Raynox DCR-250 improves close autofocus?

[Soulburner]

This is a strange finding, considering on my S3 it rendered my AF useless. I had to MF with this lens on my S3.

I tried it on my 18-55 VR and to my surprise, it autofocuses closer than it could without it. It can focus at around 2 inches from the subject, compared with about 5-6 inches normally. Anything closer and it would either hunt back and forth, or just sit there helpless. This will make any kit lens double as a great macro lens.

35mm
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Nikon35mm.jpg

55mm
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Nikon55mm.jpg

This helped me realize that 35mm wasn't close enough for macro work. I'm going to pick up the 50mm 1.8 to use as a macro lens with the Raynox. The reason I did the testing was to find out how close I would be getting with the 35mm f/2. Obviously the 50mm 1.8 would be better here so I'm going to pick them both up, I have uses for each.

Depth of Field testing:

35mm f/5.3
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Rose35mmf53.jpg

35mm f/10
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Rose35mmf10.jpg

35mm f/22
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Rose35mmf22.jpg

55mm f/5.6
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Rose55mmf56.jpg

55mm f/10
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Rose55mmf10.jpg

55mm f/22
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k245/BlackHawk2k6/Macro/Rose55mmf22.jpg

These aren't great shots but they prove the point. Turn any lens into a macro lens with the Raynox DCR-250 ;) I can't wait to see how good things look with the primes.

[Soulburner]

I just found that the 35mm f/2 has a max. magnification ratio 1:4.2 while the 50mm f/1.8 has a max. object magnification of 1:6.6. Maybe the 50 won't be great for macro despite its longer focal length. The reason for the difference? Minimum focus distance on the 50 is further away.

[MaxxxRacer]

generally speaking, 102mm is the standard for macro. that said, that product makes the 18-55 pretty good for macro.

[Soulburner]

There's a standard for macro? How is that possible when you can have two lenses with the same focal length, but one can focus closer so it gives a larger image? For example my lens (18-55 VR) at 50mm will give an image roughly 2x larger (more magnified) than the 50mm 1.8 D lens. Well, I suppose you can put them at the same distance but the 50 1.8 won't be able to focus.

I like getting super close...and I thought that the 50 1.8 would be even better than the 35mm f/2 that I'm getting, but since its minimum focus distance is so much further away its actually going to be worse. The 35mm f/2 has a nearly identical focus distance to my 18-55 VR so I should achieve almost the same results, only sharper. Plus I can always crop if I want more - those images above were not cropped, only resized.

[MaxxxRacer]

the reason the max reproduction size on the 18-55 is so good is that it can focus crazy close, where as the 50mm primes dont focus that close and hence the low max repdocution size. My 70-300VR which focus' at a rather close 5 feet (its actually a bit closer in mine) gives good macro results.

But ya, 105 seems to be a standard for large magnification macro photography. http://www.adorama.com/NK10528AFVRU.html?searchinfo=nikon%20105%20vr&item_no=6 Very expensive, but its does 1:1 reproduction in a relatively small form factor and has VR. They have a 200mm non AF-s non VR lens but it seems kinda pointless unless you need to do macro shots from further away. From what I have heard, the 60mm macro lenses dont zoom far enough for most applications. i would tend to agree. 60mm just isnt that close and you will need to get very close with to do macro.