File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hai /p/

I just got a set of +1, +2 and +4 diopter macro filters, and took this photo with all 3 attached.

Looks pretty good for so many shitty macro filters attached, y/n?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTCamera SoftwareGIMP 2.6.2Firmware VersionFirmware 1.0.3Owner NameunknownSerial Number-674257752Lens Size18.00 - 55.00 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:11:07 21:02:18Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNot DefinedISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVFlashFlash, Auto, Red-Eye ReduceFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardCamera Actuations457375975Color Matrix0Color Temperature5200 KFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessHighSaturationHighContrastHighShooting ModeMacro/Close-UpImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeRed-Eye Reduction (Auto)Compression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224
>> Anonymous
Why would you use macro filters if you have an SLR? You can just use tubes or reversed lens. Macro filters are for bridge and point&shoot cameras.
>> Anonymous
Also, this is not macro. This is close up. Macro is 1:1 or bigger magnifications.
>> Anonymous
Because they are cheaper than tubes and less stupid than reversed lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>289641

Reversed lenses can work quite well if you know what you are doing and can produce more impressive results than using filters can.
>> Anonymous
>>289641
>Because they are less stupid than reversed lenses.

I don't think they can be nearly as stupid as fucking up your lenses' finely crafted optical formula by placing a piece of shitty uncoated glass in front of the lens. Enjoy your spherical aberrations, cromabs, coma, and general lack of sharpness.
>> sufi !!AI1WunV1wb9
>>289536
No. Macro refers to the lens, not the magnification of the subject.
>> Anonymous
>>289532
Which explains why Nikon made them for their SLRs.
>> Anonymous
>>289684

Yeah, reversing a lens made for being connected to the camera body the opposite way is a finely crafted optical formula.

Oh, wait, it's just a nasty hack.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>289684

Where's that lack of sharpness? I can see every individual metal thread in the focused area. 3 lenses summing up 7 diopters should give pretty bad distortion and quality decrease, but all the tests I made look pretty sharp. Please answer because I want to know the flaws in my equipment.

This is another test I made.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTCamera SoftwareGIMP 2.6.2Firmware VersionFirmware 1.0.3Owner NameunknownSerial Number-674257752Lens Size18.00 - 55.00 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:11:08 15:14:17Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNot DefinedISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVFlashFlash, Auto, Red-Eye ReduceFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardCamera Actuations457375972Color Matrix0Color Temperature5200 KFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessHighSaturationHighContrastHighShooting ModeMacro/Close-UpImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeRed-Eye Reduction (Auto)Compression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224