[audiobomber]

The working distance depends on the lens, you use the Raynox with, too.

Yes, it is lens dependent, but for comparison I can get farther away with more magnification using the DCR-150 on my 55-300 than I can with with the D FA 100 on its own.

I cannot comment on the Raynox' quality, as I have never used one and have read completely different user comments (from unusable to fantastic...) about them.

The "unusable" opinion must have been from someone who hasn't used one or doesn't know how to shoot a macro.

But a good achromatic lens (as far as I know, the Raynox is a doublet?) is a good choice at medium imaging ratios.

These two Raynox macro lenses are achromatic diopters; two groups/three elements.

But for really high magnification, I alwayse use extension tubes and/or bellows and a dedicated micro lens (a Canon 25mm loupe lens adapted via T2 to Pentax). Thus arriving at 10:1 is easy, though things like working distances are to be measured in millimeters.

I can't even imagine shooting with that kind of magnification outside a lab.
3:1 is more than frustrating enough for me.

Ben[/QUOTE]

---

Last edited by audiobomber; 02-13-2009 at 02:40 PM.

[Ben_Edict]

I can't even imagine shooting with that kind of magnification outside a lab.
3:1 is more than frustrating enough for me.

I shot cartridge styli to document their wear with use and 10:1 is the absolute minimum to recognize any detail. Even then I am happy about the K20's high resolution, which allows for heavy cropping... Focusing is a horror.

Ben