, flower, etc)

1. just wondering if it is possible to take good (or maybe great) macros with raynox 150 and my asahi 50mm f1.7 manual lens ? i know i need to get some stepup ring (because the diameter of the lens is only 49mm) but i just want to know if with that 50mm f1.7 i can get good "macro" shots with raynox 150.

2. i also have tokina 100-300mm f5-6 - i know its so-so lens, but, if i put raynox 150 on it, can i have a reasonable good tele-macro lens?

3. will raynox 150 also give benefit (to get macro shot) to my other lenses : kit 18-55mm and sigma 28-80mm ?

nb. all lenses are non-macro/

thanks

---

Last edited by erwinsie; 08-08-2011 at 03:59 PM. Reason: more polite on tokina

[paddy567]

Hey there Erwinsie, all your lenses will work fine with the Raynox. Don't be so harsh on the old Tokina! That + the Raynox will provide more than enough challenge for you, and will provide opportunity for terrific photos. Lovely lenses are wonderful, but you can take terrific photos with average lenses, no worries.

[erwinsie]

Hi Paddy, thanks! sorry about that tokina but it gives soft pictures anyway, the thing is im looking to get into macro now..

i just afraid, eventho with raynox i can have alot of "macro lenses" (with putting it infront of my normal lenses), the quality macro it produce will be far worst than a dedicated macro lens (im looking at tamron 90mm f2.8). i wish i can try both options but all my friends here are with canon/nikon i will try read this thread from the beginning to see raynox's result. already saw tamron result, they are amazing...

[audiobomber]

i will try read this thread from the beginning to see raynox's result. already saw tamron result, they are amazing...

I don't think anyone here will tell you that a Raynox diopter is as good as dedicated macro lens like the Tamron 90mm. As you will see, some of the results in this thread are as good as a dedicated macro, but it's harder to achieve great results because depth of field is less with a diopter at comparable magnifications, and corner sharpness falls off and fringing increases compared to the host lens.

A Raynox adapter is a powerful tool for a paltry amount of money. At about ten times the price, a dedicated macro lens will produce more consistent results. If you can afford it and are serious at all about macro, get the Tamron.

---

Last edited by audiobomber; 08-09-2011 at 04:57 AM.

[paddy567]

i just afraid, eventho with raynox i can have alot of "macro lenses" (with putting it infront of my normal lenses), the quality macro it produce will be far worst than a dedicated macro lens (im looking at tamron 90mm f2.8).

This is true. But the Tamron lens sells for about $600 smackers here in Australia. You can get the Raynox off ebay for about $70. Given that you haven't taken any macro shots yet - unless you're taking a home a much bigger salary than I am! - I would hold off before making a decision that will cost you half a grand. There's nothing wrong with dipping your toe in the water before deciding you want to get wet - contrary to what a lot of DSLR fetishists will tell you!

If you want more than the Raynox, you'll always be able to sell it for nearly as much as you bought it for here. There's nowhere domestic to buy Raynox so they're in quite high demand. But really, I really would counsel that the two things on either side of the lens (photographer and subject) have much more to do with making great pictures than the gear in between.

[erwinsie]

hi Paddy, just realised you are in sydney aswell !
thanks. i have done (alot) research:
* raynox 150 from ebay = aud 70-ish
* tamron 90mm f2.8 grey import = aud 380-ish incl shipping !
well, im not that rich - you can see my lenses collection - what you said is correct, more make sense to try raynox first. ok i just lost my iphone so the money should go for new mobile and raynox

[octopussy_france]

Hello,

Images post processed from DNG files.

1-
Test with sigma 50mm macro at 1:1 and MSN 202.
Ballpoint of a common ballpoint pen.
Flash with softbox.



Here full size (3028px x 2112px)


2-
Test with sigma 105mm macro at 1:1 and MSN 202.
Ballpoint of a common ballpoint pen.
Flash with ringflash.
Look carefully at the ballpoint, you'll see the raynox lens.



Here full size (3 658px × 2 848px)

[audiobomber]

I tried the inexpensive Sears A 135mm f2.8 macro with the Raynox 150 today for the first time. Results were impressive and the combo was easy to use. These are full resolution, no cropping:

[elandel]

Very impressive

[audiobomber]

Here's a photoo taken with the Sears A 135mm f/2.8 macro lens at its maximum magnification, 1:5 macro:



Here's the same lens, same subject, with the Raynox 150 added, approximately 1:1.5 macro:

[Tonto]

Hi I'm looking to get a Raynox for my DAL 55-300 and give it a go on my FA31 and A 70-200 (4).
My question is does it improve the Mininum focus distance of the 55-300?
It is some thing that annoys me with that lens as sometimes I just want a quick flower shot.

[audiobomber]

Hi I'm looking to get a Raynox for my DAL 55-300 and give it a go on my FA31 and A 70-200 (4).
My question is does it improve the Mininum focus distance of the 55-300?
It is some thing that annoys me with that lens as sometimes I just want a quick flower shot.

A diopter works by reducing the minimum focus distance. With the 55-300mm and Raynox 150, mfd is reduced from 55 inches to about 8". Because it's a zoom, you could vary magnification to anything between 1:2 and 1.4:1 macro.

You would have two choices for mounting the 150 on the 55-300mm, You can remove the hood and clip on the Raynox with the supplied clip, or you could mount the Raynox element in a 58-43mm adapter and screw it in like a filter. The clip would not likely work on the FA 31 but the adapter would. I don't know whether a Raynox would work on the 70-200mm.