www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - RAYNOX DCR 250 and 150
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
RAYNOX DCR 250 and 150

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pedroalves



Joined: 27 Oct 2015
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:15 pm    Post subject: RAYNOX DCR 250 and 150 Reply with quote

Hello all,

as many of you (i guess) i'm using the Raynox DCR 250 as a tube lens.
For the 250, i'm working with a distance of 125 mm between the camera sensor and the raynox.
A friend of mine is using a different distance, achieved moving the raynox naked (without the microscope objective) from the camera until 'he can focus on the building across the street'. Thus focused on infinity.

My question
- is that a good practice or do we must use the standard distance for the raynox, i.e. 125 mm ?

Many thanks in advance.

Pedro
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18496
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your friend's approach is more correct.

If you measure 125 mm, that should be with reference to a special point inside the lens, called the "image principal plane" or "rear principal plane". Unfortunately that special point is not marked on the lens or specified in any of the literature. The simplest way to find it is to focus at infinity, then measure from the sensor!

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
pedroalves



Joined: 27 Oct 2015
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Rik,

that's what i thought, reason why i post the question here.
I don't know how much 10 mm (more or less) can affect the image quality.
Right now i'm using a Sony A7rII, with the DCR 250 (maybe the 150 is more suitable for FF camera??) and i'm not happy with the image quality (astigmatism it seems).



P.S. i forgot to mention that i'm using the raynox reversed, dunno if this changes anything.


Cheers,
Pedro
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jojm



Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 47
Location: France

PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Salut Pedro, content de te voir ici.

Please could you tell us what did decide you to change your camera to Sony A7RII from yours OM-D EM5 Mk II.
Your results seem very good to my eyes and I'm curious to understand what pushed you to move.
_________________
My mineral photos gallery on mindat.org
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pedroalves



Joined: 27 Oct 2015
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bonsoir Jean-Marc,

thank you very much for the compliment, coming from someone like you, it's something very special.
However, i must admit that i'm not happy with my results. I started micro photography about 2 years ago, so i have a world ahead of me to discover.
I cannot compare my photos with those od people who have been engaged in photography for years, decades.

I still keep my Olympus (a good camera, underappreciated in my hands), the Sony experience appears in an attempt to improve the definition and resolution of images. A better look overall.
For now i'm disappointed, the differences are not evident.

In my humble opinion, my problem (i mean, what I really have to improve) it is the field of lighting. Also the post processing.

I'm just trying to understand if/what i'm doing wrong.


If someone is curious about my pictures, take a look here:

https://www.mindat.org/user-13063.html


Thanks again both.

Pedro
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChrisR
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 7494
Location: Near London, UK

PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Olá Pedro
Yes, you would expect to have problems of coverage, with a full frame camera with a "tube" lens that short. I can't find what objective you're using, but bear in mind that many struggle to cover APS, at rated magnification. They cover less with reduced magnification.
I expect the biggest benefit you'd see from the Sony sensor would be a wider dynamic range. Maybe be a lower noise floor at base iso.
I also can't see anything wrong with your images! I wish we had minerals like those in the UK Sad
_________________
Chris R


Last edited by ChrisR on Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:09 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18496
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 23, 2018 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pedroalves wrote:
i forgot to mention that i'm using the raynox reversed, dunno if this changes anything.

Not really. Reversed, the reference is to the lens's other principal plane. (It has two.) Other than that, all the same.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
pedroalves



Joined: 27 Oct 2015
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Wed Jan 24, 2018 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Rik, Chris,

thank you both for the clarifications.

Chris, UK is full of pretty minerals, much more than Portugal Wink

Cheers,
P.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group