A Raynox question

[retroglide]

I have seen pretty impressive things with the Raynox adapters and am seriously thinking of buying one. My question is, I currently have a 14-45 and 100-300. Would one of these lenses work or would I have to look at getting the 45-200 which I have seen good results with. Although that would be an expense I would like to pass on at the moment.

 

[Dave in Wales]

I have seen pretty impressive things with the Raynox adapters and am seriously thinking of buying one. My question is, I currently have a 14-45 and 100-300. Would one of these lenses work or would I have to look at getting the 45-200 which I have seen good results with. Although that would be an expense I would like to pass on at the moment.

Ranox work better at longer focal lengths, the 100-300 should work just fine.

I use a Ranox 150 with my 45-200, details here.....

https://www.mu-43.com/f38/pany-45-200-fitted-raynox-150-data-pictures-18693/

The Rayox 250 gave to much magnification for every day field use I found.

 

[retroglide]

Thanks, that's good news. So the adapter should fit straight over the diameter of the 100-300. If so, will order one asap

 

[Minniesmum]

Just a general comment about Raynox's-I've used the Raynox 150 and 250 for many years on all sorts of different lenses.( they can be stacked as well ).
They can be physically made to fit just about any lens by using the correct step-up or step-down ring.
A Flickr friend of mine ( Flickr: Olympus&NikonianRay's Photostream ) gets incredible macro results with one on his LX2/LX3 compact's.

 

[F1L1P]

Been using Raynox 250 with both 14-45 and 45-200.
It all depends what are you planning on shooting - drops of water, flowers, bugs?
I'd say the best results for me are around 35-80mm.