Long distance macro, is it possible?

EcoPics

Senior Member
Messages
1,890
Solutions
1
Reaction score
168
Location
NZ
So lets say a d5500 with 450mm reach, a raynox 250 on the end. Now is that going to be macro or is that just going to be infinity?

Is there a formula for working out minimum distance, say 450mm 1:1?

Sorry, noob question :-)
 
Last edited:
How much magnification is a raynox dcr250 in real world terms, can it get to 1:1?
 
How much magnification is a raynox dcr250 in real world terms, can it get to 1:1?
What lens are you thinking of using? Find out it's max magnification and use the calculator to find a suitable diopter value.

If it's 400mm, then the 8 diopter Raynox is probably too strong. The Raynox fits lenses with filter size up to 67mm. Most 400 lenses have larger filter sizes than that. You still might be able to fit the Raynox but you will have to think about how to do it.
 
So lets say a d5500 with 450mm reach, a raynox 250 on the end. Now is that going to be macro or is that just going to be infinity?
I'm going to assume that by "450mm reach," you're planning to use a 300mm lens on your D5500. If you focus such a lens at infinity and add a Raynox 250, you'll get approximately 2.4x magnification at a subject distance of 425mm. The combined focal length will be in the 88-90mm range.

The amount of working distance will depend on which 300mm lens you choose. The maximum possible magnification at minimum focus will also depend on the exact lens. For example, with a 300mm f/4 PF, working distance at infinity is around 206mm. Attempting to focus more closely reduces working distance, but has only a very small impact on final magnification. However, you'd need a step-down ring in order to mount the Raynox, and it wouldn't surprise me if the combination showed significant vignetting.

If you want to achieve 1:1 with a 300mm lens, look for +3 diopter close-up lens such as the Marumi 330 DHG or Nikon 6T. I've used the former with a 70-300mm VR with some success, although I get better results at 250mm or so rather than 300mm.

Here are a couple of tools that I used to come up with these numbers:

 
Thank you very much, yes 70-300 just because its proving handy the AFP version.

I know its not high quality, but its not the Mrs work lens its mine I just use their body.

I thought it was going to be a dud due to price and weight but have been surprised.

I just thought whats the furthest I can get away from say a crocodile and macro his eye type thing (not literally, more like monitor lizards haha)
 
A close-up attachment such as the (excellent) Raynox will not help if you want greater working distance. It reduces the focal length, so that you can focus with the lens closer to the subject.

If anything, you want to increase the focal length, which is what a tele-converter does. The aim is to reduce the angle of view rather than focus from a closer distance.

To focus closer, when you are using a long or very long lens, use tubes or a bellows. But you will probably not need these if you use a tele-converter on an already long lens that can on its own focus down to 10 or 15 feet.

Obviously tele-converters vary in quality.

Another approach is to simply get a longer lens: for instance, a 2000mm mirror lens.

Either way, you need plenty of light.
 
So lets say a d5500 with 450mm reach, a raynox 250 on the end. Now is that going to be macro or is that just going to be infinity?

Is there a formula for working out minimum distance, say 450mm 1:1?

Sorry, noob question :-)
For a simple lens 1:1 is reached when the subject is 2 focal lengths from the optical center of the lens, which is the same distance the sensor has to be from it. This makes 600mm for a 300mm lens, but the large degree of extension makes such a system quite unworkable. Adding other lenses will change this & makes the lens much more manageable.

Diopters give higher magnifications with longer lenses. A Raynox 250 is +8 diopter (or 125mm focal length) &will definitely be macro on a 300mm lens. The Raynox can reach 1:1 with most 100mm lenses, and will only be able to shoot a rather high magnifications on a 300mm. Quick mental arithmetic suggests somewhat over 2x life size (300/125) with the lens at infinity. I'd consider that hard work to use, and would suggest either a shorter lens or a weaker diopter. The Raynox 150 is a possibility, at +4.8 diopter it's still quite powerful and will still reach 1:1 & more on your 75-300 while also giving more working distance

A Raynox added to a camera lens will never 'be infinity'. Adding a positive diopter to a lens makes the lens focus much closer. With a +n diopter added to a lens set at infinity the focusing distance is 1/n meters. That's 12.5cm with the Raynox 250 (slight over 20cm with the Raynox 150) - the FURTHEST you can focus with the diopter added.

Minimum focusing distance of the lens & supplementary will depend on the close focus setting of the lens - IIRC the focusing ring makes hardly any difference with an +8 on my 150-500, with this combination, the entire focusing range varies the working distance by only 1-2 cm. I'd rather like a good +0.5 diopter for that lens, even a +1 is too powerful.

Formulae like these work using the ACTUAL focal length of the lens not it's full frame equivalent focal length. So if your 450 lens is actually a 300 on a crop sensor you have to treat it as a 300mm.
 
Last edited:
A Raynox added to a camera lens will never 'be infinity'. Adding a positive diopter to a lens makes the lens focus much closer. With a +n diopter added to a lens set at infinity the focusing distance is 1/n meters. That's 12.5cm with the Raynox 250 (slight over 20cm with the Raynox 150) - the FURTHEST you can focus with the diopter added.
Thank you so much, totally got my head around diopters now, even though Ive got a macro lens, I think it would be handy for those days when you have your single lens telephoto, ie the nikon 14-140mm f1.4.

Again cheers.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top