250D Close-Up Lens

[Y0GI]

I have found a 250D for sale in Craigslist and I am trying to find more information on how this lens works and what exactly it does. I cannot find it on Canon's website.

I would like to use it with my EF-S 55-250mm IS lens attached to my XSi for macros of bugs, flowers and other small stuff.

Does this lens provide magnification or does it just allow a closer working distance to the front element of the 55-250? If it provides magnification, how much?

I also read that it is "Optimised" for 50-135mm lenses. What happens to the image if one goes over 135mm? In one of the reviews on Amazon a user claimed to be getting good results with an EF 75-300 mm lens.

How does this compare/contrast to the +1, +2, +4, +10 diopter close up lens kits?

Any info would be appreciated!
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

 

[richj20]

The Canon 250D and 500D are 2-element dioptre lenses with glass optimized for this type of work. The +1 etc closeup lens kits are inferior in tests I made years ago comparing to my Nikon 6T which corresponds to the Canon 500D. Unless something has changed in these kits, I would expect the differences to still be there.

Like the Canon 500D, the 6T is optimized for longer focal lengths and I use it on the Canon 70-200mm f/4 at the longer zoom.

If I put it on the 17-55mm f/1.8, there is hardly any change, so I would assume the reverse is true with the 250D optimization. Only one way to know: try it out!

rich

 

[richj20]

I forgot about your other question.

The dioptres both decrease working distance and increase magnification. The closer you are, the more shallow the depth of field.

rich

 

[photonius]

I have found a 250D for sale in Craigslist and I am trying to find more information on how this lens works and what exactly it does. I cannot find it on Canon's website.

I would like to use it with my EF-S 55-250mm IS lens attached to my XSi for macros of bugs, flowers and other small stuff.

Does this lens provide magnification or does it just allow a closer working distance to the front element of the 55-250? If it provides magnification, how much?

This does both, provide higher magnification, but at the same time you have a closer working distance, and loose focus to infinity.

I also read that it is "Optimised" for 50-135mm lenses. What happens to the image if one goes over 135mm? In one of the reviews on Amazon a user claimed to be getting good results with an EF 75-300 mm lens.

Well, you can stick a close-up lens on any lens if the filter thread fits/ is large enough and it doesn't vignette (you can use step up ring adapters of course)

How does this compare/contrast to the +1, +2, +4, +10 diopter close up lens kits?

These are single lenses, as compared to achromatic doublets.

I just did a test comparing the Canon 500D (the sibbling of the 250D) to a simple +2 Hoya diopter on a 55-250 IS. All I can say is "argh" - get the achromat.
I will post this result here:
http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro
Read this, to understand about close-up lenses, and how they work.

From this you can also see that the 500D (I have that) is the more natural fit for the 55-250 IS, although the 250D will work as well, and give higher magnification.

The "optimized" for some focal length does not mean that you cannot use it on other lenses, but as
http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro

shows, you need stronger ones on shorter focal length lenses to get a decent magnification effect.

Any info would be appreciated!
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

 

[Y0GI]

I forgot about your other question.

The dioptres both decrease working distance and increase magnification. The closer you are, the more shallow the depth of field.

rich

Thanks for the info, Rich!
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

 

[Y0GI]

I have found a 250D for sale in Craigslist and I am trying to find more information on how this lens works and what exactly it does. I cannot find it on Canon's website.

I would like to use it with my EF-S 55-250mm IS lens attached to my XSi for macros of bugs, flowers and other small stuff.

Does this lens provide magnification or does it just allow a closer working distance to the front element of the 55-250? If it provides magnification, how much?

This does both, provide higher magnification, but at the same time you have a closer working distance, and loose focus to infinity.

I also read that it is "Optimised" for 50-135mm lenses. What happens to the image if one goes over 135mm? In one of the reviews on Amazon a user claimed to be getting good results with an EF 75-300 mm lens.

Well, you can stick a close-up lens on any lens if the filter thread fits/ is large enough and it doesn't vignette (you can use step up ring adapters of course)

How does this compare/contrast to the +1, +2, +4, +10 diopter close up lens kits?

These are single lenses, as compared to achromatic doublets.

I just did a test comparing the Canon 500D (the sibbling of the 250D) to a simple +2 Hoya diopter on a 55-250 IS. All I can say is "argh" - get the achromat.
I will post this result here:
http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro
Read this, to understand about close-up lenses, and how they work.

From this you can also see that the 500D (I have that) is the more natural fit for the 55-250 IS, although the 250D will work as well, and give higher magnification.

The "optimized" for some focal length does not mean that you cannot use it on other lenses, but as
http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro

shows, you need stronger ones on shorter focal length lenses to get a decent magnification effect.

Any info would be appreciated!
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

Thanks, Photonius! You have provided a wealth of information! Much appreciated! I have decided to definitely buy the 250D!
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

 

[photonius]

I have found a 250D for sale in Craigslist and I am trying to find more information on how this lens works and what exactly it does. I cannot find it on Canon's website.

I would like to use it with my EF-S 55-250mm IS lens attached to my XSi for macros of bugs, flowers and other small stuff.

Does this lens provide magnification or does it just allow a closer working distance to the front element of the 55-250? If it provides magnification, how much?

This does both, provide higher magnification, but at the same time you have a closer working distance, and loose focus to infinity.

I also read that it is "Optimised" for 50-135mm lenses. What happens to the image if one goes over 135mm? In one of the reviews on Amazon a user claimed to be getting good results with an EF 75-300 mm lens.

Well, you can stick a close-up lens on any lens if the filter thread fits/ is large enough and it doesn't vignette (you can use step up ring adapters of course)

How does this compare/contrast to the +1, +2, +4, +10 diopter close up lens kits?

These are single lenses, as compared to achromatic doublets.

I just did a test comparing the Canon 500D (the sibbling of the 250D) to a simple +2 Hoya diopter on a 55-250 IS. All I can say is "argh" - get the achromat.
I will post this result here:
http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro
Read this, to understand about close-up lenses, and how they work.

From this you can also see that the 500D (I have that) is the more natural fit for the 55-250 IS, although the 250D will work as well, and give higher magnification.

The "optimized" for some focal length does not mean that you cannot use it on other lenses, but as
http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro

shows, you need stronger ones on shorter focal length lenses to get a decent magnification effect.

Any info would be appreciated!
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

Thanks, Photonius! You have provided a wealth of information! Much appreciated! I have decided to definitely buy the 250D!
--

Let us know how it goes with the 250D on a 55-250IS, since I don't have that.

Yogi

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

 

[Y0GI]

Let us know how it goes with the 250D on a 55-250IS, since I don't have that.

I'd be happy to!

The seller says that he cannot meet until tomorrow night. I hope that he is not just holding out for a higher bid.
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

 

[Gautam Majumdar]

250D close up lens is a double element +4 diopter magnifying lens. It will be good for the shorter part of the range of your zoom, may be up to 100mm. 500D is better for the longer lenses. You can see what magnifications you shall get at various focal lengths in this chart.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/closeup.htm

--
Gautam

 

[photonius]

250D close up lens is a double element +4 diopter magnifying lens. It will be good for the shorter part of the range of your zoom, may be up to 100mm. 500D is better for the longer lenses. You can see what magnifications you shall get at various focal lengths in this chart.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/closeup.htm

Except that chart doesn't list the 55-250 IS, but I have the details on the link I gave above, i.e. http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro
I have added now also comparison images of the 500D against a plain +2 dioptre.
Dramatic difference in IQ at 250mm, much more than expected.

I guess I got reasonable shots of flowers with the +2 dioptre on a 50mm in the film days, but on the longer focal length, it sure is worthless.

But I agree with you, the 250D might work better in the 55-130 mm range of the lens. Hopefully we will see examples how it's doing at maximum magnification, if the IQ holds.

--
Gautam

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

 

[linuxshell]

wow.... great info photonius!

 

[Marc de Vries]

250D close up lens is a double element +4 diopter magnifying lens. It will be good for the shorter part of the range of your zoom, may be up to 100mm. 500D is better for the longer lenses. You can see what magnifications you shall get at various focal lengths in this chart.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/closeup.htm

Except that chart doesn't list the 55-250 IS, but I have the details on the link I gave above, i.e. http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro
I have added now also comparison images of the 500D against a plain +2 dioptre.
Dramatic difference in IQ at 250mm, much more than expected.

I guess I got reasonable shots of flowers with the +2 dioptre on a 50mm in the film days, but on the longer focal length, it sure is worthless.

But I agree with you, the 250D might work better in the 55-130 mm range of the lens. Hopefully we will see examples how it's doing at maximum magnification, if the IQ holds.

Why do you both believe that the 250D would work better in the 55-130 range?

It would be great in the 200-250 range. It would give 1:1 enlargement or even better. You get a smaller magnification with shorter focal length.

The reason the 500D is recommended for longer lenses is because the 500D has better image quality because it needs to enlarge less. Also you need a long lens (400mm+) to get a 1:1 enlargement with the 500D.

Coupled with a high quality supertele you get great image quality and a very long working distance that you can normally only attain with the 180mm L macro.

 

[Gerrit Smit]

I never used the 250D, but the 500D works pretty well in combination with a 300mm lens ( in my case a cheap 70-300 )

In combination with the 300mm the magnification is somewhere around 1:1.3 ( but I'm not so sure about it - it's less than 1:1 and more than 1:2 )



--
Gerrit

 

[photonius]

250D close up lens is a double element +4 diopter magnifying lens. It will be good for the shorter part of the range of your zoom, may be up to 100mm. 500D is better for the longer lenses. You can see what magnifications you shall get at various focal lengths in this chart.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/closeup.htm

Except that chart doesn't list the 55-250 IS, but I have the details on the link I gave above, i.e. http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro
I have added now also comparison images of the 500D against a plain +2 dioptre.
Dramatic difference in IQ at 250mm, much more than expected.

I guess I got reasonable shots of flowers with the +2 dioptre on a 50mm in the film days, but on the longer focal length, it sure is worthless.

But I agree with you, the 250D might work better in the 55-130 mm range of the lens. Hopefully we will see examples how it's doing at maximum magnification, if the IQ holds.

Why do you both believe that the 250D would work better in the 55-130 range?

It would be great in the 200-250 range. It would give 1:1 enlargement or even better. You get a smaller magnification with shorter focal length.

The reason the 500D is recommended for longer lenses is because the 500D has better image quality because it needs to enlarge less. Also you need a long lens (400mm+) to get a 1:1 enlargement with the 500D.

Yes, that's the point, I know of course that you get higher magnification with the 250D when the 55-250 IS is at 250mm. I am just wondering how well the IQ will hold up with such high magnification - the higher the magnification the more the IQ might deteriorate. If the 250D does as well as the 500D, then no issue at all. However, as I said, I haven't used it and I am curious to know. Also, at these high magnifications, taking pictures gets more and more difficult (Share, DOF), that's why I think the 55-250 / 250D is probably easier to use when the magnification is not pushed to the max.

Coupled with a high quality supertele you get great image quality and a very long working distance that you can normally only attain with the 180mm L macro.

Exactly.

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

 

[Y0GI]

Well, I got the lens last night - for only $55! Since they are $95 at Amazon I think that I got a pretty good deal.

First impression on the 55-250mm IS: This lens is amazing! At 250mm a dime at minimum distance is bigger than the frame! (something greater than 1:1) Image is a little "foggy" I can see that the lens needs cleaning so I hope that is the problem.

I'll clean the 250D and try to post some images this afternoon if I can get EOS Utility to run on this laptop (Only 512MB RAM). My main computer is down with memory problems.
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

 

[RS_RS]

Would you use a 250mm 2-element lens for taking photographs? Probably not, unless you are a LensBaby user. When you put a 250D in front of a 250mm lens, the 250D is providing half of the optical "power" of the combination, but the 250mm lens those two elements are in front of has many elements to provide a high degree of correction. So don't expect too much. With a 50mm lens the 250D makes only a small contribution to the overall power (4 dioptres for the 250D and 20 for the 50mm lens, total 24) so good performance is maintained despite the relatively simple 2-element construction of the 250D. That's why the 250D is recommended only for lenses up to 135mm. It's also why using a prime lens mounted in reverse in front of the camera lens is a technique that can sometimes be successful for close-ups, because the reversed prime lens is a highly corrected multiple-element lens.

 

[jwilliams]

Buy one of the Nikon T series. Cheaper and as good or better. Great for using on a 70-200 zoom. I use one of the weaker T diopters from Nikon on a 70-200/4L with excellant results.

In general I would use a weaker power one if possible. Just like teleconverters the less you push them (think 1.4x vs 2x) generally the better the results are.

If you want a really good book on shooting macros find a copy of John Shaw's Closeups in Nature. The best photo book I have ever read. It has a chapter on using diiopters.

--
Jonathan

 

[photonius]

Well, I got the lens last night - for only $55! Since they are $95 at Amazon I think that I got a pretty good deal.

yes, indeed great deal

i got my 500D for half price new 1year ago, it was some kind of sale, later price doubled again.

First impression on the 55-250mm IS: This lens is amazing! At 250mm a dime at minimum distance is bigger than the frame! (something greater than 1:1)

should be 1.42x

Image is a little "foggy" I can see that the lens needs cleaning so I hope that is the problem.

I hope so, but it could also be the result of the very high magnification. let's see.

I'll clean the 250D and try to post some images this afternoon if I can get EOS Utility to run on this laptop (Only 512MB RAM). My main computer is down with memory problems.
--
Yogi

When you get down to the 'nuts and bolts' of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

 

[Marc de Vries]

Would you use a 250mm 2-element lens for taking photographs? Probably not, unless you are a LensBaby user.

Comparing it to a normal 250mm lens is complete nonsense!

The reason a normal prime uses 7 elements instead of 2 is because you also want to focus with it on other distances than just infinity.

But if you'd make a prime that focuses only at infinity and would be just as long as it's focal length, then you wouldn't need 7 elements for that either.

To the other person suggesting the Nikon T series, they are essentially the same diopters (also 2 elements) with the same performance.
And of course the weaker diopters have somewhat better IQ.

And since super telelenses are usually very sharp you get great IQ when you combine the 500D (or Nikon equivalent) with a super telelens.

 

[RS_RS]

Would you use a 250mm 2-element lens for taking photographs? Probably not, unless you are a LensBaby user.

Comparing it to a normal 250mm lens is complete nonsense!

The reason a normal prime uses 7 elements instead of 2 is because you also want to focus with it on other distances than just infinity.

You clearly have not understood what I am saying.

First, it is not true that a lens required to focus only at infinity could be very simple. Although internal-focus designs (which essentially focus by zooming) require a substantial number of elements, even linear-focusing lenses (that focus by moving the entire lens) need a reasonable number of elements to achieve a high standard of correction across the entire frame, and that need does not arise solely because of the focusing capability.

My point is that if you stack lenses (as with a camera lens and a close-up lens) then you can get away with a simple achromat close-up lens if its power is small compared to that of the camera lens, but if its power is comparable then you will lose image quality. Here's another way to understand the point: a 250mm lens will magnify the aberrations of the 250D achromat five times more than a 50mm lens.