Personal View site logo
Macro Converter Test Shot(s)
  • karlkarl

    The choice of macro converters available recently increased when Panasonic started to ship its 37mm filter thread macro converter, which can be mounted on a Panasonic 14-42mm Vario X pancake lens.

    I had bought a macro converter from Siocore for the 37mm filter thread, earlier, and I would like to know how it compares to the one Panasonic is now selling (for more than twice the price).

    To allow a comparison, I shot an object with many small details that many people should have access to - a 50 Euro bank note.

    The focal length has been set to 42mm (the longest possible with this lens), and I tried to adjust the camera to object distance as narrow as posible, such that the autofocus was displaying a happy green frame. (I guess this distance adjustment method is not much more precise than +- 3mm, but that should be enough.

    The center of the shot is aimed at the "roof top" inside the "5" of the "50", I think that is easy to replicate if you want to take another sample shot.

    Light source was thermonuclear (the Sun :-), the aperture 10.

    The attached image is the full frame as extracted from the raw .RW2 file (the only postprocessing applied while converting the RAW to JPEG was white balancing - no sharpening, no noise reduction or such).

    I would be very interested to see results from other macro converters, especially regarding minimal focus distance / minimal object size.

  • 7 Replies sorted by
  • tonalttonalt

    @karl that's insanely sharp. Here's one with Minolta 50mm 1.4 + macro tube ring (in not so good light).

    Challenge: Can anyone get any closer of that star? ;)

    P1030778.jpg
    4608 x 3456 - 4M
  • KihlianKihlian

    Canon FD 50mm +31mm macro tube ring:

    _1000615.JPG
    4752 x 3168 - 7M
  • KihlianKihlian

    Canon FD 50mm + 31mm + 21mm + 13mm macro extension tube ring!

    _1000616.JPG
    4752 x 3168 - 7M
  • 5thwall5thwall

    Here are some sets on flicker I recently shot with my Nikon 50mm f1.8 and a macro tube. Some at full extension, some not. Not sure which were which. I also recently did a bunch of closeups of pancakes, which I'll be posting sometime soon.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/61324763@N00/sets/72157629871686919/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/61324763@N00/sets/72157629890674981/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/61324763@N00/sets/72157629503538000/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/61324763@N00/sets/72157629868545665/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/61324763@N00/sets/72157629507251102/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/61324763@N00/sets/72157629895400857/

  • karlkarl

    @5thwall: Thanks for the links, really nice pictures, but I'm afraid that the very different objects shown there would not allow for a comparison with shots taken by others who do not have them at hand... :-)

    @Kihlian: Very interesting to also see a sample where macro tubes (instead of a converter lens) were used - thank you! (Personally, I like about the converter solution that it does not require to remove the lens for mounting. I wonder whether there are other pros and cons regarding converter lens vs. macro tubes.)

    @tonalt: I did not do anything special regarding sharpness, in fact the only postprocessing I did when converting the .RW2 into a .JPG (using RawTherapee) was to white balance the picture - no sharpening, no noise reduction, no other fancy stuff. (The demosaicing algorithm used by RawTherapee was "Amaze".)

  • TakumarTakumar

    One of the best, old school. :)

    Tokina 90 2.5 (same optik as Series 1). 2:1

    p1010112.jpg
    4000 x 2672 - 6M
  • karlkarl

    @Takumar: But you didn't use any macro converter or tube, but a full-blown macro lens, right?

    I bet that lots of dedicated macro lenses can achieve better results than macro converters on a conventional lens, but their price range is somewhat different... ;-)

Add a Comment