Macro on the cheap. Which way?

robertgilbert86 · 5 Jul 2007 at 12:29

Ok, it seems everyone is doing macro, and summer is a good time to 'invest'. But I don't want to buy a dedicated lens for macro work. I'd rather play with the £10 options below.
I'd like to know your experiences with them and which one is best. Also I'm interested in how close I'd need to be to the subject, because I fear getting right up close to insects will scare them away. I'd be using my D50 with the 18-135mm lens for this and it has a 67mm thread.

macro filter rings (can be stacked-are the results good?)
reversal rings (to mount lens backwards)
extension tubes (I'd be buying manual ones-so aperture is automatically widest? could bluetak be used to vary the aperture if the lens doesn't have a manual setting?)

hargi · 5 Jul 2007 at 12:35

I have a macro filter for my fuji 5600 which does what i want it to do. cost £45 though.
If you were really into it id say get a proper lens, but if you just want to play then the filter option works for me.

Rich · 5 Jul 2007 at 13:41

I bought manual extension tubes. You can get some pretty solid results with them with enough patience and good light.
This one was taken with the tubes and a Sigma 70-300 of all things:

As was this:

You can get the canon 100mm Macro for £300, but unless you are a Macro fanatic, I dont think it is worth it.

If i could do it again, i would push the boat out and by the Kenko Autofocus extension tubes i think.

woodsy2k · 5 Jul 2007 at 13:46

Imo I would say extension tubes might be the best option with cost in mind. Also they have no actual optics within them, they simply increase the distance of the lens to the CCD. This doesn't change the focusing abilities of the lens itself, it simply means that the image spot is brought into focus on the ccd at a much smaller distance from objective element to object.

Amp34 · 5 Jul 2007 at 14:13

Extension tubes for me too. See here for a few of my shots. As long as the original lens is ok the shots will turn out great.

Messiah Khan · 5 Jul 2007 at 14:47

Get a low end macro lens and use it as a nice prime lens for other shots as well.

May I interest you in a Tamron 90mm.

AndyBorzi · 5 Jul 2007 at 15:08

I have a Canon 100 dedicated macro anyway but I also have:

Manual extension tubes £8 (£4 + £4 del)
Pentacon 50mm f1.8 Manual lens (£4 + £6 del) - tis a great little lens
M42-EOS adaptor £5 incl delivery (0.99p + 4.99 del!!)

(ebay sellers make most of their cash on ebay on delivery! :rolleyes:

)

Using all three tubes, you have to get pretty close, so live insect stuff is impractical, so I tend to use 1 or 2 stacked tubes. Focusing is non-existant with the lens, so you have to rock back and forward. The aperture is adjusted on the lens though metering is still done in camera either M or AV.

Today I won a M42 Macro Bellows for £8.50 + £3 del (been trying for a couple of weeks for one of these, people are paying £20+ on the auctions). I have no idea how good they are but I like to play around hehe.

yak.h'cir · 5 Jul 2007 at 16:45

Extension tubes would normally be my chosen option but being limited to widest aperture might be a problem. I've seen a lot of great results by reversing a lens although i've never tried it myself, as its a relatively cheap option and you retain some control over aperture it might be an interesting avenue to try out.

sean · 5 Jul 2007 at 20:03

I don't think it's recommended but I read that if you select a smaller aperture and hold the camera's DOF preview button when you disconnecting a lens it'll stay at that aperture for use with extension tubes or reverse adapters.

I have only tried this once. It may or may not damage your camera or lense's electronics. Try it at your own risk. Also, manually focusing at F8 is a PITA!

Edit: A reverse adapter plus a full manual lens is probably the most versatile cheap solution IMO. Off the bay you can often get some old screw-thread manual primes for under a tenner and the reverse adapters aren't too pricey either.

Raikiri · 5 Jul 2007 at 20:04

Get a Raynox DCR-250.

£30 so not the cheapest option but I have seen some damn impressive results from them with far worse cameras than yours.

dirtybeatfreak · 5 Jul 2007 at 22:50

im after a cheap macro lense but dunno what one to go for :confused:

Messiah Khan · 5 Jul 2007 at 22:58

alangelluk said:
im after a cheap macro lense but dunno what one to go for

Since you've got a D40, your limited to AF-S/AF-I or HSM lenses if you want to retain autofocus. Autofocus isn't really needed for macor work, but its nice to have if you want to use the lens for other stuff as well. True 1: macro lenses unfortunately don't come very cheap. The 105mm Sigma isn't bad though and comes recommended. Ive go the Sigma 150mm and I love it.

Jotun · 5 Jul 2007 at 23:00

yak.h'cir said:
Extension tubes would normally be my chosen option but being limited to widest aperture might be a problem.

I was looking at extension tubes a while ago and realized this, what I ended up doing was getting an M42 lens which has manual aperture control. Combined this with an M42->EOS adapter and some extension tubes and was sorted :cool:

Messiah Khan · 5 Jul 2007 at 23:02

Do cheap M42 fit 1:1 lenses exist?

dirtybeatfreak · 6 Jul 2007 at 01:03

messiah khan said:
Since you've got a D40, your limited to AF-S/AF-I or HSM lenses if you want to retain autofocus. Autofocus isn't really needed for macor work, but its nice to have if you want to use the lens for other stuff as well. True 1: macro lenses unfortunately don't come very cheap. The 105mm Sigma isn't bad though and comes recommended. Ive go the Sigma 150mm and I love it.

yea i realise that mate, but if im honest i use manual focus a lot more than i do auto anyway.. question...putting the AF aside, can i fit any nikon fit lense on the d40?? or is it just pure AF-S/AF-I and HSM?

when i mean cheap i mean a few hundred heh, they can go for like 8/900 sometimes cant they??

Messiah Khan · 6 Jul 2007 at 08:49

alangelluk said:
yea i realise that mate, but if im honest i use manual focus a lot more than i do auto anyway.. question...putting the AF aside, can i fit any nikon fit lense on the d40?? or is it just pure AF-S/AF-I and HSM?

when i mean cheap i mean a few hundred heh, they can go for like 8/900 sometimes cant they??

Yeah, any Nikon lens will fit (maybe except really really old ones, but im not sure) and will work fine except for AF. When you say a few hundred, does hat extend to about £320? If so, then i'd say go for the Sigma 150mm, although it does depend on what your going to be shooting more. For insects, the extra reach is quite usefull, whereas if your going to be shooting purely flowers, then a shorter lens might be easier to use.

AndyBorzi · 6 Jul 2007 at 08:55

messiah khan said:
Do cheap M42 fit 1:1 lenses exist?

If you can find one a Tamron SP 90 f2.5 (the old manual focus one) is meant to be the dogs wotsits. It is a 2:1 (i think) but using the extension tubes, brings it to 1:1.....Thats what I have read anyway. I have seen some piccies from it and they look great and very sharp.

Nicos Rex · 6 Jul 2007 at 09:45

alangelluk said:
question...putting the AF aside, can i fit any nikon fit lense on the d40?? or is it just pure AF-S/AF-I and HSM?

Any "F" mount lens will physically fit.

The older pre AI lenses will only work in stop-down manual mode.

Any AI or later lens will give at least some auto mode functionality - normally aperture priority.

If autofocus isn't an issue you have a vast range of quality glassware to choose from. One to seriously consider is the Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8s. Nice and fast, and has the facility to lock the focus. From memory this will focus down to about 14" and is 1:2 - there is a matched multiplier that gives 1:1 as near as makes no odds. You should be able to pick one up for £100-£150. There were f/4.0 versions of the Micro-Nikkor 105 mm but they don't cost a lot less than the f2.8 and would in my view be a false economy as you will have more difficulty focusing, particularly if you add converters/tubes.

NOTE: Lovely though it is for portraiture, the Nikkor 105mm f/1.8 AIs cannot really be called a macro lens as its minimum focus distance is round about 3 feet.

Messiah Khan · 6 Jul 2007 at 09:56

Nicos Rex said:
NOTE: Lovely though it is for portraiture, the Nikkor 105mm f/1.8 AIs cannot really be called a macro lens as its minimum focus distance is round about 3 feet.

Would this not be a little long for portraits when taking the crop factor into account? As it would make it 157.5mm.

aztechnology · 6 Jul 2007 at 10:02

the way to go for me would be

AF etension tubes for a standard lens (I use mine on a 50mm). I got mine for about 40 quid off the bay. I don't use the AF, as it's next to useless at determining the point of focus correctly for anything off centre. What is important is the control and reporting of the aperture so you can get the effect you want. Metering is not so important as with your digital you have limitless retries. (i don't as i'm still happily using conventional film).

A fixed widest aperture with macro is not usually a good idea, you will start to find that at really close focusing distances, you may only have a few mm in focus, this would make me discount anything that doesn't let me control aperture.

if you have a medium telephoto, then a close up lens adapter works well. nikon make the best, though you will have to buy from an overseas seller if you don't want to pay through the nose. I have a +2 that cost about £30, gets most use on my 70-200 at the 200 end. again, I manually focus this all the time.

I wouldn't put blu-tac anywhere near a lens!