Macro adapter?

RivkiLocker

Senior Member
Messages
1,567
Solutions
2
Reaction score
803
I have an xe3 with a 23mm f2, 56mm f1.2 and 90mm f2 lens. I’d like to try my hand at macro without spending much money. I’m confused on what adapter I can use and how it works. Can someone enlighten me on the options? Thanks so much.
 
Last edited:
3 options:

Extension tube.

Closeup filter.

Adapted manual focus lens.

Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. And it will depend on what you mean by macro.

I have the Fujifilm 11mm extension tube (about $90). It works with any lens although some work better for closeup work than others. Fujifilm publishes a chart of magnification for all lenses.

Mostly, I use an old Canon FD 50mm f3.5 macro lens. The lens by itself gives 1:2, its own extension tube gives true 1:1 macro. I bought it used for $50.
 
90mm lens with a close up lens should give good results

OTOH an old maco lens MF is also a good choice

I use the Tamron 90mm 2.5 withits extension tube that creates 1:2 ratio then with the tube up to 1:1 The MF ring is butterly smooth with along play allowing with focus peaking an ultra precise MF This lens you can find around 100$
 
Raynox 150/250 or Canon 250/500. Both fit on the front of the lens and are excellent (not like the old "Macro/close up filters"). They are handy for field work when attached to 90 mm or 55-200mm. Or you could look for used 60mm f2.4 macro (actually 1:2 rather than 1:1 life size).

For studio, an older MF macro lens mounted on a bellows and fitted to the camera via a lens adapter is the most precise method of focusing.

I mount a Fuji body + 60mm f2.4 on a "Focus slider" and tripod which makes exact focusing and focus stacking easier and can be taken into the field more easily than bellows.

IMO the Raynox/Canon or extension tubes are the best entry level route to macro/close up with either adapted legacy lens or native Fuji and will always be useful should you take the art of Macro further - in which case:

Check this out for inspiring artistic macro. https://beta.1x.com/macro

Vic
 
+1 for Raynox DCR150 or 250. Easy on and off, allows autofocus too. Very high IQ. I bought a used 60mm but am returning it; it lived up to its billing (very sharp, nice bokeh) but the AF hunts a bit too much for me.
 
90mm lens with a close up lens should give good results
if I go this route which close up lens do you recommend?
OTOH an old maco lens MF is also a good choice

I use the Tamron 90mm 2.5 withits extension tube that creates 1:2 ratio then with the tube up to 1:1 The MF ring is butterly smooth with along play allowing with focus peaking an ultra precise MF This lens you can find around 100$

--
Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment
 
+1 for Raynox DCR150 or 250. Easy on and off, allows autofocus too. Very high IQ. I bought a used 60mm but am returning it; it lived up to its billing (very sharp, nice bokeh) but the AF hunts a bit too much for me.
pardon my stupidity but will those work on any Fuji prime lens? Thanks!
--
"Turn my eyes from looking at worthless things;
and give me life in your ways." - Psalm 119:37
 
+1 for Raynox DCR150 or 250. Easy on and off, allows autofocus too. Very high IQ. I bought a used 60mm but am returning it; it lived up to its billing (very sharp, nice bokeh) but the AF hunts a bit too much for me.
pardon my stupidity but will those work on any Fuji prime lens? Thanks!
It's a good question. The lens itself is a 49mm diameter, and it sits inside an adjustable holder that clips onto the inner ring/filter ring of the Fuji lens. The clips are spring-loaded, so it fits a variety of lens filter ring diameters. According to the listing for the DCR-150 on the B&H Photo site, the holder will fit lens filter diameters of 52-67mm. It fits securely on my 58mm diameter 18-55 and 50-230.

So it will work on Fuji prime lenses that are best suited for it, such as the mid-long telephotos that fall within the range of the holder. The 90mm has a filter diameter of 62mm, so it should work on that.
 
+1 for Raynox DCR150 or 250. Easy on and off, allows autofocus too. Very high IQ. I bought a used 60mm but am returning it; it lived up to its billing (very sharp, nice bokeh) but the AF hunts a bit too much for me.
one more question: if you were choosing one for starters which magnification would you go with?

Thanks again
I have the DCR 150 and I am happy with that, but I have used it mostly with the 50-230mm. At 230mm it has razor-thin dof, so if I were using the 250, the dof would be even less. If you are going to use it with a prime (i.e. the 90mm), it might be worth getting both. They're relatively inexpensive for the IQ and convenience.

Here, I found this on another forum: Fuji 90mm with Raynox
 
I have an xe3 with a 23mm f2, 56mm f1.2 and 90mm f2 lens. I’d like to try my hand at macro without spending much money. I’m confused on what adapter I can use and how it works. Can someone enlighten me on the options? Thanks so much.
Hi,

I haven't read the other responses but here's my $0.02c worth. You've got two lenses that will do well with accessories for macro - the 56 & 90mm. (The 23mm isn't impossible but you end up with very, very short working distances between front of lens and subject).

The most flexible option is a macro lens, but at greater cost. Extension tubes and good quality close-up lenses can produce excellent results, but you have to switch them to get the best magnification for your chosen shot. The Fuji tubes and top CU lenses - like the Raynox or the Canon 250D and 500D screw-in two element achromatic lenses - are not much difference in price. They are however different on other ways.......

Extension tubes work with all lenses but work best with primes. The shorter the FL of the prime lens the more magnification a tube of given length causes. Conversely the longer the FL, the longer the tube you'll need to get a given magnification. Either Fuji tube would work on the 23mm but cause very short working distances - I wouldn't bother to try macro on the 23mm. A 16mm tube would work well to give you substantially closer focusing with the 56mm and 90mm lenses but you won't get high magnifications like 1:2 or 1:1. The downside of tubes is that they take some light so you get slightly slower shutter speeds. Tubes don't work well with zooms because any slight touch of the zoom setting causes massive loss of focus.

Close-up lenses work with all lenses. They change the optics, shorten the combined FL and lose distance focusing. They can potentially introduce flaws, though modern two or three element ones are excellent. Their advantage over tubes is that they don't rob you of any light, so they maintain shutter speeds better than tubes. That can be very important if you're chasing bugs. They also cooperate very nicely with zooms - you can zoom at will with no impact on focusing.

I would recommend trying the Canon CU lenses, probably starting with a 250D, on your Fuji 90mm. Their elements are larger and they don't vignette as easily as the Raynox on larger diameter, faster lenses. The Canons don't come in 62mm - it's 52, 58, 72 or 77mm, so you'd need a step up or down ring. The old Nikon T series achromatic lenses have been out of production for a long time and are quite expensive second-hand, but they did come in 62mm.

You can stack or combine tubes and/or CU lenses. Don't be afraid to experiment. In macro you just do what works. It's a demanding discipline, but addictive!

Cheers, Rod
 
Last edited:
Another vote for the Raynox twins. Get the 150 for longer focal lengths (over 100mm) and the 250 for shorter ones (50-100). They only have 2 downsides as far as I am concerned:
  1. Like extension tubes, you lose infinity focus.
  2. They do vignette quite severely on some lenses, particularly at shorter focal lengths.
A good combo would be the 55-200mm + DCR-150. I use the DCR-150 with a Canon 55-250STM with great results. Here are a couple of examples:


 
Hi,

... Their advantage over tubes is that they don't rob you of any light, so they maintain shutter speeds better than tubes....
Very good write-up. One small point. Close-up lenses do "rob you of light".
Remember, they spread out the light so it's "thinner".
Effective aperture is affected by (1 + m) where m is magnification and it doesn't matter how that magnification was achieved.

Cheers,
 
Hi,

... Their advantage over tubes is that they don't rob you of any light, so they maintain shutter speeds better than tubes....
Very good write-up. One small point. Close-up lenses do "rob you of light".
Remember, they spread out the light so it's "thinner".
Effective aperture is affected by (1 + m) where m is magnification and it doesn't matter how that magnification was achieved.

Cheers,

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
Hi Bill. Thx. I'm always happy to learn something. It concerns me to have had it wrong, and I suspect I'm not the only one who thought that there is a difference between the exposures one derives from tubes versus CU lenses. How is the correction of (1+m) applied? If for example, one was shooting at 1:2 or half life size, is the exposure changed by a factor of 1.5? Eg if the exposure was going to be 100ms with the bare lens, is the exposure with a tube or a CU lens now 150ms? And if 1:1, then 200ms, etc?

Just out of interest, what should be expected of macro exposures with the new Fuji 80mm lens? It's an internal focus lens and they're usually noted (in telephoto usage) for maintaining shutter speed as you focus closer. OTOH, their FL reduces as they focus closer and substantially if they're IF macro lenses focused to high magnifications. This obviously happens to the Fuji 80mm, because Fuji's own magnification tables show it to have a very short working distance at 1:1. (It's shorter than the 60mm lens with tubes at 1:1.) Is the exposure with an IF lens (without accessories) subject to the same correction (ie 1+m)?

Thanks, Rod
 
Last edited:
Hi,

... Their advantage over tubes is that they don't rob you of any light, so they maintain shutter speeds better than tubes....
Very good write-up. One small point. Close-up lenses do "rob you of light".
Remember, they spread out the light so it's "thinner".
Effective aperture is affected by (1 + m) where m is magnification and it doesn't matter how that magnification was achieved.
.... How is the correction of (1+m) applied? If for example, one was shooting at 1:2 or half life size, is the exposure changed by a factor of 1.5? Eg if the exposure was going to be 100ms with the bare lens, is the exposure with a tube or a CU lens now 150ms? And if 1:1, then 200ms, etc?
So, the actual formula is (1 + m / P) where m is magnification and P is pupillary magnification; but we seldom know P so we assume it is 1.

At 1:2 m is 0.5; so yes, the correction is (1 + 0.5) = 1.5

This value is applied to the f-number. So if you're shooting at f/16 the effective aperture if f/24 (16 * 1.5).
Just out of interest, what should be expected of macro exposures with the new Fuji 80mm lens? It's an internal focus lens and they're usually noted (in telephoto usage) for maintaining shutter speed as you focus closer. OTOH, their FL reduces as they focus closer and substantially if they're IF macro lenses focused to high magnifications. This obviously happens to the Fuji 80mm, because Fuji's own magnification tables show it to have a very short working distance at 1:1. (It's shorter than the 60mm lens with tubes at 1:1.) Is the exposure with an IF lens (without accessories) subject to the same correction (ie 1+m)?
Yes, since almost all lenses drop focal length as they focus closer than infinity the effect of the effective f-number can be partially or entirely offset.

If the 80mm lens drops focal length to 80mm/1.5 = 53.3mm at 1:2 (certainly possible) then the size of the entrance and exit pupils would not change and neither would the exposure time.

I think I worked all this out for the Fuji lenses. I'll have to try to find my spreadsheet.

Cheers,

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
 
Last edited:
3 options:

Extension tube.

Closeup filter.

Adapted manual focus lens.
My vote is also on the adapted MF lens, it will give a lot more flexibility.

Since I got my first one, I never used the Fuji extension tubes again.

Shooting moving bugs or flowers in the wind will require a learning curve though, but then again, with AF these situations also have a lot of misses.

Another affordable MF-lens not yet mentioned is the Volna-9, combine it with a helicoid M42-adapter and you can get really close when you wish to do so.
 
Here's the spreadsheet I mentioned in a previous post:

Best viewed at Original Size
Best viewed at Original Size

It's interesting that the prime lenses in particular don't seem to drop focal length very much, in fact a few increase in focal length slightly as you focus closer.

Note that the column labeled 'pm' is the reciprocal of pupillary magnification (p = 1/P)
So effective aperture is affected by (1 + m * p)

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
 
There are a lot of them

I use bonnettes from Raynox 150 and 250

BUT you need to be sure with bonnette that you won't get huge vignetting

With my XF 18-135mm at 135mm it's perfect

Don't know for 90mm I would better recommend



It is a set no risk of vignette, no loss of light, small not expensive

Other way th extension tubes
 
I have an xe3 with a 23mm f2, 56mm f1.2 and 90mm f2 lens. I’d like to try my hand at macro without spending much money. I’m confused on what adapter I can use and how it works. Can someone enlighten me on the options? Thanks so much.
http://extreme-macro.co.uk/raynox-adapter-techniques/

For instance -

90mm + R150 Mag 0.72:1, Work distance approx 20cm.

90mm +R250 Mag 1.06:1, Work distance approx 12.5cm

200mm + R150 Mag 1.31:1, Work distance approx 20cm

200mm + R250 Mag 2.07:1, Work distance approx 12.5cm

Vic

--
The sky is full of holes that let the rain get in, the holes are very small - that's why the rain is thin.
Spike Milligan. Writer, comedian, poet, Goon. 1918 - 2002
 
Last edited:

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top