RX100 with close up filter

[U] sem said:

chocjellybean26 said:

so just to get this straight... achromats would be the best quality as it will not have CA as much as single optic. HOWEVER as the RX100 has a smaller sensor you cannot use an achromat to get the super macro effect as most only go up to 4+ and the RX100 really needs around a 8+ ????

Click to expand...

The sensor is not an issue here, the short zoom is. Weak diopters magnify enough when used on a 300mm lens (and do it at a very long working distance). Weaker achromats are useful on bridge cams with long zoom (and wide-enough aperture there, otherwise diffraction softens images).

The Raynoxes are good for the money I believe, and probably the right diameter too. You can also use a reversed short prime if you've got one lying around, 50mm is +20 diopters - but attaching heavy lenses is also an issue.

Click to expand...

thank-you _ sem _ I've only used macro lenses on my dslr.

You seem to be knowledgeable with the close up filters. I was wonder (or if anyone else could help) would the Raynox MSN-202 Super Macro Conversion Lens (+25 diopter) ( http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/digital/d_slr/index.html ) be too much for the RX100? Or too much for someone who hasn't used macro close up filters before, especially on a zoom lens not prime? eBay have the Raynox DCR-250 and MSN-202 for about $20 difference. If the MSN-202 is workable I would prefer this filter.[/U]

chocjellybean26 said:

thank-you _ sem _ I've only used macro lenses on my dslr.

You seem to be knowledgeable with the close up filters. I was wonder (or if anyone else could help) would the Raynox MSN-202 Super Macro Conversion Lens (+25 diopter) ( http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/digital/d_slr/index.html ) be too much for the RX100? Or too much for someone who hasn't used macro close up filters before, especially on a zoom lens not prime? eBay have the Raynox DCR-250 and MSN-202 for about $20 difference. If the MSN-202 is workable I would prefer this filter.

Click to expand...

I'm also mostly using DSLR, here mainly in quest for a new P&S, got no RX100 at hand (yet?). Got the DCR-250 but soon found it vignetted badly on my walkaround 18-200 even at 200, while the 500D didn't magnify enough, so I got me a Tamron 60 macro; the DCR-250 can be used with the latter for some more magnification despite the short FL. And I've used it on my old S60 which goes to 105mm equiv; rather close-up than macro.

You need to know what magnifications you want. The range of useful magnifications with one close-up filter is limited, that's why they sell sets of them. At wider angles you may get vignetting, and the working distance becomes impractically short. So it may be better to have a weaker diopter for lesser magnifications than zooming to a wider angle.

You can google up samples made these Raynoxes with other cameras with a similar zoom range (natural close-focus ability of the lens matters a bit too but not that much). There is a big diopter jump between the two Raynoxes.

And define "workable" - higher diopters work but the technique becomes more involved at higher magnifications due to low light, shake issues, short working distance, thin DoF - just as in DSLR macro/supermacro.

[U] sem said:

And define "workable" - higher diopters work but the technique becomes more involved at higher magnifications due to low light, shake issues, short working distance, thin DoF - just as in DSLR macro/supermacro.

Click to expand...

Essentially as you said issues that can occur with " low light, shake issues, short working distance, thin DoF" making it impractical for macro shots hand-held when you may not have a tripod on you. I think for practical reasons the 8x will suffice for the RX100. Anything else I will stick with my DSLR and tripod.
thanks [/U]

chocjellybean26 said:

[U] sem said:

And define "workable" - higher diopters work but the technique becomes more involved at higher magnifications due to low light, shake issues, short working distance, thin DoF - just as in DSLR macro/supermacro.

Click to expand...

Essentially as you said issues that can occur with " low light, shake issues, short working distance, thin DoF" making it impractical for macro shots hand-held when you may not have a tripod on you. I think for practical reasons the 8x will suffice for the RX100. Anything else I will stick with my DSLR and tripod.

Click to expand...

Indeed P&S users tend to expect hand-held would just work. Perhaps surprisingly, small sensors are indeed more convenient for hand-held closeups in ambient light, because the shutter time at base ISO is shorter than the one on DSLR, with the aperture stopped down for equivalent DoF at equivalent FL and with ISO bumped to comparable noise. And the short FL of their macro modes is also well-suited for hand-held (diopter add-on lens on long a tele not so). But the RX100's sensor isn't that small...

But instead of tripod you may also use flash, preferably with a diffuser screen, works hand-held too.[/U]

Digital Shutterbug said:

I don't own a 250D, so I can't say fro certain about the results with one. I have 3 500D filters, but the smallest is 58mm. It seems a little on the heavy side to put on the front of the RX100 lens. Most of my macro experience has been with DSLR's, where weight is not an issue. I also have no experience with the Raynox filters. They seem to be quite popular.

Click to expand...

I have used both 500D and 250D with many different digicams 5-10 years ago; many of those had 3-5x zoom range and usually both diopters give good closeup results depending on the focal length used. Just don't expect extreme magnifications, but they are a good place to start; the +2 diopters like 500D are usually for tele lenses 100mm equiv. or higher, +3-4 are usually used with normal lenses. RX100 has a special lens design, so I'm not sure how these diopters will work there. The 500D exists in 52mm too; I have one, don't think the weight should be a problem on RX100.

Raynox is a bit lower quality optically than Canon 500D/250D, Olympus MCON, Nikon Tx etc. but good value for money and sometimes easier because of the clip mount.

Btw, the B+W +10 is a single lens diopter too; don't be fooled by the brand name, this is not the right choice if you want good image quality (but maybe useful if you want the highest magnification for lowest price, and don't care about sharp corners, CA etc).

Digital Shutterbug said:

ChristianHass said:

You took both shots at the widest setting. For the camera's own "macro" setting this is correct, but when using closeup filters you normally use the tele end of the lens to get the highest magnification.
--
Shooting for fun and memories.

Click to expand...

I had difficulties in focusing at the tele end. I'm not sure why.

Click to expand...

keep in mind that with a diopter, you can no longer focus to infinity. There is a zone where the camera can focus, e.g. with a +2 diopter the maximum focus distance is 50 cm and the closest will be something like 30cm depending on camera. If you are working outside this focus distance, the camera cannot focus. Depending on the AF mechanism of the camera, you can easily be fooled by the camera 'locking focus' while you are actually a bit outside the range, the result is blurred images.

technic said:

Digital Shutterbug said:

ChristianHass said:

You took both shots at the widest setting. For the camera's own "macro" setting this is correct, but when using closeup filters you normally use the tele end of the lens to get the highest magnification.
--
Shooting for fun and memories.

Click to expand...

I had difficulties in focusing at the tele end. I'm not sure why.

Click to expand...

keep in mind that with a diopter, you can no longer focus to infinity. There is a zone where the camera can focus, e.g. with a +2 diopter the maximum focus distance is 50 cm and the closest will be something like 30cm depending on camera. If you are working outside this focus distance, the camera cannot focus. Depending on the AF mechanism of the camera, you can easily be fooled by the camera 'locking focus' while you are actually a bit outside the range, the result is blurred images.

Click to expand...

As I stated further in that same post, I repeated the technique the next day with excellent results. The first time, I was in a big hurry due to fading light and the time I had to play around that evening. I'm sure it was something I was doing wrong in my haste. With the +10 diopter I was using, the margin for error is paper thin. I was even surprised that I was able to hand hold the camera and get such good results. I wouldn't even waste my time doing such work with my 5D Mk III without a tripod. The super light and small RX100 makes it possible, even though a tripod would still be helpful.

Steve