the dreaded Raynox 505

When I first purchased the Raynox 505 and used it on my Panasonic FZ1000, and FZ2500, I was unhappy with the results. Everything seemed unsharp and only the very center 5-10% of the images seemed usable. The Raynox 250 was the much better choice for what I was using.

I soon switched in late 1999 to the Olympus EM1 Mark 2 camera and bought the Olympus 60mm macro lens. My main focus has always been macro photography, so I purchased a few Kenko extension tubes to get the most out of my macro lens. I was told that if I wanted to do anything over 5x magnification, I would need to get a microscope objective to get anything usable image-wise.

I wasn't out to prove anyone wrong, but I didn't have the funds at the time to do a Mitutoyu setup (or any other objectives) with tube lens and an automated rail when I was first starting out.

I decided to purchase the MC-20 teleconverter as I was convinced it would work with the 60mm macro lens by attaching extension tubes. I took two 10mm extension tubes by Kenko and attached them to the teleconverter and this allowed me to attach the MC-20 to the 60mm macro lens, giving me 2.5x magnification just using this setup. However, adding the Raynox 250 gave me near 6x magnification with full ability to focus bracket up to 999 images if needed.

One day I decided I would see if the Raynox 505 would work. I took a cheaper 16mm Pixco brand extension tube which has an inner wall made of plastic. I whittled away about 1mm of the inner wall of the tube which allowed the teleconverter lens to fit inside. I did this as the two 10mm tubes created a bit of a void between the teleconverter lens and the 60mm macro lens, and I wanted to avoid that if posssible. Using 16mm brought the two lenses closer together which gathered more light and made things sharper.

Adding the Raynox 505 brought me a field of view of 1.8mm - about 9x magnification, with the full ability to focus bracket images. This also made sure to use the very very center of the Raynox 505, bring me sharpness to approximately 40-50% of the image, rather than the initial 5-10%. I could see why people weren't big on the Raynox 505 on the usual macro setup...but with a lens setup already at 2.4x magnification, adding the Raynox 505 gave acceptable results as long as I was cropping about 1/2 of the image away.

This is how I got involved with photographing grains of sand, scales on butterflies and bugs, and other things at around 9x magnification. With the sand grains, I have since attempted to use a Mitutoyu 10x objective with rail and tube lens and cannot get good results with that setup, no matter what lighting I use.

Here are a few examples of some shots with the 505 and my MC-20/60mm macro setup. Most are stacks of about 125-175 images as that seems to be the sweet spot.  The setup has its flaws and isn't perfect....but provides me with good enough results to the point where I am happy and my followers on my Facebook page and Instagram pages are thrilled with the results.  I do use the Raynox 202 many times when I need not as much magnification but better sharpness all-around.  The Raynox 250 is great out in the field.  The 202/505 setup is usually indoors.

First, the shoulder and back of the head of a nectar-drinking mosquito I found in late 2020.

Focused on only the pedipalps of a tiny jumping spider, getting some great detail of the individual hairs on them

The surface of a fly's eye - about 1mm field of view

the scales on a Polythemus moth - 0.75mm field of view

tiny purple moth eggs, just 0.6mm each

the area on a female jumping spider for fertilization

a 0.25mm sand garnet balanced on another grain of sand, both from Bandon, Oregon

a 0.2mm sand garnet balanced on another grain of sand, both from Bandon, Oregon

a 0.25mm sand garnet balanced on another grain of sand, both from Bandon, Oregon