Macro lens attachments Answered
I recently got a set of marco lenses for my DSLR, an old E300.
They are the simple kind, basically a magnifying lens that screws onto the the existing lens system like a filter.
My first impressions of this simple and relatively cheap alternative to a dedicated macro lens in the 400$ range were quite good.
But I also found some downsides and would like to know if they are a general thing to accept or a result of poor quality standards.
1. Although about 20% of the lens are unused (nothing at all visible when covering the outsides of the lens) there is some nocticable distortion happening.
Especially the corner areas of the image when the object fills the entire picture appear to be slightly bend.
Is that due to the marcro lens being a single and cheap system or a general thing with these marcro filter lenses?
2. It is quite hard to to get a clear focus even with F22 settings and good light.
With the X4 lens it is not too bad and leaves about 8mm of totally sharp image before it gets blurry.
But when using the X10 lens I often have troubles getting a sharp image of an object that goes less than 5mm into the background.
Using a smaller setting, like f11 and only 1-2mm of the image is clear and sharp while everything in front or in the back of this area gets more and more blurry.
Is this due to the marco lens affecting the focus?
For example taking a full size shot of a rose flower is next to impossible if the entire flower should be be sharp - I would like to be able to get at least 10mm of totally sharp image when using f22 settings :(
If this is a downside of cheap filter lenses then I already learned my lesson, but would like to know a bit more before saving money on a dedicated macro lens that I will rarly use...