Is the Raynox easier than a dedicated macro?

evereti · May 2013

Hi @Moose,
We have Canon 550D cameras and wanted to get into some macro work. We have the kit lenses and find the 55-250mm pretty good at the close up photography.
I'm wanting to go a bit better so we bought an EF-S 60mm USM macro. Excellent lens, but working at that level of macro is really painfull with the tiny depth of field. It's easy to get a blurred shot. Tripod, big f number, and remote shutter helps of course, but you can't cart a tripod everywhere.
Does the Raynox approach have the same problem or should I just stick to a zoom macro where there is a bigger depth of field? We also have a 28-135mm USM which has a reasonable macro but it's a bit old now and not so sharp.
Cheers

PBked · May 2013

Hi there,
Depth of field will always be a problem with macro work whatever piece of equipment you use. Your new macro lens is more than capable, but here are a few tips.
First, get used to using a tripod; it's the only way to go with macro work.
Second, use the centre AF point only for focussing and then switch your lens to manual and tweak the focus until sharp. Also set your AE to spot metering.
Third, set your lens to manual and do it by eye if you don't trust the camera's focus system.
Fourth, if you are shooting non-moving subjects, switch to live view and use manual focusing. There is a facility in live view where you can zoom in to check focus (see the camera manual section 5, page 120).

If you try some of my tips you should be able to capture well focussed pictures. You could spend a fortune on equipment but you would still have problems with very narrow depth of field.
Best regards, PBked

evereti · May 2013

Thanks guys.
I have tried most of that and we get pretty excellent focus in bits, but it's a real performance. I have not tried the zoom in on live view. I will give it a shot.
Cheers

Is the Raynox easier than a dedicated macro?

Comments