Macro help needed!! :)


jansen81

New Member
Aug 31, 2010
48
0
0
Singapore, Tampines
#1
I have some inquiries to find out from you all, macro experts

I'm intending to purchase this len: Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF in the near future. I'll understand this is not a macro len, but I would wan to explore into macro photography.

What additional accessories do I need to buy to get those macro shot with the above mentioned len? I do not need the picture to be lifesize. Just as long I could be able to zoom down to the magnification (e.g an Ant or Butterfly) and achieve a good sharp pictures quality. I heard of Raynox and macro filter. Which one should I choose? Kindly recommend! Thank
 

Aug 9, 2009
244
0
16
#2
Raynox will give better image quality as compared to those close up filters. You can try extension tubes as well.:)
 

AhKar

New Member
Oct 2, 2010
105
0
0
#3
Please note the the 17-50 do not work well with th e Raynox and you will see serious vignetting on it. I think if you search for the documentation it does say that it's not suitable for the 17-50.
 

NovJoe

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2009
5,650
0
0
~Sunny Little Island~
#4
First of all Tamron 17-50/2.8 has a filter size of 72mm there are 2 methods to convert it into macro capable lens.

1) Step down ring from 72mm to 67mm + Raynox 250
*Note you will get vignetting like AhKar mentioned.

2) Extension tube set to get better magnification from your Tammy 17-50.

Personally, I would go with option 2 in the case of your lens.
 

meisterSG

New Member
May 26, 2010
268
0
0
#6
I have this tammy 17-50 f/2.8 but I use this for landscape, event and walk about lens. It has 67 mm filter diameter and not recommended to be used with raynox as it will result in serious vignetting.
I would say better to attach an extension tube if you really want to use this lens in macro shooting. Or consider buying an 18-55 kit lens + reverse ring adapter and use the reverse lens technique. Check some of my post in "macro and close up" threads to see some of my captures using reversed lens... Cheers!
 

jansen81

New Member
Aug 31, 2010
48
0
0
Singapore, Tampines
#9
I have this tammy 17-50 f/2.8 but I use this for landscape, event and walk about lens. It has 67 mm filter diameter and not recommended to be used with raynox as it will result in serious vignetting.
I would say better to attach an extension tube if you really want to use this lens in macro shooting. Or consider buying an 18-55 kit lens + reverse ring adapter and use the reverse lens technique. Check some of my post in "macro and close up" threads to see some of my captures using reversed lens... Cheers!
Hi Meistersg, I saw your macro photo, pretty nice! :) I heard of extension tube but I understand there is some limitation (e.g no Autofocus) or probably there is some extension tube which comes with autofocus, but rather exp.

I'm quite interested in your reverse lens techniques. However, I do not possessed strong knowledge on how it works. To my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong), 2 lens are required (preferably 1 prime and 1 zoom) and 1 reverse ring. Hence, I got to attach the zoom lens first to the camera, followed by reverse ring adapter, and lastly a prime len attached to the reverse ring adapter in the other way round. In term of setting, I totally have no ideas.

Questions for the reverse len methods:
1) Should the focal length set at longest focal length for the zoom len (eg 55mm)?
2) Can i set the aperture at the highest for the zoom len (f3.5) -Please note I do have a kit len 18-55mm
3) As indicated, I have a kit len (18-55mm) and intending to buy a tamron 17-50mm SP f2.8, can i attach these 2 lens together using the reverse len methods. If yes, what will be the set up?

Hope to hear from you soon! :)
 

GRbenji

New Member
May 24, 2010
1,057
1
0
#10
note that using this type of filter will cause degradation to your photo quality.

raynox is a better filter.
Are you aware that raynox is also a diopter aka closeup filter?

Closeup filters come with single or dual element (achromatic). Dual element ones reduce chromatic aberrations. There are other diopters that are just as good, if not better, than raynox, and do not cause as serious vignetting.
 

jansen81

New Member
Aug 31, 2010
48
0
0
Singapore, Tampines
#11
Are you aware that raynox is also a diopter aka closeup filter?

Closeup filters come with single or dual element (achromatic). Dual element ones reduce chromatic aberrations. There are other diopters that are just as good, if not better, than raynox, and do not cause as serious vignetting.
It seem that there are quite a number of ways for macro photography. So what the difference between Hoya +4 close up filter and Raynox +250. Aren't they close up filter too. IMO, Raynox seem to have a better pictures quality in terms of sharpness.
 

GRbenji

New Member
May 24, 2010
1,057
1
0
#12
It seem that there are quite a number of ways for macro photography. So what the difference between Hoya +4 close up filter and Raynox +250. Aren't they close up filter too. IMO, Raynox seem to have a better pictures quality in terms of sharpness.
Raynox is a +8 diopter, higher magnification.

Adding a diopter reduces the working distance and the ability to focus to infinity. It's not that easy to use for beginners.
 

sinned79

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2009
10,868
3
0
Singapore
www.aboutlove.sg
#13
Are you aware that raynox is also a diopter aka closeup filter?

Closeup filters come with single or dual element (achromatic). Dual element ones reduce chromatic aberrations. There are other diopters that are just as good, if not better, than raynox, and do not cause as serious vignetting.
of cos i am aware. i have used both. Raynox quality is better then a Hoya +4 (refering to #5).

thats why i said in my last line, raynox is a better filter. isn't it?

Here's some comparison:

a hoya +4 with 50mm f1.8 shot with my old Canon 450D last year -


raynox with 50mm f1.8 on my 5DMKII recently -


although one is shot with FF one is shot with a crop body... the sharpness is very obvious.
 

Last edited:

sinned79

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2009
10,868
3
0
Singapore
www.aboutlove.sg
#15
anyway just to share.

i decided to give raynox a miss and use extension tube a try instead. the reason why i decided not to get a dedicated macro is due to i only shoot macros once a while... ;p

using your existing 17-50mm... u just need 2 x 25mm extension tube or any combination as long as it reaches 50mm (the formulae is magnification = length of extension tube / lens focal length, so 50/50 gives u 1 which is 1:1 magnification) ... then shoot at 50mm to achieve 1:1 magnification (actually is slightly more cos 17-50 itself should have some magnification by default).


but if u really like macros very much, you should get a dedicated macro lens like EFS 60mm f2.8 or the EF 100mm f2.8 USM. Third party wise, there is a tamron 90mm f2.8.
 

Last edited:

meisterSG

New Member
May 26, 2010
268
0
0
#16
Hi Meistersg, I saw your macro photo, pretty nice! :) I heard of extension tube but I understand there is some limitation (e.g no Autofocus) or probably there is some extension tube which comes with autofocus, but rather exp.

I'm quite interested in your reverse lens techniques. However, I do not possessed strong knowledge on how it works. To my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong), 2 lens are required (preferably 1 prime and 1 zoom) and 1 reverse ring. Hence, I got to attach the zoom lens first to the camera, followed by reverse ring adapter, and lastly a prime len attached to the reverse ring adapter in the other way round. In term of setting, I totally have no ideas.

Questions for the reverse len methods:
1) Should the focal length set at longest focal length for the zoom len (eg 55mm)?
2) Can i set the aperture at the highest for the zoom len (f3.5) -Please note I do have a kit len 18-55mm
3) As indicated, I have a kit len (18-55mm) and intending to buy a tamron 17-50mm SP f2.8, can i attach these 2 lens together using the reverse len methods. If yes, what will be the set up?

Hope to hear from you soon! :)
The one that you are saying is called "LENS STACKING" that is two lenses stacked together which one is in reversed position. The one I'm using is "REVERSED LENS" similar to the one shown below. Although, I do not use any external flash but just the built-in flash.


Some of the macro shooters who joined Jacob's outing surely had seen my setup. It's really quite funny looking setup so I'm so humble and shy to show off my gears to them... hahaha

In reversed lens technique, the longer the FL is the lower the magnification. And the shorter the FL is the higher the magnification. Thus, it is really the reversed of the normal usage of the lens.

With regards to the aperture setting, it is just the same as the normal lens. The bigger the opening is more shallow the DOF. If you are using Nikon 18-55 kit lens, it doesn't have aperture ring where you can set your aperture. What you need is a stick as shown in the picture above to open the aperture. Many of macro shooters who saw the stick on the end of my lens usually wonder what's that for.... hahaha
 

Last edited:

jansen81

New Member
Aug 31, 2010
48
0
0
Singapore, Tampines
#17
The one that you are saying is called "LENS STACKING" that is two lenses stacked together which one is in reversed position. The one I'm using is "REVERSED LENS" which is shown below. Although, I do not use any external flash but just the built-in flash.


Some of the macro shooters who joined Jacob's outing surely had seen my setup. It's really quite funny looking setup so I'm so humble and shy to show off my gears to them... hahaha

In reversed lens technique, the longer the FL is the lower the magnification. And the shorter the FL is the higher the magnification. Thus, it is really the reversed of the normal usage of the lens.

With regards to the aperture setting, it is just the same as the normal lens. The bigger the opening is more shallow the DOF. If you are using Nikon 18-55 kit lens, it doesn't have aperture ring where you can set your aperture. What you need is a stick as shown in the picture above to open the aperture. Many of macro shooters who saw the stick on the end of my lens usually wonder what's that for.... hahaha

What is the distance when you shoot those insects? From your series, most of the pictures are quite close up. Do you need to stand very close to get those shot? Are all your macro series taken with kit len 18-55mm only?
 

meisterSG

New Member
May 26, 2010
268
0
0
#18
What is the distance when you shoot those insects? From your series, most of the pictures are quite close up. Do you need to stand very close to get those shot? Are all your macro series taken with kit len 18-55mm only?
@55mm you need to be around 4" away from the subject and while you shorten your FL then your FD will become shorter as well. That's the good thing with reversed lens, you can get the magnification you need (about 4:1 max on 18-55mm lens) which a dedicated macro lens alone (1:1) cannot provide unless you attach an ET or a diopter (some use teleconverter). But the drawback is you cannot take photos of skittish and big subject.
Most of my shots are never cropped and were taken with 18-55 kit lens...
 

Last edited:

jansen81

New Member
Aug 31, 2010
48
0
0
Singapore, Tampines
#19
@55mm you need to be around 4" away from the subject and while you shorten your FL then your FD will become shorter as well. That's the good thing with reversed lens, you can get the magnification you need (about 4:1 max on 18-55mm lens) which a dedicated macro lens alone (1:1) cannot provide unless you attach an ET or a diopter (some use teleconverter). But the drawback is you cannot take photos of skittish and big subject.
Most of my shots are never cropped and were taken with 18-55 kit lens...
Nice, I might try this out this weekend. It seem to be the cheapest way of doing macro photography. Once I'm familiar in the future, then maybe I will consider trying out extension tube or getting a macro len :)
 

NovJoe

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2009
5,650
0
0
~Sunny Little Island~
#20
If im not wrong, the 17-50 has a filter thread of 67mm.
I know the reason why I've got the 72mm information.

The model with VC (Vibration Control) has a filter size of 72mm. whereas the model without VC will have a filter size of 67mm only.
http://www.tamron.com/en/photolens/di_II_hi_speed/a16.html
http://www.tamron.com/en/photolens/di_II_hi_speed/b005.html
http://www.tamron.com/en/photolens/di_II_hi_speed/
 

Last edited:
Top Bottom