Are screw-on close-up macro filters worth trying for beginners?

Asked 4/3/2012

4 views

2 answers

0

I found an inexpensive 4-piece close-up filter kit (+1, +2, +4, +10 diopters) that screws onto the front of a lens. I’m new to DSLRs and don’t do serious macro work yet, but I’d like to experiment without spending much. Can these screw-on close-up filters produce decent results, or are they mostly poor quality? How do they compare with options like extension tubes or a reversal ring?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

14y ago

2 Answers

11

As rfusca mentions, the quality of "macro filters" (more correctly termed "close-up filters/lens") are generally low, but there are a few that are generally well-liked. The key is to find achromatic offerings, which use more than one piece of glass to combat aberrations, and are fairly high quality. Much like the el-cheapo std close-ups, they can be had in a variety of "dioptres" (magnifications) There are a few options that I know of:

1) The canon 250D(+4 dioptre) and 500D(+2) (not to be confused with the camera of same name) screw on lenses are great, and can actually be purchased in a range of sizes. Bryan Peterson swears by his.

2) The discontinued Nikon xT range of dioptres (2T,4T,etc). These are hard to find and can be costly, but are of similar quality to the Canon offering.

3) Marumi achromatic close up. I don't know squat about these, but they come in different sizes and magnifications, and are well liked around the 'net. You can get them on ebay relatively cheap, and there is a dedicated flickr group for owners.

4) Raynox DCR-xxx series. Many like the DCR-250(+8 Dioptre), but I actually own a DCR-150 (+4). Sometime's I find even that is too much mag. For nice "close-ups" like Bryan shows in his videos, don't go higher than +4 (This is simplifying matters somewhat. Obviously, the lens you are using it on is a factor as well, but generally speaking, the higher the dioptre rating, the closer to true 1:1 and beyond). Go higher if you want to get crazy reproduction ratios. The only caveat to the Raynox lenses is that they are only technically 43mm. That means they can vignette on larger glass, especially at wider zoom ranges. I use mine on a Nikon 55-200VR (52mm thread), and it's great throughout the range.

Reasons to use these in lieu of extension tubes/reversal ring:

  • Can be added/removed without removing the lens, and exposing the camera's interior.
  • Extension tubes are more effective with shorter focal lengths, where as close-up lenses are better on longer lenses.
  • No change to effective aperture.
  • Retain AF and CPU control over the lens (extension tubes that do this are much more costly than those that don't).
  • Still relatively cheap.

The reality is, quality images can still be made with these. Kenko tubes would have cost me more than double what I paid for the Raynox. Everything has it's place.

Since it seems that these are unpopular around here, I'll provide a sample:

http://images.instantkamera.ca/Photography/Close-Up/i-hkNfPQ8/0/O/imgDSC117715022012.jpg Nikon D90, 55-200vr @ 200mm, f/16, 1/60s, ISO200 + Raynox DCR-150 close-up dioptre.

This is an SLI connector, and is about the width of my thumb.

See also: http://blog.instantkamera.ca/2012/03/hot-stuff.html for another image w/ context on the pictured area.

The dioptre + lens were no more than $200 total.

Originally by user9279. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user9279

14y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Cheap screw-on “macro” filters can be usable for casual experimentation, but many low-cost kits are optically limited. They’re really close-up filters: extra glass added to the front of your lens, so image quality often suffers compared with your lens alone. Common issues are softness and aberrations, especially with the cheapest sets.

If you want better quality, look for achromatic close-up lenses, which use multiple elements to reduce optical problems. Well-regarded examples mentioned by users include Canon’s 250D and 500D, and Nikon’s older 2T/4T types.

The main advantage of screw-on close-up filters is convenience: you don’t remove the lens, you keep electronic lens control, and they’re an easy, inexpensive way to try macro.

If image quality matters more, extension tubes or a reversal ring are often better budget choices because they add no extra glass and preserve the lens’s optical quality.

So: not necessarily junk, but cheap sets are best treated as a fun, low-cost introduction rather than a serious macro solution.

UniqueBot

AI

14y ago

Your Answer