Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Raynox 250 vs MSN-202

  1. #1

    Default Raynox 250 vs MSN-202

    Raynox has these two snap on close up filters. The 250 is an 8x and the 202 is 25x, if I recall rightly. My question would be whether the 202 has significantly lower resolution than the 250, and whether the 202 has an uncomfortably close working distance. The way I see it, the two filters are very similarly priced, but I expect the 202 to have less resolution and harder to work with. Does anyone have experience with one or the other?

  2. #2
    Senior Member felixcat8888's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    9,125

    Default Re: Raynox 250 vs MSN-202

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirika View Post
    Raynox has these two snap on close up filters. The 250 is an 8x and the 202 is 25x, if I recall rightly. My question would be whether the 202 has significantly lower resolution than the 250, and whether the 202 has an uncomfortably close working distance. The way I see it, the two filters are very similarly priced, but I expect the 202 to have less resolution and harder to work with. Does anyone have experience with one or the other?
    Contact Jim and ask to try out. Then you will know the difference.
    Pentaxian for Life
    K1, KP, FA*28-70/2.8, FA31, 43 & FA77 Limiteds, K85/1.8, FA*200/2.8, A50/1.2



  3. #3
    Senior Member Override2Zion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Singapore/Bangkok Thailand
    Posts
    2,111

    Default Re: Raynox 250 vs MSN-202

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirika View Post
    Raynox has these two snap on close up filters. The 250 is an 8x and the 202 is 25x, if I recall rightly. My question would be whether the 202 has significantly lower resolution than the 250, and whether the 202 has an uncomfortably close working distance. The way I see it, the two filters are very similarly priced, but I expect the 202 to have less resolution and harder to work with. Does anyone have experience with one or the other?
    Hi Kirika, I've used to own the Raynox MSN-202. Tried it on a Nikon D80 and also a Lumix FZ-7. Its a lot easier to focus properly on the FZ-7 as compared to when used on a Nikon D80 DSLR (was using it with a 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 at 18mm). The focusing distance has to be 30mm IIRC, not more not less, not much tolerance to play with. You'll need a good tripod so that you could play around with the adjustments and get the right focusing distance. When used on the FZ-7, it was relatively easier to focus even when hand-held. Hope this helps.
    Nikon D200/D700/D800 User :)
    [www.PositiveStudioProductions.com]

  4. #4

    Default Re: Raynox 250 vs MSN-202

    Whewps. 30mm basically means live insects are out of the question. Pity. I'm not sure about the difference in resolution between these two filters, tho. I think the ask Jim option is probably going to be the best one at the moment.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Raynox 250 vs MSN-202

    mind letting me know as well? i own a 202 but dont know the specs of a 250. thanks!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •