Advice on lensmate purchases-filter, adapter tube, macro lenses. Help me spend money!

[chaozie]

Ok, first question, adapter tube 52mm or 58mm, which is more versatile? I'm leaning towards the 52 because it's cheaper and the things that fit on it are cheaper and I can always add step up rings...right?

Second question, I would also like a polarizing filter but just want to make sure that it delivers on its promise. Do these things make a nice noticeable difference in your pictures?

Last question, I would also like some simple macro lenses, I'm thinking about the
Hoya Close-Up Macro set (double coated)
52mm & 58mm
Includes +1,+2 and +4 filters. Use individually or in any combination. All you need to take great macro shots. Available 52mm and 58mm



From lensmateonline.com. It said it can halve your working distance when taking pictures of flowers and bugs which would be great! These are some of what my pictures look like now, http://chaozie.googlepages.com/. So will these lenses allow me to a. magnify my subjects even more? and b. Can I get the same result with the lenses from twice as far as compared to the supermacro mode on the S2 (but I have to be right up to the subject which is fairly frightning as I don't like being close to bugs)? Thanks in advance!

[brantfordbandit]

i got the 52 for the same reason, hoya circ polorizer will deliver, as for the macro? s2 and s3 have super macro i don't know how much closer you'll get

[eccles]

As you've already discovered, you have to get seriously close to the subject for decent macro shots in super macro mode, and an addon lens plus adaptor is a good route to get higher magnification from further away.
You will most likely be disappointed with the Hoyas, however, especially if you try to stack them together. They are single element and uncorrected for chromatic abberation, which is why they are cheap. Check out the Lensmateonline website for photographic examples.

To snap medium and large sized bugs and butterflies the Canon 500D is very good, shooting from 12-20" away. It's more expensive than the Hoyas but you really do get what you pay for as it's well corrected for chromatic abberation and capable of well detailed high quality photos. I use the 58mm adaptor and get no vignetting at all with the 58mm 500D throughout the zoom range of the camera, and this is Canon's recommended close-up setup for the S2/S3.

If you want get a LOT closer, 4-5" away, the Raynox DCR-250 is good but this is a difficult lens to master as it's very high powered. You'll still probably be further away than with the camera's super macro.The Raynox vignettes at the wide angle end of the zoom range because it is only a 43mm lens but zooming forward to about halfway gives you the full frame, and the more useful macro levels are at the long end of the zoom range anyway. This lens has a universal mount and will fit the 52mm or 58mm adaptor.

[2Shiny]

Super Macro mode isn't terribly useful because the working distance is so short. The available light on your subject is decreased as you get closer to the subject. The macro filters will magnify the subject, allowing you to stay farther away, and thus allowing more light to reach the subject. I use my macro filters all the time.

The polarizing filter can make a substantial difference in pictures. It is a very important filter to have, as is a UV filter.

I have everything in the 52mm size and have no reason to regret it.

[2Shiny]

You will most likely be disappointed with the Hoyas, however, especially if you try to stack them together. They are single element and uncorrected for chromatic abberation, which is why they are cheap.

They may be cheap, but I have been quite happy with them. Here are a few examples:

+4 filter:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v627/White95Max/Flower-R.jpg

+4:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v627/White95Max/Snake5-EC2.jpg

+10:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v627/White95Max/Dragon3-CR.jpg

Considering that I got all 4 macro filter for just over $100, I can't complain.

[chaozie]

Thanks for all the advice!
Ok, so I'm going to get a polarizing filter (circular or linear though...)
And about the Hoyas, are they really that bad? lensmate had good things to say about them and their sample pictures didn't look too bad,but maybe it's just my astigmatism messing with me :)

2Shiny, did you take those pictures with the Hoyas, because they are very nice! and that's exactly the type of lens I'm looking for.

[2Shiny]

Yes, those were with the Hoya filters. Each picture is labeled with the filter I used.

I think I have the linear polarizer, but if I could do it over, I'd probably buy a multi-coated circular polarizer.

[chaozie]

One last thing, My boyfriend and I are having a minor argument about which is better, 52mm or 58mm. I say 52 because of the price of the adapter and attachments and it's shorter. He says 58 because it's longer and will reduce vignetting? And the main reason is he has a giftcard to bestbuy and wants to get this polarizing lens http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7668561&st=sunpak&lp=12&type=product&cp=1&id=1134701342753
I think the hoya brand is better, does it make a difference?

[Jon]

Yes, filter brand makes a difference, but so does product line within the brand. Sunpak's not one of the best filter brands. However, your Hoya, if it's not at least a SHMC, may be equally prone to glare, flare and reflection.

[eccles]

Those Hoya c/u shot are ok, but I wouldn't say they are competition standard. It all depends on what you find acceptable.
Look at this example, taken with the 500D. You'll notice that the butterfly's antenna to the left, the wingtip to the right and the leaf all the way along the bottom are all sharp with none of the chromatic aberration in the above shots.
As for a polarising filter, why on earth is this being considered for close up use? The main purpose of such a filter is to cut down glare from reflections such as water, reduce scattered light on distance shots such as landscapes thereby increasing contrast, and to deepen sky effects. I used to have one when I had a film SLR and hardly used it. It's not necessary for close up.
As for 52mm vs 58mm adapters, you may get away with the 52mm but vignetting may be a problem depending on what you put on the end of it. 52mm close up lenses should be ok as you'll use them at the telephoto end anyway, but a teleconverter may not be useable over the whole zoom range for instance. I've gone for the 58mm myself and have had no cause to regret it, although the Canon product that I got is plastic compared to the aluminium Lensmate which looks a better buy.

[chaozie]

Can you specify and point out exactly what are the chromatic aberrations in the photos? I guess I have a bad eye. And I wasn't planning on using the polarizing filter with the macros. I was planning on using them for beach shots or landscape shots with forests. I would then take it off and screw on the macro lenses for macro shots. As to the 52 vs. 58 mm being more likely to cause vignetting, I have read posts saying 52 is more likely or 58 so which one is it and why? Oy vey, such a newb I am.

[chicagoastronomer]

I just got my adapters and accessories and perhaps it could lend some insight in your decision quandry:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=269947

[2Shiny]

The 52mm would be more likely, but neither adapter from Lensmate will cause vignetting. I have the 52mm and have never experienced any vignetting at full wide-angle setting.

[eccles]

Can you specify and point out exactly what are the chromatic aberrations in the photos?
The flower shot has blue fringes around the petals and it's generally soft. The snake shot is pretty good, probably because there's no sharp definition away from the centre where any lens should do ok, although there's a tiny bit of blue fringing around its nose. The left eye on the dragonfly has quite bad red fringing and there's distortion everywhere away from the centre. This is such a shame as it's obvious a fair amount of talent and effort has gone into taking the shot. In my opinion this lens in particular wastes the quality of the S3 optics, and if you really want to shoot anywhere near +10 dioptre you should look at the Raynox DCR-250 which is +8. Believe me, you'll be struggling with this sort of magnification because of the narrow depth of field, but optically it is pretty good.
@2Shiny, this is not hammering your efforts, which are commendable, but I do feel your talents would shine better with better kit. And I do like that snake!
Comments on the 52mm adapter WRT vignetting noted, and I agree that the lensmate adapter is a better product than the Canon. I wish it was available in the UK. :(
I understand the thing about the discussion WRT the polarising filter now. Sorry I was a bit slow. But as I said before, I didn't find a lot of use for one when I had one with the old 35mm film SLR kit that I had. I quite like the light scattering effect of distance and polarised landscape pictures appeared to me to be rather false, although if you spend a lot of times shooting mountain scenes in the Rockies or Sierras for example then maybe you'd disagree. My filter was circular, incidently, and when I did use it I spent most of my time fiddling with it to set it horizontally polarised.

[2Shiny]

Any criticism of my pics is always taken constructively. No hard feelings.