Better Macro for Nikkon 80-200 f2.8

[guakorn]

which is a better setup?
A. Nikkon 80-200 f2.8 + Canon 500D Closeup Filter
B. Nikkon 80-200 f2.8 + Raynox 250

 

[lsisaxon]

which is a better setup?
A. Nikkon 80-200 f2.8 + Canon 500D Closeup Filter
B. Nikkon 80-200 f2.8 + Raynox 250

None of the above. AF-S Micro 105/2.8 VR.

 

[sherwoei]

Might want to consider using 1.4TC or extension tube together with those filter. But if you have extra $ ... go with the micro/macro lens.

below is example of using Raynox 250 with good result,
http://www.naturephotosociety.org.sg/dcforum/DCForumID14/3875.html

 

[ortega]

the 80-200 is heavy and when shooting at macro distances
everything is magnified, including camera shake

if on a budget, get a 2nd hand macro lens
don't need the working distance, 60mm macro will do the trick nicely

 

[Xiao_shin]

Do you already have a 80-200?

What will be your main usage? If I can remember correctly, C500D have working distance up to 500mm while R250 is 250mm.

For 200mm focal length, C500D is recommended. Or so they say.

Does Raynox has 77mm version?

 

[ExplorerZ]

the 80-200 2nd touch sucks at close-up without any attachment at 200mm (talking about image quality and also magnification), not sure how it fare with filters tho...

 

[hacknet]

i'm actually thinking of slapping tubes on my 200mm f/4, as many have said, the lens being heavy and of a 77mm filter ring doesnt help one bit, why not put the money for the 500d aside for a 55mm manual micro?

 

[leyo04]

which is a better setup?
A. Nikkon 80-200 f2.8 + Canon 500D Closeup Filter
B. Nikkon 80-200 f2.8 + Raynox 250

a. it will work, you'll get acceptable results. Nothing PS can't handle but don't overdo it. I currently have this rig. It's big, it's heavy and you need a tripod.

b. the dcr-250 is too small for 80-200mm.

you may want to try out the affordable dedicated macro lens tamron 90mm 2.8. It's cheap, it's sharp and it's light.

 

[jmmtn4aj]

WHEN I get a 70-200 I'm hoping to make that + 500D my macro setup. Lots of people seem to be getting good results with the 500D

 

[lsisaxon]

i'm actually thinking of slapping tubes on my 200mm f/4, as many have said, the lens being heavy and of a 77mm filter ring doesnt help one bit, why not put the money for the 500d aside for a 55mm manual micro?

The longer the focal length, the longer the tube needs to be in order to focus nearer also.

 

[giantcanopy]

a. it will work, you'll get acceptable results. Nothing PS can't handle but don't overdo it. I currently have this rig. It's big, it's heavy and you need a tripod.

Before i got a dedicated macro lens, I used to fix a 500D with my 70-200mm and ever tried fixing an R1C1 + SB 800 on top of it handheld :bsmilie:

It is a good setup. But like many others i will recommend a dedicated macro lens for the flexibility and the lightweight, not to mention the greater amount of details the macro lens can capture.

Rgds
Ryan