Close up lenses versus actual macro lens: Has anyone tried taking macro close up photographs with both the cheaper close up lenses and the more expensive macro lens to compare the...

wpas

Has anyone tried taking macro close up photographs with both the cheaper close up lenses and the more expensive macro lens to compare the difference in quality?

TomasV Loc: Haddon Heights, NJ

The cheap glass does have it’s drawbacks. Some of them are subtle, some of them are really noticeable. It’s a really broad question. Are you looking at anything specific? Most non photographers probably would nit notice the difference if it was shot with a cheaper lens.

Mark Sturtevant Loc: Grand Blanc, MI

I have moved through a few upgrades. Started with a stock 50mm lens on extension tubes, to a true macro, and i have used the Raynox 150 close up lens on various lenses. That close up lens is considered quite good, and I agree. Still, the macro is sharpest if you compare closely. But one can be very happy with using a less expensive non-macro option.
Other options, the best of both worlds, is to use one of the non-name brand macro lenses like the Tamron macro. This is quite good, and you can get used, older model macro lenses that are very affordable. So you don't necessarily have to compromise on IQ if you do your research.

wpas

I am looking at the Hoya 58mm HMC Close-Up Filter Set II, Includes +1, +2 and +4 Diopter Filters versus one of the more expensive macro lenses recommended by the forum. I am also looking at the Mcoplus Extnp Auto Focus Macro Extension Tube Set for Nikon AF AF-S DX FX SLR Cameras as I would only be doing the occasional close up picture. Which would be the better choice, the lenses or the tubes? Thanks

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

wpas wrote:

I am looking at the Hoya 58mm HMC Close-Up Filter Set II, Includes +1, +2 and +4 Diopter Filters versus one of the more expensive macro lenses recommended by the forum. I am also looking at the Mcoplus Extnp Auto Focus Macro Extension Tube Set for Nikon AF AF-S DX FX SLR Cameras as I would only be doing the occasional close up picture. Which would be the better choice, the lenses or the tubes? Thanks

In your case, I probably would not get a true m@cro lens. Of course the Tokina can be had for ~$400.00. There are numerous very good macro lenses from several makers. I have used virtually every option: Raynox, Nikon’s closeup lenses (think a high quality “filter”, lens stacking, lens reversal, extension tubes. By far the easiest and best results are obtained using a macro lens. They vary in price from $150.00 for used manual focus to $1200 for a new brand name macro. In the right hands, with skill and practice, most are unlikely to cipher the difference.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

wpas wrote:

I am looking at the Hoya 58mm HMC Close-Up Filter Set II, Includes +1, +2 and +4 Diopter Filters versus one of the more expensive macro lenses recommended by the forum. I am also looking at the Mcoplus Extnp Auto Focus Macro Extension Tube Set for Nikon AF AF-S DX FX SLR Cameras as I would only be doing the occasional close up picture. Which would be the better choice, the lenses or the tubes? Thanks

If I were you, I would get the Hoya Close up filter set.I started with them many years ago.Results were excellent. When I taught photography at the University of Vermont continuing education, I told my students about close up filters. If you get serious with closeup and want to go the next step, then a macro lens.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

wpas wrote:

Has anyone tried taking macro close up photographs with both the cheaper close up lenses and the more expensive macro lens to compare the difference in quality?

Yes. To answer your question. I have a true macro lens, and also some high quality Canon close up lenses. And extension tubes. They all have a place, but I would avoid the inexpensive single element close up lenses unless you are working on a very restricted budget.

radiojohn

Don't forget reverse-adapter rings! [Look it up]

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

wpas wrote:

Has anyone tried taking macro close up photographs with both the cheaper close up lenses and the more expensive macro lens to compare the difference in quality?

I tried one of them (a cheapie) many years ago and was disappointed. You're sacrificing too much for the low price. However, Nikon (and probably Canon) makes a close-up lens that probably gives better results than one of those $6.00 add-ons.
https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D-SLR-Close-Lens-52mm/dp/B00NJ0R9AC

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

A cheapie screw-on lens will get you closer focus, but image will suffer in quality. The Nikon/Canon multi- element screw-on lenses are better quality. Extension rings do not add glass into the image production, therefore do not degrade image quality. But nothing can really beat a dedicated Macro (Flat-Field) lens. The single element screw-on items are Lenses...NOT FILTERS.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Pablo8 said, and I agree... A cheapie screw-on lens will get you closer focus, but image will suffer in quality. The Nikon/Canon multi- element screw-on lenses are better quality. Extension rings do not add glass into the image production, therefore do not degrade image quality. But nothing can really beat a dedicated Macro (Flat-Field) lens. ...."

There is one screw-on that when I bought mine has 4 elements construction, Opteka 10x Macro Lens. $20 - $30 depending on size. Multi elements [4] correct for the different bending of light that varies with wave length.
http://opteka.com/10x.aspx

Raynox is a snapon and has 2-3 elements depending on size. Requires a snapon adapter! The cost of a Raynox on Ebay is $81 and of course there are those UHH who shout that more money you spend the better the product.... OK, I will sell you the bottom of a Coke Bottle for $100!!!

http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/dcr/dcr250/indexdcr250eg.htm

rdubreuil Loc: Dummer, NH USA

wpas wrote:

I am looking at the Hoya 58mm HMC Close-Up Filter Set II, Includes +1, +2 and +4 Diopter Filters versus one of the more expensive macro lenses recommended by the forum. I am also looking at the Mcoplus Extnp Auto Focus Macro Extension Tube Set for Nikon AF AF-S DX FX SLR Cameras as I would only be doing the occasional close up picture. Which would be the better choice, the lenses or the tubes? Thanks

If you intend only the occasional close up don't invest in a lens you'll rarely use. Work with the lenses you have and get both the extension tubes and close up filters and experiment. That route will limit your uses though, with a macro lens you gain the versatility of using it as a standard prime lens too, it's not relegated to shooting macro images only. As mentioned already though, older true macro/micro lenses can be had for 400.00 or less, even a new Tokina 100mm falls in the 400.00 range. As for used lenses for example you can find Nikon Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D lenses for 200 or 300 dollars on eBay or Amazon all the time, an excellent macro/walk around lens. If you've got a local camera shop you may find a bargain there on a used lens. I guess it all depends on your budget and intended uses. Good luck in your selection and happy shooting.

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

wpas wrote:

Has anyone tried taking macro close up photographs with both the cheaper close up lenses and the more expensive macro lens to compare the difference in quality?

One of the standards of a Macro lens is being 'flat plane'. e.g. sharp focus on a flat surface such as a paper photograph, document, postage stamp. Standard lens focus on a fixed distance from the lens and is a curve.

Being flat plane is important when focus stacking esp. on something small such as an insect or a diamond setting on a ring.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

One point not mentioned is that a true macro lens (zoom lenses with a macro feature are not true macro lenses either) allows one to vary the magnification & composition by simply turning the focus ring. Tubes and the close up lens (filters) require one to add/remove sections in order to do that. Not really an issue with static subjects, but can be with mobile subjects.

Chris Bennett

I use an inexpensive screw-on lens that came as part of a kit and it provides reasonable results while I save for a real macro lens.
I was worried about chromatic aberration but it has not been an issue. Because I am shooting handheld from about 3" from the subject (which keeps moving) I tend to not use the focus ring and instead simply move in and out until the subject is in focus. That and taking a lot of shots to ensure I get the right focus.

(Download)