Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Canon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 30, 2007, 10:08 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5
Default

:?I received the Canon S5 IS for my birthday and for Christmas my husband offered to purchase me extra lenses....I always like to research first, so here I am! I would like to be able to get a macro lens ($130 on Canon's website), a wide angle lens ($199 on Canon's website), maybe a teleconverter lens ($149 on Canon's website)and of course the adapter ($39 on Canon's website)! (Maybe even throw in some filters!)

Looking on eBAY, I see alot of Digital Optics lenses...are they any good?I also see some lenses by Opteka , but can't really find any reviews on them. Does anyone have any experience with them?

Of course, I would like to stay in a reasonable price range...I would go the max with the Canon lenses, but would prefer to go lower if the lenses are as good!

THANKS!

Sarah


sarahwms is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 30, 2007, 5:45 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Michi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 176
Default

I have bought two wide angle lenses for point and shoots in my life. One was an Opteka, can't remember what the other one was. I had a lot of fun with them, but I have to say the quality was not outstanding. Unfortunately I never bought a Canon lens (because they were too expensive to justify the purchase), so I can't tell you if the extra money will gain you extra image quality. I would guess that they are better, but I cannot say that from experience.
Michi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2008, 7:23 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 38
Default

I would go with a Raynox for the closeup. Much cheaper than Canons original, but I hardly think they are of lower quality. Excellent stuff to say the least, dont think anyones been dissapointed in a Raynox closeup.

http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/dcr/...exdcr150eg.htm

Here are a few, very little postprocessed and hardly even cropped, shots from my site, taken with the very strong (a bit too strong actually) DCR-250. I though recommend the DCR-150 with strength +4 for macro, so you can capture larger things too and not be limited to 4cm across subjects...






sebastianr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 11:18 AM   #4
Member
 
mInDtrIP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 71
Default

Sebastianr - You have taken some great macros with that Raynox and I think I will soon order the DCR-150, its only like $38 on ebay, cant see how I'd go wrong. I'm looking for a macro lense for aquatic photagraphy (I have several fish tanks). As many things I want to picture are still several inches big I figure I definately dont need the 250. Sound reasonable? (I've never used an actual macro lense before). Do you have any experience with any other Raynox lenses? I was thinking about a wide angle multiplyer to, like .7 or maybe a fisheye. BTW I got an S5 for christmas too! My S1 served me well...

Thanks for any advice.

mInDtrIP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 12:40 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 38
Default

mInDtrIP wrote:
Quote:
Sebastianr - You have taken some great macros with that Raynox and I think I will soon order the DCR-150, its only like $38 on ebay, cant see how I'd go wrong. I'm looking for a macro lense for aquatic photagraphy (I have several fish tanks). As many things I want to picture are still several inches big I figure I definately dont need the 250. Sound reasonable? (I've never used an actual macro lense before). Do you have any experience with any other Raynox lenses? I was thinking about a wide angle multiplyer to, like .7 or maybe a fisheye. BTW I got an S5 for christmas too! My S1 served me well...

Thanks for any advice.
Sorry, dont have any clue about their wide or tele lenses, I just know that about everyone loves their closeup lenses.

I guess you should be fine with the DCR-150 for shooting aquatic, just remember that the largets object you'll fit horizontally will be around 8 cm (3 inches or so)....for larger objects you'll need a less powerful lens like strenght 2, but I dont think Raynox has any of those to offer.
sebastianr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 12:48 PM   #6
Member
 
mInDtrIP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 71
Default

sebastianr wrote:
Quote:
Sorry, dont have any clue about their wide or tele lenses, I just know that about everyone loves their closeup lenses.

I guess you should be fine with the DCR-150 for shooting aquatic, just remember that the largets object you'll fit horizontally will be around 8 cm (3 inches or so)....for larger objects you'll need a less powerful lens like strenght 2, but I dont think Raynox has any of those to offer.
Thats sounds ok, 3" covers any true 'macro' I'd want to do, otherwise the camera itself will work fine for 3"+ I think.

I am still new to macro lenses though - I assume the 3" size is based on the zoom lense being fully at tele at 12X? Can it be ran at slightly less magnification to get a larger object to fit in the pic?

And for the 150 what is the appropriate distance away the object needs to be, is that were the 150 comes from (150mm)???

I was previously considering getting the canon 500D but with the seemingly good quality and cheap pricing of the raynox I might as well at least try em first.
mInDtrIP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 4:20 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5
Default

sebastionr...THANKS for the recommendation! I think that I too will go with the 150...I played around with the Super Macro on the camera and got some awesome pics! So, with the extra lens it's going to be cool! I'm also looking for a wide angle (some have macro with that lens) and a tele lens! DECISIONS! DECISIONS! But THANKS ALOT for your input and AWESOME photos!

Sarah
sarahwms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 6:02 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

Unfortunately, other than the wide angle lens, there isn't really that much you should have to do as far as getting additional lenses for the S5. You already have a coverage of 38 - 400 mm with the standard lens. The super macro function allows you to focus as close as 0 inches! I'd get the best wide angle I could affordand agood flash. The Canon 430EX would be an excellent choice.
wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 8:37 AM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 38
Default

mInDtrIP wrote:
Quote:
sebastianr wrote:
Quote:
Sorry, dont have any clue about their wide or tele lenses, I just know that about everyone loves their closeup lenses.

I guess you should be fine with the DCR-150 for shooting aquatic, just remember that the largets object you'll fit horizontally will be around 8 cm (3 inches or so)....for larger objects you'll need a less powerful lens like strenght 2, but I dont think Raynox has any of those to offer.
Thats sounds ok, 3" covers any true 'macro' I'd want to do, otherwise the camera itself will work fine for 3"+ I think.

I am still new to macro lenses though - I assume the 3" size is based on the zoom lense being fully at tele at 12X? Can it be ran at slightly less magnification to get a larger object to fit in the pic?

And for the 150 what is the appropriate distance away the object needs to be, is that were the 150 comes from (150mm)???

I was previously considering getting the canon 500D but with the seemingly good quality and cheap pricing of the raynox I might as well at least try em first.
I dont think Canons lenses can be so much better as to justify their pricings.
I dont know what 150 comes from, but its strenght +4 so you can use if from 1/4=25 centimeters, and focusing closer you can maybe use it down to 20 centimeters or so, but thats a guess.
If you use it with full zoom you ought to capture slightly less than 1" wide, that is, really really high magnification. If it works like the 250 does you ought to be able to zoom out to around 3x zoom, and then fit about 3" wide.
Not sure how it behaves though and when it starts to vignett, but its probably quite like the stronger 250 one that I have so I base my assumptions on that.
You could always try it if you buy it, on a ruler, and measure how "far away" you can get without vignetting....would be nice to know. Thinking of maybe buying one as a complement to my DCR-250. Would be real nice for butterflies and flowers and other not extremely small objects
sebastianr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 8:39 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 38
Default

sarahwms wrote:
Quote:
sebastionr...THANKS for the recommendation! I think that I too will go with the 150...I played around with the Super Macro on the camera and got some awesome pics! So, with the extra lens it's going to be cool! I'm also looking for a wide angle (some have macro with that lens) and a tele lens! DECISIONS! DECISIONS! But THANKS ALOT for your input and AWESOME photos!

Sarah
Sure, buy one as fast as you can
A closeup lens is the first thing anyone with some tiny bit of macro interrest should buy for their ultrazoom camera....it gives the potential for soooo much better pictures its almost unbelievable they are so cheap.

Thanks for the compliment
sebastianr is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:49 PM.