With my DSLR and macro lens I get about 1:1 ratio.  Looking at extremely close macros in the galleries, I believe some photogaphers use add-on lens or devices to provide magnification beyond the 1:1 ratio.

If you have experience with add-on devices for magnified macro shots please let us know how well these devices work.   Do you know of some which are quiet effective and others which are basically junk? 

I am certain a similar thread has been here before but still would like to know what you think on the subject.       thanks.          TomDart.

Well yes we have covered the topic before if you want to go beyond 1/1 life size there are specialist Macro lens like the Canon MP-E 65mm that can go to 5 times life size but is tricky to handle without a tripod at the max range.. I am unsure if any other makers produce a lens like the Canon,  I have use a sigma acromatic add on filter that is quite good but my own experience with the x2 filters or higher  you screw on the front apart from the sigma are not very good and worked much better on non SLR digitals I have owned and in any case will not add very much further magnification perhaps 1.3  as they are not designed to work on an SLR they tend to do odd things to the DOF and introduce noise in my humble opinion..

Attached Link: Raynox

Some people attach microscopes to their camera's. what I would like to get is the raynox CM-3500 Micro Explorer Lens Set which is a add-on accessory. http://www.digitaladvisor.com/lenses/raynox-cm-3500_reviews.html http://raynox.co.jp/english/35mmacc/egcm2000.htm http://www.bugeyedigital.com/product_main/ray-msn500.html

tx for the links guys, coz I'm seriously interested in getting magnifiers or a macro lens too, but the lens would have to wait until I'm overseas, just not affordable here...

I personally feel Macro should be as good as as a close up and not beyond that but yes..... it doesn have its curiosity and gives a new look as it can go beyond what a naked eye can see.  Like there are many pics posted at RR which show Super macro x 2 giving details of the eyes of bugs and bees......... as close as showing the tiny turf of hair on their body.  They do add a surprise element to the image  but I personally like the Macros......... like danobs buttys........ they were an inspiration for me and they still are.  It is close but not too close. 

 

:O))

 

SNAKEY 

the Canon MP-E 65mm is surely a beautiful toy :)

i use a canon 100mm macro and the kenko extension tube... works fine

HI All

I use Sigma 28-200 macro and a Sigma 70-300mm with extension tubes, but I do warn you that they become very long and increasing unweidly to use, so I am currently looking into a set of bellows and a M42 adaptor ring to Canon 305D.

I would love the 65mm, but find the cost to much, but hey thats life, once I have done my research I will get back to you on this.

The thing about DOF, is critical and keeping an eye on it, is an absolute must, but mainly is not a problem if you focus correctly and compose with care.

Tom

 

I use a set of extension tubes as there are no optics in them there is no loss of image quality.

 

The three tubes add up to 67mm so very close focusing is possible, beware the DOF is tiny. I can’t quite figure it out but I think that this gives you approx 2x life size with a 100mm macro

 

This was shot @f11 and is full frame no crop, not a great example, it might of made a good wordplay entry, but unfortunately is was done in April.

 

Somthing like this

http://stores.tomshardware.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=743793//

Ok one point here to remember a Macro facility on a lens is not the same as a Macro lens

Very true Simon also bear in mind that these work better on leses above 35mm..  This fact is why the 25mm extension tube won't work with anything shorter than a 35mm lens because the focus zone is moved in so close the front glass element on the lens prevents you from getting that close.

a very cheap solution is to mount your lens with an inversion ring...

i've obtained surprising result with a 18mm inverted! ...

the bad thing is the darkness of the lens and the loss of automatism of the camera...

a ring may cost 5-10 dollars...

 

(and sorry for my poor english)

Quote - Very true Simon also bear in mind that these work better on leses above 35mm..  This fact is why the 25mm extension tube won't work with anything shorter than a 35mm lens because the focus zone is moved in so close the front glass element on the lens prevents you from getting that close.

Good point I had forgotten about that, I have onlt ever used then on the 100mm macro, I could use them on the 50mm to get 1:1 but that would be pretty pointless as I have a dedicated lens that can do that.

 

I have not used a reversing ring for many moons lol, they are a good and cheap option.

 

Now if you are willing to play a little (just for the sake of it) you could try this:

 

I have a length of drain pipe about the same diameter as the lens mount; attached to this at either end is a Canon AF T2 mount one attaches to the camera and one to a lens. As long as the mounts are light fast, this gives you a very long extension tube. Focusing is not easy there is no TTL metering and no aperture control, the result is super macro when you get it all right! Focusing must be done by moving the subject.

 

These post are invaluable  to me, meaning of great value.  Thanks so very much.  I will likely have to be better at 1:1 before moving on to higher magnification.  Snakey, yes, I do see the point you make.   Macros do leave more room for detail in many cases than "composition" though the last is not impossible when done correctly as seen from a few on this web site.

Thanks again.         Tom.