a_ph0t0

Quality at a reasonable price.

In the previous article I told you about how you can begin to familiarize with the macro-world without spending a lot of money on expensive photo equipment. Those who have not read - would recommend to get acquainted to keep abreast of topics. :-)  Then I will tell that I have finally come out of it.

So, plenty getting practice in shooting of small inanimate objects, I realized that I would like to take pictures of wildlife. At the macro.
Those who tried to shoot in fully manual mode, not static objects know - how hard to do this: you must to keep in mind a lot of options and constantly change them when changing the lighting or object - and despite this ,object could be sometimes missed, because it moves...

So, for me the question arose: how much is not raising up the bar of our modest budget to get more comfortable and versatile solution for shooting macro in nature and in particular insects?

For a long time I could not come to an optimal solution for me, and even I started to think about buying a good macro lens. But first things first...

Shooting on the nature of complex home on the technical side: lighting changes frequently, objects are moving. Therefore, one of my requirements was to ensure auto exposure metering . I payed attention to the so-called close-up filter , which are screwed on top of the lens of as well as protective or polarizing filters.

Close-up filter can reduce the minimum focusing distance of the lens, respectively, improving the appearance of small parts of object. At the macro-filter's frame is usually indicated their optical power. Who cares, then calculate their specific magnifying power in diopters according the formula: 1/lens focal length.
That's basically the whole theory that you should know to start using them.

Each filter was calculated for a specific lens seat diameter. I.e. filter diameter of 52mm will not allow you to put him on lenses with a filter-thread diameter of 67mm. From this situation, there is a solution - you can buy a filter under the maximum diameter and use the adapters (which are much cheaper than a filter) to install it on the lenses of smaller diameter.

The benefits of macro-filter before the macro-rings:

1. Fully preserved camera auto-mode. That's mean, you can trust the camera's exposure meter and set shutter speed and / or aperture, quite as well as when shooting without a filter.

2. Efficiency. No need to remove objects. Just screw the filter on top of it.

3. Works with any lenses with filter thread support.

But not without problems :-( .

At macro-filters have at least one drawback: the more its optical strength - the more distortion it introduces, especially on the frame edges. In contrast to the macro-rings in which the optical elements are completely absent, here we have an optical element - the lens. And believe me, after installing the macro filter, the yours lens characteristics will change. And not for the better. And the larger the diameter of the filter - the better the quality it (filter) should be, that the distortion introduced by close-up filter were the least visible.

After having a lot experiments with the usual macro filters I was wondering - is it possible here in any way to improve the quality of received images?

What can be done?

I wanted to find the better way to make the most quality macro without buying a macro lens and staying within a small budget.

Is it possible to achieve exactly this with close-up filter? It turned out that yes.

The decision has turned imperceptibly, more casually. The solution was in macro-filter design.

Qualitative macro filter.

Watching the sample macro photos, I observed that the author mentioned in passing that the photos were taken with the macro-lens Raynox .

And that's what I discovered:
Formally, this lens is actually the same macro-filter which I mentioned above. But there is one rather significant difference:
within its frame is not one and the pair of lenses! The optical quality of this filter is much better than a single close-up filter.

When you hold it in your hands, then just call it macro-filter do not dare - he looks more like a mini-macro-lens, so solid and of high quality its design.

Remember I wrote that in addition to the quality I was looking more versatility? And I found it! This lens (with a thread diameter of 49mm) with the aid of a simple adapter can be worn on any lens, which supports the installation of a filter with a thread from 52 to 67mm.

Finally, my choice fell on a set of two macro-lens (1.5x and 2.5x) with a focal length of 21cm. and 12.5 cm respectively, and a universal adapter Raynox CM-2000 Macro for their attachment to the lenses.

Box picture:

And here is a close-up filter in working condition over the lens Nikkor 50mm, F/1.8:

This set allows for shooting in scale from about 1:4 (0.25x) and up to 2.7:1 (2.7x), (specific scale depends on the lens used) that was quite meet my requirements.

I was not mistaken in my expectations: these lenses are paid for themselves: a set of two macro-filters cost me about 90$, but you can buy a one + adapter for about 50$.

The simplest specialized macro lens is still much expensive!

Moreover, if you already have a macro-lens, you can try to use this macro-filter with him and thus arises to an even larger scale image.
The higher the optical quality of your base lens and the less its outer diameter of the outer thread, the better the image you may get. The larger outer thread diameter - will lead to the more likely vignetting.

For example, with my favorite zoom Nikkor 70-300, F/4-5.6, whose external diameter of 67mm was noticeably slight vignetting in the corners. Incidentally, the title shot is made with its help.

And Tamron 17-50 mm, F/2.8 with the same outer diameter, vignetting switched to a terrible level, probably from the fact that it was originally designed for APS-C (Nikon) sensor type and not for the full frame (35mm). Although if resulting photo will be cropped in the editor, the result will be more or less normal, but all the same - not good.

On my Nikkor 50mm, F/1.8 (external diameter 52mm), vignetting and softening was not observed. All images, except the title, was made with this lens.

Now, I'll show you some of my photos, that made with Nikkor 50mm, F/1.8 lenses and the Raynox M-150/250 close-up lens set:

1. Caterpillar in attack!

2. Spider's defense.

3. Mosquito on yellow

4. Beetle on a flower.

5. Beetle's battle.

6. Beetle on purple-pink.

7. Spider & the flower.

8. Spider on dew.

Conclusion.

In general, for myself, I solved the problem with taking the macro shots for less than 50$ (price of one, high-quality macro-filter) and with the convenience that is comparable to using a much more expensive macro-optics.

Then everything comes down to skill of the photographer. I wish all beginners more patience and luck, just so you can get good photos.

Hopefully, this article will help to someone to settle into an amazing and very interesting world of macro.

Be happy to answer the questions, relating to this article.