Tell me about diopters aka close-up filters

[etane]

So, I think I solved my original question and a diopter is not what I am looking for. What I want is something that extends the zoom range on my 17-55mm lens, and that something is a teleconverter. Now, I know what you guys are thinking that this is probably an even worse option than a diopter or extension tube. But, functionally, it's what I was looking for instead of a diopter.

[TickleMyElmo]

Originally Posted by etane

Ultimately, with close focus distance being equal, what makes the reproduction ratio get closer to 1:1? Is it how much/far it can telephoto?

No, it depends on the design of the lens.

Originally Posted by etane

So, I think I solved my original question and a diopter is not what I am looking for. What I want is something that extends the zoom range on my 17-55mm lens, and that something is a teleconverter. Now, I know what you guys are thinking that this is probably an even worse option than a diopter or extension tube. But, functionally, it's what I was looking for instead of a diopter.

No, a teleconverter won't help you. It doesn't mount on some lenses (usually mostly only mounts on super telephotos). They can be mounted on certain macro lenses to increase the reproduction ratio, but then working distance is greatly reduced.

The only thing you can get cheap is an extension tube or reversing ring. Both offer terrible quality. Photography is very much an expensive hobby, there is no cheap method that offers great results :/

[Nubster]

You can get a Tamron 90mm macro for $300ish and they are pretty well regarded. That's what I use and its a really good lens.

[etane]

Quick update:

I won a bid on fleabay for a Kiron 28-105mm f3.2-4.5. Will report back after I receive it. Got it for dirt cheap, $11 plus ship. Reviews for this lens is great. Kiron is the OEM for Nikon E-series lens.

If this one doesn't work out, I think I will get a Rokinon 85mm f1.4. Reviews are awesome and can use it for night photography with the f1.8. Not sure how well it handles night photography in the sense that this is a manual focus only lens. Plus, I'd prefer to have a zoom for indoor shooting since space to move around is more limited.

[Nubster]

Originally Posted by TickleMyElmo

The only thing you can get cheap is an extension tube or reversing ring. Both offer terrible quality.

Orly?

This shot was taken with a reversing ring and a pretty shoddy setup overall...

(not mine)...



How do tubes produce terrible quality when all they are is a hollow tube?

[speedie408]

I use tubes all the time.

Quality seems fine.

[GraphicGr8s]

Nubster, they don't. Neither do focusing bellows or deglassed teleconverters. I'll give TME the benefit of the doubt.

[etane]

Just reporting back about the Kiron lens. Well, so I learned that I shouldn't get a macro lens with a wide angle. I thought I could be within a foot of the subject with any macro lens, but, with this one, I could do that only when in wide angle. Once in tele, I have to move farther away. The lens itself is a keeper for casual photos as I do not have a tele lens. 99.9% of the time, the 17-55mm suits me fine.

[etane]

Well, I actually did end up getting a diopter. Although I can auto focus from within 4" from the subject, the images captured at that distance all came out blurry for some reasons. I guess this is what is called narrow depth of field? But, at about 8" from the subject, I could get some OK shots. The macro is quite as "macro", but is doable for me. Here's a few samples.




No flash on the first shot and built in flash on the second shot. Still difficult to get a good shot as lighting is still a challenge since I am not using an off body flash. So, I can't capture any fish as they are always moving, and I can't speed up the shutter speed as the pic will under expose.

The diopter I got is a B+W 77mm +5.

BTW, these are Nick's famous shrimps.