Another point to consider is that, given the limited focus distance, it is best to choose subjects that a) aren’t so small that you won’t be able to get close enough, and b) aren’t so big that their size extends beyond the limits of the frame. With the 55mm and 75mm, I found that the perfect size was around the equivalent of a 25 cent coin – any smaller or bigger and I couldn’t make the composition work. The only exception was if I wanted to capture a small object within its surrounding environment (i.e. a spider in its web) or focus in on a specific area of large object (i.e. the stigma of a flower). E-M1, 1/125, f/ 8, ISO 400 – 75mm with Raynox 250 E-M1, 1/160, f/ 11, ISO 400 – 75mm with Raynox 250 There are other insects such as crane flies and shield bugs that stay still in plain sight for long periods, as do some spiders, especially the ones that have webs that they sit in the middle of waiting for lunch to arrive. A problem with spiders in particular (but also for some insects) is that the best photo opportunities are when they leap into action on some prey - and the rapid flexibility of hand-held with flash is usually much better than using a tripod in those circumstances. Image Quality:These lenses are surprisingly sharp in the center and do okay in the corners depending on the main lens. CAs are usually pretty minimal.For the price you cant beat a Raynox for getting up to and beyond 1:1. Outdoors, which is where I do almost all my macro work, I often find it difficult to use a tripod in that way.

When you use a close-up lens on a zoom lens you keep the working distance (between the close-up lens and the subject) roughly constant and alter the magnification/framing of the picture by altering the amount of zoom.To estimate the magnification with a Raynox and the primary lens focused at infinity, use this simple formula: The great advantage for starting out with a Raynox is that you can use all the in-camera aperture controls like you would normally, but most importantly you won't have to fret looking through a very dark viewfinder as you do with reversed manual lenses. Learning how to keep still and stalk is hard enough and the added complication of a dark viewfinder really isn't especially helpful. The non-DCR models like the MSN-202 and 505 will not cover a full frame sensor are for APS-C or smaller sensors only. The depth of field will be very narrow. You get the maximum depth of field by using the smallest aperture available to you (the largest f-number, quite possibly f/22). You may find it easier to start out by using a tripod and rail and move onto handheld later. In practise though, adjusting a tripod and rails tends to slow you down outside and only really works for me if the subject doesn't move.

That brings us to conversion lens. Yes, usually just mentioning the words in front of any serious photographer result in a uncontrollable, painful contortion of their facial muscles. Raynox proves this doesn't have to be the case. Mounting the Raynox DCR-250 on a telephoto lens the Nikkor 80-200mm, I also preserve the advantage of utilizing the zoom. With a fixed-focus reversed lens, you have to swap extension tubes to change your magnification factor. Watch Outs Squeeze the shutter release slowly rather than jabbing at it the moment the desired part of the subject is in focus. I have been looking around the macro section (some wonderful work posted by people) & I have seen their insect feeders. Teleconverters are an even worse choice than extension tubes. They are very expensive, the usually create very ugly bokeh,and they increase the effective f-number by an additional factor of whatever their power is, 1.4X or 2X. If you are at an effective f/11 at a 1 : 2 ratio,then adding a 2X teleconverter would push you to 1 : 1 but at a new effective f/22! Your 55-250 is the better of your current zoom lenses to use with a close-up lens, so lets compare to that. To make things easy, I'll convert everything into the 35mm (full frame) equivalent focal lengths, which I'll show as (FF).

How to Attach the Raynox DCR-250 on the Olympus 60mm and 30mm Macro Lenses?

The Raynox DCR-250 Macro Lens is a macro lens which screws onto the front of the lens and performs as a magnifier of the subject you intend to photograph. The lens is built out of high indexoptical glass and creates a really sharp image. The lens provides a magnification power of 2.5x and includes a front filter thread which measures in at 49mm, enabling you to attach innovative filters for intriguing effects. When people embark on their photography journey, they usually start out with a basic kit zoom, only adding more lenses to their collection once they become more serious about the hobby. The Raynox 250 is a great solution for these people, as it allows them to dabble in the macro genre without making a huge initial investment. E-M1, 1/160, f/ 9, ISO 200 – 100mm Some people (including some of the macro stars) do sometimes use sugary stuff to keep insects busy or attract them to a pre-rigged photo setup, but it isn't something I've tried yet. Raynox lenses come sold in a box with an adapter, and the Raynox adapter clips onto the front of your main lens. Just screw the Raynox into the adapter and clip the squeezy bits to the very front of the lens: it grips onto the thread that will usually hold a filter. It all looks a little odd but the adapter is the way it is so it will fit onto many lens diameters. Does anyone have any experience with using the Raynox DCR-250 with a 72mm lens? I've tried the lens with cardboard over the end with a 43mm diameter hole in it and there is significant vignetting even at full zoom (it's a Nikon 18-200mm), so I'm guessing that I'm going to see the same thing with the Raynox adapter. Raynox sell an adapter to convert from 72mm to 43mm, so that physical fit isn't a problem.

Raynox with 43mm mounting threads will cover a full frame sensor but the 37mm threaded models are better suited for a crop sensor camera. Raynox Close-up Lenses Raynox Macroscopic Lens Model M-150 Incidentally, what follows won't matter if you are going to get a macro lens, but while you are using close-up lenses have you looked at the Raynox 150 and/or the Canon 500D close-up lenses (or other close-up lenses that are less powerful than the 250)? It depends on what sort of pictures you want to capture, and my preferences are I think not main line, but FWIW although I started out using the 250, the 150 is now what I most often use for insects and the 500D is what I most often use for flowers, larger insects such as crane flies, dragonflies, damselflies and butterflies, and some other "larger small animals" such as large slugs (although it makes you get a bit closer than some of these subjects like). I believe it should work. I have found it vital to get a suitable working distance - the distance between the lens (the front of the 250) and the subject.The 150 is less powerful than the 250. It costs the same as the 250 and is easier to use than the 250 because of the lesser magnification and because it has a greater range of working distance, and it also gets you a bit further from the subject than the 250 (about 6" to 8" for the 150 versus about 4" to 5" for the 250), which can be handy for some insects. Macro photography is generally associated with photography of flowers and insects, even so this type of photography is not limited to only these types of photographs. This type of macro lens is used for taking close-up photography of jewelry, diamonds, very well used in the field of numismatics as well as to photograph food products and is even used in science. Timing can also be an issue with using the self-timer out of doors. The slightest puff of wind can ruin things, and around here at least it is rare to get a day when the air is completely still. I often have wait for a moment when the subject is momentarily still to take the shot and the self-timer doesn't give me enough control for this.

Using the 150 on my 45-200mm lens at full zoom of 200mm, I capture a scene about 18mm across, with a working distance of between about 164 to 210mm.Focal distance. This is the main reason I wanted to test the Raynox DCR-250. I primarily have used a reversed 50mm lens with extension tubes for macro-photography and have been very happy with the results. But, by using a reversed lens, the focal distance is very short. Comparing two similar magnification levels, the focal distance of a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 with 27.5mm extension tube is 3.0 inches, while the focal distance at 200mm on the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 80-200mm 1:2.8 D with Raynox filter is 6.1 inches. While three inches doesn't sound like much, when you're dealing with very sketchy insects, the further away the better. Ever try to get close to a dragonfly or butterfly? Those eyes can see you coming. You may get quite serious vignetting with the 18-55. If you have a 55-something then you will may get much less vignetting. You may get none. For example, on my micro four thirds Panasonic G3 the 45-200 and 45-175 lenses don't have any vignetting with the Raynox 250 or Raynox 150 but the 14-42 has very serious vignetting (as in "looking through a porthole") at the wide end and the vignetting doesn't completely disappear until more than 30mm. On my APS-C Canon 70D the 55-250 doesn't have any vignetting with the Raynox 250 or 150 but the 18-55 has very serious vignetting at the wide end and the vignetting doesn't completely disappear until about 30mm. Usual problems are more common to macro in general than the Raynox in particular, but in some ways that's why it works so well for so little money. My SX10is has a crop ratio of 5.6, and its focal length ranges from 5mm to 100mm, which means that: The Raynox DCR-250 Macro Lens for Fujifilm X100 is a macro lens which screws onto the front of the lens and performs as a magnifier of the subject you intend to photograph. The lens is built out of high indexoptical glass and creates a really sharp image. The lens provides a magnification power of 2.5x and includes a front filter thread which measures in at 49mm, enabling you to attach innovative filters for intriguing effects.