Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,927   Posts: 1,585,156   Online: 854
      
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Eastern Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,595

    Close up filters.

    I was thinking about picking up a set.
    Any opinions?

    Mike

  2. #2
    Markok765's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,270
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    24
    Bellows\ext. tubes have better quality
    Marko Kovacevic
    Blog
    Youtube

  3. #3
    Loose Gravel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    921
    Images
    14
    I like closeup filters. I had some for the Hassie and that worked so well. I'd like to find some for the Pentax 67, but can't find that much info on them. Easier to use than extension tubes. Cheaper than macros.
    Watch for Loose Gravel

  4. #4
    glbeas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Roswell, Ga. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    109
    An easy way to get closeups. Be sure and get multicoated sets, the cheaper ones have so much flare as to be practically useless. A good lens hood will help too. Another cheap way for doing closeups if your camera is manual focus is to pick up a really cheap telextender and unscrew the lens elements from it. Makes a nice little extension tube for a fraction of what the usual ones cost.
    Gary Beasley

  5. #5
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    There are several kinds, and generally you get what you pay for. The most expensive are multicoated achromats, the cheapest are simple uncoated glass lenses.

    All of them are usable with due care, but there's little doubt that the best results can be had with the best lenses. The cheap ones can be problematic...
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  6. #6
    ZorkiKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Manila PHILIPPINES
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    344
    a bit of a nitpick
    shouldn't these be called as closeup lenses instead of "filters"? They aren't filters by definition, but real lenses placed over the camera objective.
    FED ZORKI SURVIVAL SITE
    RANGEFINDERFILIPINAS
    Zorkikat.Com

    "不管黑猫白猫能抓到老鼠就是好猫。" 邓小平
    It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white, so long as it catches mice.-邓小平

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New Brunswick , Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    86
    Hi Mike,
    Try the Nikon or Canon two element ones, they work pretty good.Just keep your lens stopped down to about f8 or higher for good sharpess and depth of field.

    Rob.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Evanston, IL, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    646
    Images
    17
    I have one and it produces a fuzzy picture. An automatic extension tube is a better option.

  9. #9
    Anupam Basu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    504
    Images
    20

    Get dual element ones

    The dual element ones from Nikon (3t-6t) or Canon (250D, 500D) and also from Minolta are high quality. The single element ones were not worth the effort in my experience.

    Compared to tubes, they are lighter, easier to carry and don't mess with AF contacts which are required for some low end Nikon cameras. But on the flip side they eat into working distance more than tubes do. I'd get diopters for occasional macro use but get tubes and macro lenses if carrying them is not a bog deal.

    -Anupam

    PS: The new Macro forum would have been a great place to ask this.

  10. #10
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by reub2000
    I have one and it produces a fuzzy picture. An automatic extension tube is a better option.
    So what do you have? A simple lens, or a coated two-element achromat?

    Among the simplest uncoated lenses, I've had some really good results with 1930's Focar lenses...
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin