[Philoslothical]

I'm pretty sure the macro mode doesn't even kick in til you're in the 200-300mm range. At 300mm and fully focused in with the macro mode switch on, you'll get 1:2 or half life size magnification. It drops off pretty quick at lower focal lengths.

On my equivalent Sigma lens, I find it more difficult to stabilize than something shorter that attains the same or better magnification. I also find it eats a lot of light, but some of that could be subjective based on the stabilization issue. There are definitely better ways of doing macro stuff, in any case.

[Culture]

Will it work if the dial is not turned to Macro mode?

[Philoslothical]

I only had your lens for a short time, it died on me and I swapped it out for the Sigma. If I remember right, and it functions the say way as the Sigma, it's the extra extension that you get from fully focusing in in macro mode that lets you get closer than the usual minimum focusing distance.

So no, if macro mode isn't on or you're not fully focused in with it on, you won't get too close.

[RioRico]

I will try this out and see. But I thought it was best to stay away from the far end of the focal length.

For more magnification with a close-up adapter like a Raynox, you need a longer focal length. There's no way around that. One or two dozen posts back, I gave the equation.
__________________________________

To calculate the magnification of any lens plus adapter, use:

M = F*D/1000 -- where M is magnification, F is host lens focal length, and D is dioptre of the add-on lens.

A +8dpt Raynox (or whatever) on a 100mm lens gives M = 100*8/1000 = 0.8x. On a 200mm lens, M = 200*8/1000 = 1.6x. Et cetera.
__________________________________

With a Raynox DCR-150 (4.8dpt) on a lens at 300mm, M = 300*4.8/1000 = 1.4x. The DCR-250 would have M = 300*8/1000 = 2.4x. Get around any optical weakness at 300mm by stopping-down to f/8. Or just crop the image edges.

[audiobomber]

For more magnification with a close-up adapter like a Raynox, you need a longer focal length. There's no way around that. One or two dozen posts back, I gave the equation.

While I agree with what you said, Culture was asking about the Tamron 70-300 by itself, with no close-up lens attached. As stated by Philoslothical, you need to set the lens to Macro mode and maximum zoom to get to 1:2 magnification.

With a zoom and a Raynox, I set the lens to infinity focus and use the zoom to adjust magnification.

[RioRico]

While I agree with what you said, Culture was asking about the Tamron 70-300 by itself, with no close-up lens attached.

Oops, I guess I didn't read back through the thread chain far enough. Mea culpa.

[Marc Sabatella]

I suspect Culture might have been asking about the "macro" mode on the camera dial, not on the lens. That's useless, like all other specialty modes.

[Culture]

I suspect Culture might have been asking about the "macro" mode on the camera dial, not on the lens. That's useless, like all other specialty modes.

Yes that was what I was asking. I tried this yesterday with the macro mode and then manual mode. I didnt notice any difference in magnification.

Ofcourse the switch was set to macro on the lens. I suspected the macro mode was useless. But thanks for confirming it.

[Philoslothical]

Ah OK. I didn't even consider the scene mode, never used them. Really, I don't think they belong on a DSLR, as they just distract beginners from learning about exposure modes.

Sorry for the confusing information.

You're aware that the switch on the lens is just a lock, right? You have to fully focus in to get the magnification, it's the extra quarter turn or so that becomes available on the focusing ring that does it.

[Culture]

Ah OK. I didn't even consider the scene mode, never used them. Really, I don't think they belong on a DSLR, as they just distract beginners from learning about exposure modes.

Sorry for the confusing information.

You're aware that the switch on the lens is just a lock, right? You have to fully focus in to get the magnification, it's the extra quarter turn or so that becomes available on the focusing ring that does it.

What do you mean its just a lock? It doesnt play any real macro funtion? Are you saying then that I can use any lens for macro?

[Philoslothical]

What do you mean its just a lock? It doesnt play any real macro funtion? Are you saying then that I can use any lens for macro?

No, I'm saying that the macro switch on the lens is a lock that when turned on (unlocked) allows the focusing ring to turn farther than usual, extending the lens more than usual, resulting in 1:2 magnification when you turn it as far as it can go and zoom in to 300mm at the same time.

And yes, you can use any lens for macro, with the right techniques. Putting extension tubes between lens and camera is one way. Getting something like a Raynox lens that sits on the end of the host lens is another. Getting a ring to reverse a short prime on the end of a longer lens is yet another. Have a look at Rico's article here for more info on these and other ideas: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-lens-articles/152336-cheap-macro-b...lose-work.html

[Culture]

No, I'm saying that the macro switch on the lens is a lock that when turned on (unlocked) allows the focusing ring to turn farther than usual, extending the lens more than usual, resulting in 1:2 magnification when you turn it as far as it can go and zoom in to 300mm at the same time.

And yes, you can use any lens for macro, with the right techniques. Putting extension tubes between lens and camera is one way. Getting something like a Raynox lens that sits on the end of the host lens is another. Getting a ring to reverse a short prime on the end of a longer lens is yet another. Have a look at Rico's article here for more info on these and other ideas: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-lens-articles/152336-cheap-macro-b...lose-work.html

Thanks. Will look into it. And for the explanation.

[Culture]

I got myself a raynox. I have notice something that is puzzling me.
I manually focus. When the focus is at infinity the image is smaller than when I focus at 45cm. I would say maybe 3 times smaller.
45cm is the minimum distance for the Tammy in macro mode. With the raynox attached this distance is not valid anymore.
So why the difference? Can anybody explain.

[audiobomber]

Yes that was what I was asking. I tried this yesterday with the macro mode and then manual mode. I didnt notice any difference in magnification.

Ofcourse the switch was set to macro on the lens. I suspected the macro mode was useless. But thanks for confirming it.

The macro switch allows you to focus closer, therefore increasing magnification, and that applies whether you mount a Raynox or not.

If you're using the lens at infinity focus with the Raynox mounted, there is no difference in magnification with the macro function engaged. If you set the lens for minimum focus distance, you will have see greater magnification in macro mode.

[Culture]

The macro switch allows you to focus closer, therefore increasing magnification, and that applies whether you mount a Raynox or not.

If you're using the lens at infinity focus with the Raynox mounted, there is no difference in magnification with the macro function engaged. If you set the lens for minimum focus distance, you will have see greater magnification in macro mode.

I thought the focusing distance when you have a raynox mounted is always the same irrespective of the position of the focus ring.

Isnt magnication based only on focal length? I am getting a little bit confused.

Also I did some unscientific test with my eye and didnt really see that much difference with the focusing distance when it was at minimum or when at infinity. I could be wrong.