Anyone using a telephoto?

Im currently using the stock 18-55 non VR with a set of Polaroid extension tubes and the Polaroid set of four diopters x1,2,4,10 basically I'm curious to know if anyone is using Telephoto lenses what is it and to what effect it's having?

I know I have another thread going in the General Photography Section but this is just aimed at the Macro side of things.

I am currently using the 70-300mm VR combined with a B+W diopter and the results are reasonable ok for this sort of improvised macro. It shortens my minimal focus distance dramatically and provides plenty magnification.

A tele can certainly be used, especially if it can focus close enough. Using diopter lenses and ext. tubes with it can allow for closer focus. However, the downside is a narrow DOF.

Some of my first macro work was with a 70-300 and extension tubes.

DOF is indeed a problem and the diopter not only magnifies the subject but also every weakness of the lens. A +4 diopter in the 300mm range makes sharpness balance at the edge of tolerable. With some effort, luck and good conditions you can still get not too shabby pictures. When handheld and without flash you do need to push the camera into the reds.

Well I'm certainly looking forwards to playing around with one on wednesday UPS allowing having a Telephoto at the beach would have been a lot more rewarding I will be investing in an dedicated Macro when the pig has enough in it

Chatterstatic said:

Im currently using the stock 18-55 non VR with a set of Polaroid extension tubes and the Polaroid set of four diopters x1,2,4,10 basically I'm curious to know if anyone is using Telephoto lenses what is it and to what effect it's having?

I know I have another thread going in the General Photography Section but this is just aimed at the Macro side of things.

Click to expand...

How good are the Polaroid extension tubes? Here they are much cheaper compared to Kenko. If they are sturdy and can AF with AF lenses then I am thinking of getting them instead of the Kenko set.

aroy said:

How good are the Polaroid extension tubes? Here they are much cheaper compared to Kenko. If they are sturdy and can AF with AF lenses then I am thinking of getting them instead of the Kenko set.

Click to expand...

They are fine sturdy electrics all ok, I initially had an issue where the 12 and 20 mm wouldn't lock into position as they would catch on that depressible thingy that is on the outside of the lens near the aperture control doofer. depressing it solved the issue and they lock into place. There are quite a few of these tubes that look identical although the Polaroid ones have metal mounts top and bottom which make them feel quite sturdy.

Chatterstatic said:

They are fine sturdy electrics all ok, I initially had an issue where the 12 and 20 mm wouldn't lock into position as they would catch on that depressible thingy that is on the outside of the lens near the aperture control doofer. depressing it solved the issue and they lock into place. There are quite a few of these tubes that look identical although the Polaroid ones have metal mounts top and bottom which make them feel quite sturdy.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I will get the Polaroid tubes then. That will save me quite some money.

Imho it's a good starting point pick up some of the diopters as well

I did some quick testing to see the true effects of the +4 diopter on the quality and magnification of the 70-300mm.

I didn't use a tripod or flash even when it wasn't the best of light since I wanted to create about the same conditions I experience when shooting handheld. I had to rotate some images which implies a part might be cut but I measured the originals.

These are the results (D3300 sensor is 23.5mm):

@70mm

66mm = 1:2.8

@100mm

46mm = 1:2

@135mm

35mm = 1:1.49

@210mm

22mm = 1.07:1

@300mm

16mm = 1.46:1

It's quite obvious how quality and sharpness quickly degrades the more you go to the 300mm.

PS: I got no idea why the attachments show instead of the images. Ah well...

Cant get the images only invalid attachment

I think I fixed it. At least I see them now.

See them now

The main problem, I noticed, is light. The moment even the least bit of light hits the diopter directly, at higher magnification, it creates a blur or fog.

Since anything worth doing is worth overdoing, I tried what a diopter would do on a dedicated micro.

The first image is to give you an idea of the size.
The second is the Micro at max.
The third is with the B+W +4 diopter, handheld in front of the lens. Evidently I have to go crazy with the f/.

An aperture of eight is rather wide for using a four diopter lens addition at 300 mm.
I suggest trying to stop down the aperture as you increase focal length to reduce that light haze.

Stoshowicz said:

An aperture of eight is rather wide for using a four diopter lens addition at 300 mm.
I suggest trying to stop down the aperture as you increase focal length to reduce that light haze.

Click to expand...

It indeed is. It took me a while to realize that to get better results when using a diopter, you have to stop the aperture down severely. +4 is a bit extreme at 300 if you don't use flash.

J-see said:

It indeed is. It took me a while to realize that to get better results when using a diopter, you have to stop the aperture down severely. +4 is a bit extreme at 300 if you don't use flash.

Click to expand...

Yep , I saw in your quick test that you held aperture constant , which in real life one would want to compensate for.
When I first got the things I hadnt seen that mentioned and so I almost threw them out the window
but I do see in the other pic you got down to f45. ( which I dont think my 70-300mm can do -and would be excessive because of the diffusion issue through the now too tiny aperture , on my lens.)

I can go down to f45 when at 300mm but it's very rare there's enough light to do it. I think I give the diopter another try when my leds arrive.

Since I have the dedicated micro, no other lens has been on the cam.

J-see said:

I can go down to f45 when at 300mm but it's very rare there's enough light to do it. I think I give the diopter another try when my leds arrive.

Since I have the dedicated micro, no other lens has been on the cam.

Click to expand...

I find it handy out in the woods ,to use the diopter, but if I had the dedicated macro ,, thats what I think I'd use.,, is there much difference?