Close-up lenses vs macro lenses?

[stevet1]

Are close-up lenses worth it, as opposed to buying a macro lens?

Some advertise that you can focus as close as 2 inches.

Steve Thomas

[SignifDigits]

Steve, I'm not sure what you mean by "close-up lens" here.  Do you mean close-up filters?  Or perhaps something like a Raynox?   If so, I personally couldn't comment on them as I've never used them.  I'm trying out native macro lenses. 

That said I'm just starting into macro and I have bought an extension tube to try out sometime on something teeny tiny and not moving.  Extension tubes is a cheap way to do get macro effects, but there are focus and DOF downsides.   I honestly was buying a few Canon drawstring lens cases and got one because it was almost free since it came with the size case I was shopping for.  But I will play with it someday - likely using manual focus and focus bracketing.

What are you thinking of trying out macro-wise?

[stevet1]

SignifDigits,

You wrote, "What are you thinking of trying out macro-wise?"

Nothing in particular. Just looking around. They're called both filters and lenses.

Extension tubes might be another option.

I had posted this question in the Accessories forum, but when I went back to see if I had gotten any answers, my post was gone.

I had to go through every forum to see where it went, and I discovered it here.

In my search process, I discovered that if one of your posts go missing like that, if you go into your profile and look through your list of posts, it will tell you where it wound up.

That is very frustrating to say the least

Steve Thomas

[March411]

Hey Steve, you mean close up filters?

I guess it depends on what you are trying to achieve.  

Steve do you own a EF - RF adapter?

[SignifDigits]

From what I read it seems in terms of expensive extension tubes are the cheapest but hardest to get good results.

The Raynox DCR-250 would be the next step up and a lot of people use it.  Seems that for $80 it's a a good option to try.

For either one once you get into macro you're going to have to start thinking of lighting.  I know you asked about a diffuser recently.  Of course you can just use natural light but you'll just be a few inches away from the subject so a diffused flash is a huge help in a lot of situations - like when the critter isn't really wanting to stay still long enough for focus bracketing, for instance.

Hopefully some of the macros gurus will show up and will have some experience with filters and/or Raynox and offer some great advice.  Oh, and remember, just because a lens is marked "macro" doesn't mean it's a true 1:1 macro.   And just because a lens is NOT marked macro doesn't mean it's not capable of close focus and macro-like results.  I shot this with my RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 IS STM as a test for someone that was interested in the lens and it's "macro-ish" capabilities.  This was just a quick shot of a toothpick on live edge wood shot on the full-frame R6 Mark II, not APS-C, handheld, manual focus and natural light at 1/320th of a second.  It focuses really close and well for a non-macro lens IMO.

So my first choice would be a lens like that that has many wonderful other functions besides just macro.  That said I did buy some used EF macro lenses (they are some great bargains in EF lenses IMO) that I'm looking forward to using.  I could go out and shoot snowflakes or ice pellets, but I'd prefer it to be warmer.

 

[stevet1]

Marc,

They're called both filters and lenses.

I'm just poking around. I don't do much, if any, macro work, so I'm just looking for a cheaper alternative to a full blown macro lens.

In my research, I've learned that extension tubes are a better fit for shorter lenses, and close-up filters or lenses are a better fit for telephoto lenses.

Steve Thomas

[stevet1]

I've learned that Canon makes, or made a 250D and a 500D close-ups that have good reputations, but I haven't found any for sale yet.

1. Steve

[kvbarkley]

The short answer is they work, but you won’t be pleased with the quality. Iirc, a lot of distortion around the outside. I haven’t used one in 40 years

[March411]

kv for the most part nailed it, the majority are not worth the expense. You can find some good ones but will pay the price. The reason I asked about you owning an adapter is because Laowa sells 180mm Macro that is pretty nice for $500 new and with the EF/RF adapter has AF, I use it strictly for Macro, always manual. It may be an option and it would also give you some flexibility adding 180mm lens.

[stevet1]

Marc,

What kind of nightmare is THAT? 😃

P.S. Thank you for the tip on the lens. I will keep that in mind.

I don't own an adapter yet. I'm trying to save up for a camera upgrade just now.

Steve Thomas