Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 19, 2003, 11:03 PM   #1
Senior Member
Deiota's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 105
Default Raynox VS Olympus

I have a Olympus C-750 Uz and I'm considering of buying some lenses for m digicam.
I've just bought a new adapter ring 52mm for my digicam and I'm thinking of buying a macro addon to my camera.
I'm considering of buying CDR-250 from Raynox instead of MCON-4 from Olympus.
Is it a good choice? Is it good enough, comparing the price (50 VS 150 )?
Does anyone knows where I can find a review of both or a comparation of both?
Does anyone owns both and can clarify my thoughts?

Andrea Oliveira
Deiota is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 20, 2003, 3:20 AM   #2
Senior Member
richardh's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 156

I have could not find info on the two lenses that you specified. Perhaps I can help a little though. Based on your other posts I assume that you do not know the diffrence between macro lenses and macro filters or whatever there proper names are. There are macro lenses/filters that are a single element lens. That is, they only have one piece of glass. They pretty much look just like a filter except the glass is curved, not flat. The other type is a multi element macro lens like the olympus mcon35, mcon40, and the raynox dcr 150, dcr 250.
The left one is of the single lens type, the right is of the multi lens type.
The filter type are often sold individually or in kits with a couple of lenses. They are rated with a diopter rating like +1, +4, +7, +10 etc. Here is one of that type and there is a litle info here.
They have the same thread size on the front and back just like a filter and can be stacked to increase magnification just like a filter. They are also cheaper that the multi element type. The single element type do not corect for chromatic aberation though (this is where the lens splits diffrent colors of light so you get colored fringing). Optically there are some very good lenses of the single element type. Many people seem to think that the level of chromatic aberation that they produce is acceptable. Stacking them does increase aberation though.
While in some cases you can stack the multi-element type, they are really not designed for it. The rear threads are often smaler than the front threads if it even has front threads so you run into some of the same issues that you get stacking teleconverters etc. They are normally use alone. The multi-element type corect for cromatic aberation. They are usally more expensive and if you want a top quality lens this is the type I think you would want to look at. Sometimes they are rated with a diopter value but they are often not. More often they give information on how they relate to the specific camera they were designed for or how they relate to several cameras. You can often search forums and the web and find an equivalent diopter value for comparison though. For instance the lens pictured in the pbase link above. It is an olympus is/l life size macro lens. All it claims is that it produces 1:1 life size images with the is-1 and is-2 cameras. A little searching on the web and I found out that it is equivalent to a +7.7 diopter lens. The mcon35 is equivalent to a +3 diopter and the mcon40 is 2.5. Here is a good source of a little info on the olympus lenses.
Here is some info on the raynox dcr-250 for reference (you will notice that they relate it to diffrent cameras rather than giving a diopter value)
I am not farmiliar with the raynox lenses but the olympus ones are top quality mulit element lenses. There are good lenses of the single element filter type too and they are cheaper but there is the chromatic abertion issue.
There is a third inexpensive option if you like powerfull macro. You can reverse certain slr lenses on some cameras to get a cheap and decent macro lens. I have heard that this is comparible to a +20 or +28 lens (I have heard both but cannot rember which was right). Try doing a search here for "reversed slr" or something like that and you should find some info.
The magnification you get may be much diffrent than in these shots (I'm not really farmiliar with the olympus camera) but these were taken with my canon a70. The diffrence you would see between a +3 lens and a + 7.7 lens would be the same I think. The first is the camera alone, the second is three +1 filters (+3), the third is my olympus lens (+7.7) and the fourth is a reversed slr lens. Please ignore poor lighting/focus as I just shot these quick to show magnification diffrence.
I'm no expert so anyone feel free to corect any errors or add info. Hope that helps a little.
richardh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2004, 8:34 AM   #3
Junior Member
DriniS's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 29

I don't know if you have now purchased any of them, but I can tell that I'm pretty happy with my Raynox Macro Lens 250 D as I use C740. It's so powerful I didn't expect it. You will have to practise it to find the best distance for shooting, and also it is not suggested that you use SuperMacro mode when having this macro lens.

DriniS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2004, 12:55 PM   #4
Senior Member
Pooperdog's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 170

I have done a little experimenting with a 2.9 diopter lens and am curious about how much magnification a higher diopter lens would produce. I've accumulated my results here;

Pooperdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 14, 2004, 6:24 AM   #5
Junior Member
MartinCZ's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 28

Originally Posted by Pooperdog
I have done a little experimenting with a 2.9 diopter lens and am curious about how much magnification a higher diopter lens would produce. I've accumulated my results here;

I've also done some experimenting recently. I have +5 Hoya double element macro lens, +4 Rowi normal lens and a 55mm lens reverse mount setup. I'm using Olympus 2100UZ.
1. Rowi lens is completely useless because of CA and softness. CA could have been corrected by adding an extra element, softness is probably caused by using a terrible quality glass.
2. Hoya lens is very good. I find its +5 diopter just enough additional magnification. Captured area is about 2cm wide and working distance about 20cm (normal UZI macro mode captures 5cm and 10cm working distance). Optical quality is perfect. DOF is obviously quite shallow, getting better when zoomed out a bit. This lens gives absolutely no vignetting through the whole zoom range. Hoya is simply a perfect piece of glass and works very fine with UZI.
3. Reverse mounted 55mm Russian SLR lens with 49mm front thread (the same as UZI) gives about 0.5cm wide capture area and working distance not more than 5cm. Extremely shallow DOF and some vignetting even in full 10x zoom. When lighted and focused good, it produces very good picture quality. It's quite difficult to achieve such conditions however.
4. Stacking Hoya lens and 55mm SLR lens eliminates vignetting completely without significant quality loss and additional magnification. I recommend you trying this setup (if your macro lens has a front thread).
MartinCZ is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17 AM.