anyone getting good macro shots under $500
- Thread starter smellfishy
- Start date
DerrickBrown
New member
Ok, they are both great lenses, but they are different. The Raynox DCR-250 (2.5x) is roughly a +8 diopter lens (no more than a +10) and the Canon 58mm 250D (1.5x if I remember correctly) is a +4 lens. So, the Raynox is almost twice as powerful as the Canon lens. My personal favorite is the Raynox DCR-250, but some say it is too powerful and in all honesty, that is true in some instances, but I really like the Raynox DCR-250 a lot. You could use a Raynox DCR-150 which is also a 1.5x like the Canon lens, but I think you may be happier with the Raynox DCR-250. It is personal choice with lenses.
Yes, you will need a Conversion Lens Adapter for the A620. Lens Adapter LA-DC58F or an equivalant for the A620/A610 and other G-Series cameras from Canon will be needed for any add on lens used for those cameras.
Camera -> Lens Adapter -> Add on Lens (Macro, Wide Angle, Fish Eye, Tele Lens, etc..). In that order.
You could stack lenses also. I.E. - Telephoto lens with a Macro lens. The photo below is a photo only of the lens adapter without an add on lens. The add on lens screws into place or snaps into place as the Raynox does.
LA-DC58F about $22
http://smart-shop.biz/cgi-bin/shop.pl?SearchIndex=Blended&Operation=ItemSearch&Keywords=ladc58f
Raynox DCR-250 about $40. (Cheapest price I've seen for this item)
http://smart-shop.biz/B0002YBXBY/Ra..._Mount_for_52mm_to_67mm_Filter_Diameters..htm
A80 Camera with the appropiate Lens Adapter and a Raynox DCR-250
Canon 250D 58mm about $85 (About the average for this item)
http://smart-shop.biz/B000050M6M/Ca...A610_A620_G1_G2_G3_G5_G6__EOS_SLR_Cameras.htm
Raynox DCR-150 about $38 (About the average for this item)
http://www.etronics.com/product.asp?stk_code=raydcr150&catid=4012&store=
For comparision purposes:
Canon 250D (1.5x)
Raynox DCR-150 (1.5x)
Raynox DCR-250 (2.5x)
Remember, the 1.5x lens can take a very nice shot if you are close to the subject being shot. The 2.5x takes amazing photos, but it can be too much magnification at times for some.
Just so you know, I absolutely hate Frogs/Toads, but I had to do what I had to do to help you out. LOL... I know,weird huh?
Hope this helps,
Derrick
DerrickBrown
New member
Ok, I couldn't help it. Here are a few more images for you. I wasn't sure if I explained the 1.5x lens enough or in good enough detail. To clarify things, see the information below.
Canon 58mm 250D Notice the difference in image size once the subject distance was shorten.
Raynox DCR-150 Notice the difference in image size once the subject distance was shorten.
Raynox DCR-250 Creme of the Crop. Notice the difference in image size once the subject distance was shorten.
The DCR-250 is nice, but you can you see how it can over magnify the image. Regardless, the Raynox DCR-250 is still my favorite.
Happy shooting,
Derrick
Canon 58mm 250D Notice the difference in image size once the subject distance was shorten.
Raynox DCR-150 Notice the difference in image size once the subject distance was shorten.
Raynox DCR-250 Creme of the Crop. Notice the difference in image size once the subject distance was shorten.
The DCR-250 is nice, but you can you see how it can over magnify the image. Regardless, the Raynox DCR-250 is still my favorite.
Happy shooting,
Derrick
CH
New member
This is a great thread with some great info. However, I'm still a little confused and my brain is all mush!
I have a Canon powershot A80, and when I started doing research into the macro lense, the only one they showed was "52mm close-up lens 250D"
Is this my only option for a macro lens, or are there other brands, that may be less expensive, that would work with this camera? I basically just want to know what I need to buy!
Thanks in advance for any input or suggestions you can give me!
I have a Canon powershot A80, and when I started doing research into the macro lense, the only one they showed was "52mm close-up lens 250D"
Is this my only option for a macro lens, or are there other brands, that may be less expensive, that would work with this camera? I basically just want to know what I need to buy!
Thanks in advance for any input or suggestions you can give me!
DerrickBrown
New member
I'll try to keep this short as possible. The A80 can use other lenses/filters as long as they are the correct diameter for the adapter. The A80/A95 uses a 52mm, but the A610/A620 uses a 58mm, so the same size lens can't be used without additional equiptment. i.e, stepper rings and/or spacers.
Canon will only push their lenses (more expensive usually) as you would imagine. Ford isn't going to push a Chevy product. Although the tires and wheels on one may fit onto the other.
The equivalent lens adapter for the A80 normally is a 52mm like the OEM Conversion Lens Adapter LA-DC52D. There are some places where you can get a 37mm that will allow 37mm lenses to be used or you can use stepper rings up and down for the size needed.
Below are images of a A80 with an OEM LA-DC52D adapter and different types of lenses. The most important item is not the lens, but the adapter lens that the lens attaches to. After this has been done, then chosing a lens that is a high quality lens. If the correct length is not right, the the image will be fuzzy (distortion). You can have the most expensive lens on the planet with the wrong adapter and the photo image will look like crap. I'll show more on this at the end of this post.
A80 with LA-DC52D Conversion Adapter
A80 with Raynox DCR-250
A80 with Kenko LD-183T
A80with Kenko LD-20T
None of the lenses shown above are made my Canon, but they work fine. The Raynox DCR-150 and Raynox DCR-250 are my personal favorites for macros for the A80. They are cheaper than the some. You could also look at the Hoya and Tiffen brands also. I recommend any of the 3 choices. They all are good lenses.
Here are examples of using the wrong adapter. The wrong adapter has a different focal length for the camera. i.e, A70 isn't the same as the A80.
A80 with incorrect adapter
A80 with an correct adapter
I always seem to get diarrhea of the keyboard on these forums. :lol:
Oh well...
:dance:
Last edited:
CH
New member
Ok, that helps a ton. at least I can go into the camera shop and not feel like a cmoplete idiot. I also don't want to spend a ton, so in your opinion, the Raynox lenses are good, and at a much better price, correct?
I'm assuming, as long as I get the canon brand adapter for the A80, I should be good to go, right? Then just find a decently priced lens.
Thanks again for the great info! I think you just saved me some money! LOL
I'm assuming, as long as I get the canon brand adapter for the A80, I should be good to go, right? Then just find a decently priced lens.
Thanks again for the great info! I think you just saved me some money! LOL
DerrickBrown
New member
Ofcourse, anything can be made complicated if that is your intent as some camera shops unfortunately do to their customers. Some try to talk over your head so to speak to make you feel you need something you don't, but you've got the basics down.
Yes, you are correct.
A80 + LA-DC52D + High Quality Lens = Great Photos
It's that simple.
I like the Raynox (DCR-150 or DCR-250) macro lenses since macros are usually what's used in Reef photography. This with the Canon LA-DC52D will be no more than $80 usually. Surfing the net usually gets you better prices also, just use your common online caution as you would with any store online. If you aren't comfortable, don't buy from there. See what others have to say about the store if possible.
Be sure to show us some photos once you get everything setup and going.
I am not sure whether your dislike for toads is more weird than the fact that you placed a deep link into my web page without asking me for permission. Although I am not particularly proud of that image, I would still prefer to be asked before other people make use of it.
(I am sure now. Your dislike for toads *is* very weird.)
DerrickBrown
New member
Hmuenx, I apologize for anything I've done to you, but I've never been to your site. Exactly what photo are you talking about?
Please show what link you are talking about?
Thanks
I just visited your site in the above link and there are some amazing photos there, but again I've never been to your site.
**Update**
I see the frog link is to your site, but I didn't get the link from your site as I have never been to your site. I honestly can't remember where it came from. I'll ask the moderator to remove it. I do apologize for the misunderstanding.
CH
New member
Ok, I found a Tiffen 52mm 3 piece set (+1, +2, +4) on Amazon for $35.00
and they have the converter for $15.
This sounds like a pretty good price to me. Do you think the tiffen are decent enough to buy, especially for a first time macro set?
I could always upgrade later.
Also, in my research, I found a 37mm adapter for the a80.
Is there a difference between using 37mm lenses and 52mm lens? Obviously the 52mm is bigger, but does this have any effect on the actual picture?
and they have the converter for $15.
This sounds like a pretty good price to me. Do you think the tiffen are decent enough to buy, especially for a first time macro set?
I could always upgrade later.
Also, in my research, I found a 37mm adapter for the a80.
Is there a difference between using 37mm lenses and 52mm lens? Obviously the 52mm is bigger, but does this have any effect on the actual picture?
DerrickBrown
New member
Thanks
DerrickBrown
New member
The Tiffen lens are good and that is a decent price for them.
37mm and the 52mm difference is size mainly. The 37mm won't block the view finder as much as the 52mm would if that is important to you also. The 37mm won't block the autofocus beam also as much. The 52mm is more common for lenses though. There are a some nice 37mm sizes out there also.
Really just depends on the size you want to go with.
BeanAnimal
Premium Member
I hate to veer off topic here, but the exchange above (albiet polite) is something that seems to come up a lot lately, or at least has the potential to come up more often.
It appears that hmuenx watches his server logs to determine what pictures are being viewd. He must have seen a few dozen (or more) hits on his toad image and found this site as the referer. I would imagine he then sigend up at RC so he could post his disaproval.
However, the qestion then becomes that of "use" or rather "fair use". The is a very vague part of the copyright law with regards to interpretation and intention.
My observations:
The image was not TAKEN from the site (I.E. no local copy was made), and the image is a live link to the site (as evidenced by the URL to the image. The image was posted on a website with a public domain name, public url and images that are viewable by the public. There is no obvious disclaimer, terms of use or any other indication that these images are copyrighted or protected. Furthermore, the fashion that they were used in here at RC was not for profit, financial gain or other similar use. The image was used as an example in a conversation.
I do not condone the theft of copyrigted images or material. However, there are HUNDREDS (if not thousands) of images posted here and likely downloaded and stored on peoples desktops, web pages or other spaces. It's just something to think about.
I understand why hmuenx dropped in and posted, but consider the "threat" kind of petty of not unfounded (at least based upon my understanding of image use and rights).
If somebody knows more about the specifics that would apply here, could they please fill us in (even if another thread needs to be started). I think clarification would be a great help to most of us that are not in the know.
It appears that hmuenx watches his server logs to determine what pictures are being viewd. He must have seen a few dozen (or more) hits on his toad image and found this site as the referer. I would imagine he then sigend up at RC so he could post his disaproval.
However, the qestion then becomes that of "use" or rather "fair use". The is a very vague part of the copyright law with regards to interpretation and intention.
My observations:
The image was not TAKEN from the site (I.E. no local copy was made), and the image is a live link to the site (as evidenced by the URL to the image. The image was posted on a website with a public domain name, public url and images that are viewable by the public. There is no obvious disclaimer, terms of use or any other indication that these images are copyrighted or protected. Furthermore, the fashion that they were used in here at RC was not for profit, financial gain or other similar use. The image was used as an example in a conversation.
I do not condone the theft of copyrigted images or material. However, there are HUNDREDS (if not thousands) of images posted here and likely downloaded and stored on peoples desktops, web pages or other spaces. It's just something to think about.
I understand why hmuenx dropped in and posted, but consider the "threat" kind of petty of not unfounded (at least based upon my understanding of image use and rights).
If somebody knows more about the specifics that would apply here, could they please fill us in (even if another thread needs to be started). I think clarification would be a great help to most of us that are not in the know.
Lets have a look at the technical details. The toad image is located on the page
http://muenx.net/img/swus/page-0016.html,
where you can see some information and navigation elements. In particular, this enables the visitor to identify and contact me with a few clicks in case of questions or remarks. However, only the URL of the JPEG image included in this page has been used in this thread with any additional source description, rendering the visitor entirely unable to identify or contact me.
When you are quoting references to add substance to your statements, it is common to mention the specific author and title. This is usually considered as 'fair use' and, for example, scientific work would not be possible otherwise. Just including the direct image URL in the post without any additional references is entirely opposite to this and is usually not considered acceptable.
In the rather unlikely case that there is no other way than directly including one of my images in other work, I am quite willing to discuss appropriate terms. For example, the health office in my home town is allowed to use one of my images without any charges (but they properly asked before).
I am a bit surprised, though, that I have to discuss this because I thought that these aspects are quite obvious. Since I found a number of similar uses of my images on other sites, I will probably go for the less polite but more efficient technical solution to disallow access to images to all unknown referrers.
(I am still wondering why somebody could not like toads. That's very weird.)
BeanAnimal
Premium Member
I fully understand your point of view. I certainly had hoped that somebody would have some input on the legal aspects of situations such as this. In other words is the situation a "legal issue" or one of "polite conduct".
You may be suprised, but then again you deal with images on what seems to be a professional or artistic level and therefore concern yourself with such matters. I have a feeling most people that use images either illegaly or inpolitely (in a situation like you find here) do so out of a lack of understanding about the legalality or the etiquette associated with such use. In my eyes there is a big difference between what you find here and a blatant theft of an image for commercial purposes.
If you would like the image removed from the link, we can easily have a staff member edit the post. Locking the images to unknown refers is your right and likely your best course of action if you intend to keep casual web surfers from linking your pictures.. In my opinion it will serve no real purpose and those who steal images for commercial use will still steal the images anyway. This is however my opinion and is only worth as much.
Thank your for your response. I would also add that after browsing your site, you do have some very well composed photos. Nice work.
You may be suprised, but then again you deal with images on what seems to be a professional or artistic level and therefore concern yourself with such matters. I have a feeling most people that use images either illegaly or inpolitely (in a situation like you find here) do so out of a lack of understanding about the legalality or the etiquette associated with such use. In my eyes there is a big difference between what you find here and a blatant theft of an image for commercial purposes.
If you would like the image removed from the link, we can easily have a staff member edit the post. Locking the images to unknown refers is your right and likely your best course of action if you intend to keep casual web surfers from linking your pictures.. In my opinion it will serve no real purpose and those who steal images for commercial use will still steal the images anyway. This is however my opinion and is only worth as much.
Thank your for your response. I would also add that after browsing your site, you do have some very well composed photos. Nice work.
DerrickBrown
New member
My phobia may be uncommon in general, but there are phobias for everything believe it or not. I'm sure, there is something everyone doesn't like or has a phobia with even if they don't know it because they haven't been exposed to it yet. It is human nature. My fear of frogs is no different psychologically than someone being afraid of heights (Acrophobia), spiders (Arachnophobia), cats (Aclurophobia), etc... I hate when it rains during the spring, summer and fall because they come out and hop and jump all over the place or when you try to cut the yard around a wet/moist area. I have a hard time going to my LFS because they have the aqautic version there also for sale, but I overcome the anxiety and go into the store. I just hate all the little b..tards. Excuse my expression. I am able to control my fear for the most part, but a true phobia is hard work to overcome and most times it is never overcome, but simply dealt with. My wife and family joke with me about it all the time, so I have a good sense of humor about it, but they know I really don't care for frogs at all. Just your photo alone makes my skin crawl. If you don't have the phobia, you couldn't understand it. That is why I know to have a sense of humor about it because it really is silly and very uncommon, but the human mind is very complex. You know it is harmless, but yet you hate it and fear it.
Phobias are very real and affect some to the point of them not being able to function in society properly.
Batrachophobia is the fear of amphibians, such as frogs, newts, salamanders, etc.
I'm not exactly the above. Mine is strictly frogs.
Ranidaphobia - Fear of Frogs
See the link for more.
http://www.phobialist.com/reverse.html
WOW.. This is really off the macrophoto subject of the thread. Enough of this conversation. Back to photos for me.
:rollface:
Last edited:
Hopefully, this is my last off-topic contribution before I leave you guys to your underwater pastime. 
@BeanAnimal
I agree, the only way to really stop unauthorized use of images is not to show them on the Internet. I guess, though, that the casual surfers directly linking, usually unaware of what they are effectively doing, are the majority of those who are using images without permission.
Thank you for the kind words about the photos.
@Derrick
Actually, I thought that you just do not like toads. The one shown in the image is about the size of your thumbnail. Really cute. I am irrationally afraid of heights, so you do not have to tell me about the existence of phobias...
@BeanAnimal
I agree, the only way to really stop unauthorized use of images is not to show them on the Internet. I guess, though, that the casual surfers directly linking, usually unaware of what they are effectively doing, are the majority of those who are using images without permission.
Thank you for the kind words about the photos.
@Derrick
Actually, I thought that you just do not like toads. The one shown in the image is about the size of your thumbnail. Really cute. I am irrationally afraid of heights, so you do not have to tell me about the existence of phobias...
