Raynox 250 or 50mm f1.8?


Mythmaker

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2011
1,022
2
38
Buangkok MRT
#1
Anyone tried before?

1) Mounting a Raynox DCR250 directly
2) Reverse mount a 50 1.8 in front of the lens

Which would be better in terms of working distance, maximum magnification and image quality?
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#2
Anyone tried before?

1) Mounting a Raynox DCR250 directly
2) Reverse mount a 50 1.8 in front of the lens

Which would be better in terms of working distance, maximum magnification and image quality?
Quite heavily discussed in the MACRO section. I suggest reading the stickies there where this is covered extensively. Plus the existing 50+ threads on this.
 

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#3
Anyone tried before?

1) Mounting a Raynox DCR250 directly
2) Reverse mount a 50 1.8 in front of the lens

Which would be better in terms of working distance, maximum magnification and image quality?
Tried both. I like the Raynox DCR250 better.
 

Mythmaker

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2011
1,022
2
38
Buangkok MRT
#4
Quite heavily discussed in the MACRO section. I suggest reading the stickies there where this is covered extensively. Plus the existing 50+ threads on this.
Existing 50+ threads? From which forum? As far as I can see, there's no macro discussion forum here, only a gallery.

Or are you referring to this singular thread?

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255554&page=7

There is *no* mention of my question, or much info on coupling rings.

Tried both. I like the Raynox DCR250 better.
Thanks for the more constructive answer :)

May I know why?
 

pinholecam

Moderator
Staff member
Jul 23, 2007
10,954
91
48
#5
Anyone tried before?

1) Mounting a Raynox DCR250 directly
2) Reverse mount a 50 1.8 in front of the lens

Which would be better in terms of working distance, maximum magnification and image quality?
It all depends on what you have as the main lens.
Its more flexible if its a zoom since you can then vary magnification by changing the focal length on the lens.
With a long prime as the main lens, usually the quality is a bit better. (but little variability to the magnification)

The Raynox will be easier to put on and off because its clip on.
For the same FL main lens, the Raynox should give more magnification too.

In the end for me, I find that they both work on the same principle of closing up the minimum focus distance via a 'close up lens' so it just boils down to what you already have (eg. already have a cheap 50/1.8 to try) and want to spend.
 

Mythmaker

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2011
1,022
2
38
Buangkok MRT
#6
It all depends on what you have as the main lens.
Its more flexible if its a zoom since you can then vary magnification by changing the focal length on the lens.
With a long prime as the main lens, usually the quality is a bit better. (but little variability to the magnification)

The Raynox will be easier to put on and off because its clip on.
For the same FL main lens, the Raynox should give more magnification too.

In the end for me, I find that they both work on the same principle of closing up the minimum focus distance via a 'close up lens' so it just boils down to what you already have (eg. already have a cheap 50/1.8 to try) and want to spend.
Thanks for the info!

So if it's the same main lens, the raynox would give better IQ eh. Noted haha. I do have a raynox. I also have a coupling ring. I have sold my macro lens long ago though, decided it's not really worth it to keep. Thinking whether a Canon 50 f1.4 + raynox would be better or a 50 f1.4 + 50 f1.8 would be better lol. If the latter is better I would go ahead and buy a 50 1.8, but since you mention it's not as good, I guess I'll just stick with a raynox then :)
 

Bukitimah

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2010
1,269
6
38
Singapore
#7
My combination is 50 f1.8 plus Raynox 250. I am happy with this as I am not into magnifying subject too much. Flash is important in my opinion of you are into macro.
 

pinholecam

Moderator
Staff member
Jul 23, 2007
10,954
91
48
#8
Thanks for the info!

So if it's the same main lens, the raynox would give better IQ eh. Noted haha. I do have a raynox. I also have a coupling ring. I have sold my macro lens long ago though, decided it's not really worth it to keep. Thinking whether a Canon 50 f1.4 + raynox would be better or a 50 f1.4 + 50 f1.8 would be better lol. If the latter is better I would go ahead and buy a 50 1.8, but since you mention it's not as good, I guess I'll just stick with a raynox then :)
Raynox just gives a higher magnification.
IQ between the 2 options is about the same.

As Bukittimah said, lighting is more important
 

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#9
Existing 50+ threads? From which forum? As far as I can see, there's no macro discussion forum here, only a gallery.

Or are you referring to this singular thread?

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255554&page=7

There is *no* mention of my question, or much info on coupling rings.



Thanks for the more constructive answer :)

May I know why?
Note that I am not too much into macro. But I did a couple of macro shots once... with both Raynox and reversing of 50mm lens.

The Raynox is easier to use as compared to the 50mm lens in my opinion.

My set up with the reverse 50mm lens on a 100mm macro lens.








A shot with Raynox 250 on my 100mm macro,




The usual disclaimer, I am not expert in this field, the above is the best I could do.

(I am not a photographer, just somebody who happened to have a few cameras).
 

Last edited:

Mythmaker

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2011
1,022
2
38
Buangkok MRT
#10
Thank you for the images, they helped alot :) I guess I'll go with the Raynox instead of the coupling ring then.

A person who happened to have a few cameras won't put in so much effort in such stuff haha.
 

shierwin

Senior Member
Dec 29, 2008
3,487
10
38
East Coast
#11
Thanks for the info!

So if it's the same main lens, the raynox would give better IQ eh. Noted haha. I do have a raynox. I also have a coupling ring. I have sold my macro lens long ago though, decided it's not really worth it to keep. Thinking whether a Canon 50 f1.4 + raynox would be better or a 50 f1.4 + 50 f1.8 would be better lol. If the latter is better I would go ahead and buy a 50 1.8, but since you mention it's not as good, I guess I'll just stick with a raynox then :)
If you use 50mm lens with 50mm lens reverse mount, you get 50/50 = 1x magnification only.
If you use 200mm lens to body and 50mm lens reverse mount to the 200mm, you get 200/50 = 4x magnification
and so on....

Direct reverse lens onto the body requires different calculation for magnification achieved
 

Mythmaker

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2011
1,022
2
38
Buangkok MRT
#12
If you use 50mm lens with 50mm lens reverse mount, you get 50/50 = 1x magnification only.
If you use 200mm lens to body and 50mm lens reverse mount to the 200mm, you get 200/50 = 4x magnification
and so on....

Direct reverse lens onto the body requires different calculation for magnification achieved
Wow, didn't know this formula exists. Any idea on the working distance? No point having 4x MM when working distance is 1cm? haha.
 

shierwin

Senior Member
Dec 29, 2008
3,487
10
38
East Coast
#13
Wow, didn't know this formula exists. Any idea on the working distance? No point having 4x MM when working distance is 1cm? haha.
Depends on the lenses mounted. Can try them out. Working distance will definitely be very small :)
 

Last edited:

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#14
Actually with very high magnification, I would suggest using a tripod and delay shoot. This is because, a slight shake will be magnified and your photo will become blur.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,662
69
48
lil red dot
#15
Do you mind sharing what you intend to shoot? Without that info all suggestions are just shots in the wind.
 

Mythmaker

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2011
1,022
2
38
Buangkok MRT
#16
My target is Shikhei Goh's level. Or biker11 from 500px. Both of which requires magnification of way more than 1:1.

Getting a MPE-65 would be alot easier, just currently trying to see if there's other way of doing things (hence exploring raynox vs coupling rings). Or as a backup by using 70-200 f4 IS and raynox/coupling ring for some unplanned macro (in case I ever get a MPE-65, I can't possibly bring it everywhere I go lol).
 

Last edited:
Top Bottom