Yeah step down rings should work.. or you could get a Canon 500D 8-)

the close up lens not the camera hehe.. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-500d-close-up-lens-review.aspx I think they may have a 77mm version .. but its expensive ! hnmmm the price seems to have dropped since I last looked.. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/87503-REG/Canon_2824A002.html

Anyone know of something similar to the Raynox DCR-250 but for 77mm filters.

I really want to toy with macro but I'd rather have something to work with my AF-S 80-200 or Tokina 16-50 but they are both 77mm filters.

Do you think step up rings (or is it step down) will work?

Another weird thing is for some/many lenses the focal length actually reduces when you focus closer so if you stick a close up lense in front of it the closer you focus the smaller the image becomes! Ie the opposite of what you would expect !

gelu88 said:
i just took a picture of a ruler; at 105mm the image is 1:1, meaning life size (i'm assuming differing lenses do not change this) at 200mm it becomes 1:2(or is it 2:1??) meaning double life size.

Cool, thanks for the hard numbers.

But, yes, different lenses will have different reproduction ratios, even when both at 105mm.

The reason is that while the magnification of two lenses of the same focal length is the same, the close focus distance likely will not be. Therefore the lens which allows closer focus will have a greater effective magnification. (A postage stamp 1' from the camera shot with a 200mm lens is going to be a lot bigger than a postage stamp 5' from the camera shot with a different 200mm lens.)

krevlingoodspeed said:
So I got my D7000 + the kit lens.

Do you think the 18-105mm would work well with this?

I was planning to sell it off with my D90 to make it a complete kit but I might keep it for macro instead of getting the 55-200VR.

i just took a picture of a ruler; at 105mm the image is 1:1, meaning life size (i'm assuming differing lenses do not change this) at 200mm it becomes 1:2(or is it 2:1??) meaning double life size.

specifically, the numbers are 24mm wide @ 105mm and 13mm wide at 200mm and the D60 sensor is 23.6mm wide

the DOF is literally razor thin and requires a really fast shutter speed, so lots of light is needed. But if shooting in bright light or with an off camera flash is fine with you i can't see why anyone would NOT buy this.

So I got my D7000 + the kit lens.

Do you think the 18-105mm would work well with this?

I was planning to sell it off with my D90 to make it a complete kit but I might keep it for macro instead of getting the 55-200VR.

heartyfisher said:
:-) 5 inches working distance and you are complaining! :-) the 60mm micro nikkor is about 2 inches working distance. the tamron 60 and 90 is almost 4 inches.

Dont be afraid to clean it your self ( I do it all the time).. if you do mess it up just send it in for cleaning by the pros( I have never needed to). Lots of tutorials on the web on how to do it.

I measured and its 4.5 inches exactly. I had no idea those lenses went so close, getting good light in must be highly frustrating.

And i figure once i get the D7000, ill clean my D60 thoroughly.

I just can't risk it when its my only option.

D300D70s said:
Am I right in thinking that the Canon 250D / 500D are in a different league?
Obviously they are more expensive, but are they worth it?

I recently picked up a book on close-up photography that raved about the 500D as something to have in your pocket in case a close-up opportunity arises.

The canon close up lenses are great. They have 2 elements. but you get them with fixed filter sizes to fit your specific lens (Just like a UV filter). The raynox is small and fits a 49mm filter but it has an adapter that allow you to attach to lenses with filter sizes from 49mm to 67 mm. it vignettes badly on some lenses but that goes away if you stop down to F11 or F16 or more.

:-) 5 inches working distance and you are complaining! :-) the 60mm micro nikkor is about 2 inches working distance. the tamron 60 and 90 is almost 4 inches.

Dont be afraid to clean it your self ( I do it all the time).. if you do mess it up just send it in for cleaning by the pros( I have never needed to). Lots of tutorials on the web on how to do it.

heartyfisher said:
looks good! Nice samples. Which lens was it in front of ? :-) would you mind if I linked to some of your photos?

PS: You have dust bunnies!

Thanks. I used the 55-200 and its a great combo. link to your hearts content.

i was still able to zoom wide, so i could kind of figure out what i was aiming at through the blur. Still, the working distance is not ideal, i wasn't more than 5 inches away from that bee.

As for the dust, i was shotting at f/16 so it could not be worse. Its one of the big reasons i'm impatiently waiting for my D7000 to arrive, i've been blowing away at the sensor for many minutes and almost none of the dust is budging. I think i got some moisture in there and that made the dust stick.

i figure i'll need to send it in, my local camera store can do it for $30, but i do not want to do it unless absolutely necessary.

Am I right in thinking that the Canon 250D / 500D are in a different league?
Obviously they are more expensive, but are they worth it?

I recently picked up a book on close-up photography that raved about the 500D as something to have in your pocket in case a close-up opportunity arises.

looks good! Nice samples. Which lens was it in front of ? :-) would you mind if I linked to some of your photos?

PS: You have dust bunnies!

Looks AWESOME!

Think I will pick this up and the 55-200 VR soon!

Got mine today, i purchased it from ebay.ca and it shipped from vancouver on thursday. (it was thanksgiving on monday in canada so its fine)

it came very well packaged and the build quality is very good.

it claims to be made in japan, and the writing is Japanese, so its possible.

it comes with rubber covers that protect very well.

now for the pics! (all pics are f/16, RAW, imported into lightroom 3 and exported without any adjustments, cropping or resizing)

<img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4104/5078431205_7e5ef9e6e8.jpg"

Drab said:
Easiest way is to shoot a ruler. You know how wide your sensor is...

why do it the easy way when you can do it the hard way ... :-)

(why didnt I think of that !! doh ! )

heartyfisher said:
No real formula besides doing measurements of the actual object compared to image size captured.
further more the actual magnification of my 70 mm (35-70 F2.8) vs your lens at 70mm (say 18-70 nikkor or 17-70 sigma) will be different due to the lens formula.
1) the distance of the front element from the sensor.
2) The closest you can focus on the lens natively.
3) if by focussing close the actual focal length may change.
So with the DCR only testing with your lens can you determine the actual magnification. Having said all that, if you set all the lenses at 70mm and focus at infinity then stick the DCR250 in front of them they should all have almost the same magnification.

Re the 105 micro. On DX it does give 1:1 but, as with all DX vs FX fov issues, its a crop of the FX so the object will look relatively "bigger" on DX by that 1.5 dx factor we all know and love. :-) thats one of the advantages DX has. ie with macro stuff you get a "closer" FOV just like with tele. Another advantage is the DOF is greater with DX and with macro work you usually want more DOF.

Drab said:
No, as it is a crop factor, not a zoom factor.

1:1 is defined as a 10mm wide subject taking up 10mm of width on the sensor*. Cropping the sensor does not change magnification therefore it does not change your macro ratio calculations.

EDIT: Or a 9mm wide subject taking up 9mm of width on the sensor, etc.

Ahhh very helpful, thank you very much good sirs!

heartyfisher said:
No real formula besides doing measurements of the actual object compared to image size captured.

Easiest way is to shoot a ruler. You know how wide your sensor is...

Hi,

I have both the Nikkor 105mm and 60mm Micro AFs, the older models, circa 1995 or so, and they're terrific. I would sell the 60mm, but I use it with my slide copier and bellows attachment.

The 105mm is a great portrait lens, too.

FWIW, I have had other brands, but have, many years ago, went Nikon and never looked back and have no regrets.

Mike

krevlingoodspeed said:
Wait so does that mean the 105micro on DX gives more than 1:1?

No, as it is a crop factor, not a zoom factor.

1:1 is defined as a 10mm wide subject taking up 10mm of width on the sensor*. Cropping the sensor does not change magnification therefore it does not change your macro ratio calculations.

EDIT: Or a 9mm wide subject taking up 9mm of width on the sensor, etc.

krevlingoodspeed said:
Wait so does that mean the 105micro on DX gives more than 1:1?

Also how did you figure out the 70mm gave you 1:1.6 what is the formula?

No real formula besides doing measurements of the actual object compared to image size captured.
further more the actual magnification of my 70 mm (35-70 F2.8) vs your lens at 70mm (say 18-70 nikkor or 17-70 sigma) will be different due to the lens formula.
1) the distance of the front element from the sensor.
2) The closest you can focus on the lens natively.
3) if by focussing close the actual focal length may change.
So with the DCR only testing with your lens can you determine the actual magnification. Having said all that, if you set all the lenses at 70mm and focus at infinity then stick the DCR250 in front of them they should all have almost the same magnification.

Re the 105 micro. On DX it does give 1:1 but, as with all DX vs FX fov issues, its a crop of the FX so the object will look relatively "bigger" on DX by that 1.5 dx factor we all know and love. :-) thats one of the advantages DX has. ie with macro stuff you get a "closer" FOV just like with tele. Another advantage is the DOF is greater with DX and with macro work you usually want more DOF.

heartyfisher said:
You rang?

To get 1:1 with the raynox dcr you probably need a 105 lens so that 18-105VR kit lens should be just about a perfect combo with the raynox. still on my DX camera and a 70mm I get 1:1.6 which is almost equivalent to 1:1 on FX.

For or dedicated macro photographer a real macro lens like the 55 or 60 or 105 micro nikkor is still the best but if you usually have a kit lens on your camera this DCR250 is hard to beat for the opportunistic macro shot! and you don't have to change lenses and introduce dust to your sensor. "Mr Sensor meet Mr. Dust. Dust, Sensor.." :-)

I did try out the DCR250 on a the 50mm AFS. its a nice combo too. Magnification is not as high but that 50mm is sharp ! I will try and update my review with some of my 50mm test shots.

Wait so does that mean the 105micro on DX gives more than 1:1?

Also how did you figure out the 70mm gave you 1:1.6 what is the formula?

krevlingoodspeed said:
Ah Thanks and hopefully he pops in here!

You rang?

To get 1:1 with the raynox dcr you probably need a 105 lens so that 18-105VR kit lens should be just about a perfect combo with the raynox. still on my DX camera and a 70mm I get 1:1.6 which is almost equivalent to 1:1 on FX.

For or dedicated macro photographer a real macro lens like the 55 or 60 or 105 micro nikkor is still the best but if you usually have a kit lens on your camera, this DCR250 is hard to beat for the opportunistic macro shot! and you don't have to change lenses and introduce dust to your sensor. "Mr Sensor meet Mr. Dust. Dust, Sensor.." :-)

I did try out the DCR250 on a the 50mm AFS. its a nice combo too. Magnification is not as high but that 50mm is sharp ! I will try and update my review with some of my 50mm test shots.

aslightdelay said:
Careful of the AI-S version. The reviews on it are decidedly mixed (YMMV). On the other hand, if you're just dabbling, I suppose there's not much point in spending top dollar.

It will be mainly used for jewelery macro. I also have 55mm 2.8 macro nikkor. It's an excellent lens. Sharp like a razor.

poster said:
Ohh man I got ripped off! :(

I am also thinking of pickig up that 105 ais lens. Seems like a no brainer. It's pretty damn good, it's cheap and perfect for just "dipping my feet" in the water.

I wouldn't say you got ripped off, I know in other states it still goes for over 1000$.

I actually did a check of all of CL to see prices because I couldn't find one in my state.

Careful of the AI-S version. The reviews on it are decidedly mixed (YMMV). On the other hand, if you're just dabbling, I suppose there's not much point in spending top dollar.