Flavio Minelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Boris, >closeup filters are a cheap and easy way to start into macro. > >Single elements attachments often suffer from optical aberrations while >2 elements ones are much better in this respect. The cost of quality >closeup attachments is quite high, though. At least enough to make the >acquisition of a macro lens a feasible alternative. > >There are 3rd party manual focus macros in the 100 mm range widely >available used at very interesting prices, maybe 100-200 USD, edpending >on model and conditions. You don't need autofocus for macro, anyway. > >It all depends on funds availability and what you really want to do. A >couple years ago I bought a 100/2.8 FA from KEH for about 200 USD and >that's about the best you can get from Pentax. > >Tubes are another cheap alternative but not so flexible, IMO.
My preference for macro work is, in decreasing order of preference and optical quality, but increasing order of convenience and versatility: A true macro lens Extension tubes Achromatic (2-element) close-up attachment I think the extension tube is optically preferable to the add-on lens, but not as convenient. The best thing about the add-on lens approach is that you're able to use it on a zoom, which allows you to change framing easily without moving your tripod around. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
