Wanted Macro lens

Hello,

Ive only just joined so i hope its ok to post in here so soon.

I'm looking for a 'basic' macro lens, dont want to spend too much money until i learn more about them but would like to get hold of something for a play with during the half term holidays next week.

Ive also thought about extensions tubes....but likewise need to do more research.

Ive seen things like 28-80 mm macros and 28mm......and 70-300.....on ebay but i think/like the sound of a fixed focal length...but i dont know, hence this 'want' add.

Any advice or offers would be really helpful.

thanks

ian

Raynox DCR-250.

Superb little addon and if you decide you want to progress to a dedicated macro lens you can sell them for near enough the amount you originally paid. (I kept mine as well because it fits in the bag nicely when you dont want to take a macro lens).

The chepest way to get macro may be a reverse adaptor and cheap wideangle lens, or an old bellows set. Metering will be more tricky but will give you an idea if macro is for you.


I will be selling a Pentax smc-m 50mm f4 macro. Send a PM if of interest.

Thanks, ive had a look at the Raynox and a couple of reviews this morning. It looks like an interesting alternative. I probably need to do more checking as i cant quite get my head around the effects of using different lens. ie If i use it on a 50mm lens or a 70-300mm then what magnification will i get or how close can i get to the subject....and which is better !

Thanks again, i can see this is going to be a day of internetting

you would get higher magnification with a longer lens, so the 70-300mm set at 300m would give most magnification and the 50mm lens the least.

hope that helps.

Thats pretty much what i was thinking but what i dont understand is how close you can get with a 300mm lens compared to a 28mm and how much that will effect the final quality. I get the impression that with the sort of lenses i can justify buying at the moment that, for example, you can get to within 25mm of the subject with a 28mm lens but maybe 500mm distance with a 300mm lens. That seems to suggest to me that i would be relying on the extra magnification to make up for the greater distance (to some degree) and that any lack of quality in the lens (considering my budget) would also be magnified.

thanks for your reply

Thanks, a bit more research and i might drop you a line. I already have a 1.4 50mm lens (not macro) so i think i'm more inclined to get something different, please feel free to tell me i'm talking pants

If you've already got a 50mm then a suitably sized reversing ring (49mm?) and/or a staking ring (to reverse mount it on the kit lens / one of your other lenses) will be a very cheap way to get into macro.
A 50 coupled to the kit vignettes badly when zoomed out (see the 'cheap macro' in my portfolio) but can get you to 1:1 for around a fiver. I believe the ratio of the reversed lens focal length to the other one gives the magnification.

When used reversed their is no need for a lens to be a macro model.

If you'd rather go for a macro lens I'd recommend a focal length of around 100mm to get a reasonable working distance. Some older examples are available reasonably cheap and work well.

Mike