# Raynox lens and Canon EF 75-300mm F4.0-5.6 III



## davholla (Nov 27, 2020)

I am fed up with my Canon MPE65 lens.  It needs fixing again - only 4 months after the last time.
I need to know that if I go on holiday my extreme macro lens will definitely work.
I already have a Canon EF 75-300mm F4.0-5.6 III and if this is correct

Using Raynox Adapters For Extreme Macro

If I get a DCR 150 & DCR 250 I should be able to use it for a macro lens with 1-5 magnification.  Any thoughts?

Are my calculations correct?  Good place in the UK to buy these?


----------



## Johann Schutte (Nov 27, 2020)

davholla said:


> I am fed up with my Canon MPE65 lens.  It needs fixing again - only 4 months after the last time.
> I need to know that if I go on holiday my extreme macro lens will definitely work.
> I already have a Canon EF 75-300mm F4.0-5.6 III and if this is correct
> 
> Using Raynox Adapters For Extreme Macro



You'll get good mag, but in my experience (and I can't explain this scientifically), you're likely to lose DOF, at similar mag on the MP-E65. The MP-E is by far the preferred option if you have one. What's wrong with it/what are the symptoms? They're quite robust lenses and I've had mine for many years without problems. Maybe try another repair centre?[/QUOTE]


----------



## davholla (Nov 28, 2020)

Johann Schutte said:


> davholla said:
> 
> 
> > I am fed up with my Canon MPE65 lens.  It needs fixing again - only 4 months after the last time.
> ...


[/QUOTE]
I get  Err01.  I had it in 2017 July this year and now again.
Interesting that you don't have this problem, could it be the way you use it?  Or I have an inferior model?
I do like the MP-E I just can't trust it.


----------



## Space Face (Nov 28, 2020)

davholla said:


> Johann Schutte said:
> 
> 
> > davholla said:
> ...


I get  Err01.  I had it in 2017 July this year and now again.
Interesting that you don't have this problem, could it be the way you use it?  Or I have an inferior model?
I do like the MP-E I just can't trust it.[/QUOTE]

________________________________________________________________________

I've had mine for well over 10 years and never, ever had an issue.

That error is quite a common one for Canon lenses and relates to poor communication between the lens and the body. If you've not already done something similar, have a look through this.

How To Fix Err 01 Error on Canon Cameras


----------



## davholla (Nov 28, 2020)

Space Face said:


> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> I've had mine for well over 10 years and never, ever had an issue.
> 
> ...


Thank you 
 I just cleaned the contacts and it is working now - but I did that the other day and it didn't last long!  Maybe this time will be different.
Sadly this is quite common with the MPE65 see here
Canon MP-E 65mm Durability


----------



## Johann Schutte (Nov 28, 2020)

davholla said:


> Space Face said:
> 
> 
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> ...




Hi. I have had that dreaded error twice on brand new Tokinas (1 yr old, little use). I know how you feel, because it brought me to the point of resolving NEVER to buy Tokina again, despite their optical quality, which is excellent. I suppose bad copies come off the assembly line from time to time, just like with any other product. That error was a ribbon problem with the Tokinas in both cases. Best of luck.


----------



## Overread (Nov 28, 2020)

Years ago I saw some side by side tests with microscope and prime lens setups. The Raynox with a few specific primes were able to beat the MPE in optical quality. What you don't get is the ability to magnify between magnifications (or if you do its reduced); but you can get as good and better. Raynox are very top end and don't forget they've also got their 505 and 202 series and one or two other higher powered attachments not just the DCR 150 and 250 (though these two are the more commonly spoken about).

Sadly its so long past that I don't recall where I saw them (it was on flickr back when it used tobe really active but I can't now say who did them or have a link or anything). It's out there but you might have to hit up the very specialist macro groups to find that info. www.photomacrography.net - Index page would be where I'd start asking around as that's very macro focused


----------



## Johann Schutte (Nov 28, 2020)

Overread said:


> Years ago I saw some side by side tests with microscope and prime lens setups. The Raynox with a few specific primes were able to beat the MPE in optical quality. What you don't get is the ability to magnify between magnifications (or if you do its reduced); but you can get as good and better. Raynox are very top end and don't forget they've also got their 505 and 202 series and one or two other higher powered attachments not just the DCR 150 and 250 (though these two are the more commonly spoken about).
> 
> Sadly its so long past that I don't recall where I saw them (it was on flickr back when it used tobe really active but I can't now say who did them or have a link or anything). It's out there but you might have to hit up the very specialist macro groups to find that info. www.photomacrography.net - Index page would be where I'd start asking around as that's very macro focused



Close-up Photography       (???)


----------



## Overread (Nov 29, 2020)

That's a good reference, but no it was a post on flickr years back comparing some exotic 50mm (if I recall right) prime whilst fitted with attachments like the Raynox. Of course there are many in the macro world doing such and with the advances in lenses over the years I'm sure there are other options. The MPE has remained the "king" in so much as its the most easily used of the high magnification options by virtue of its ability to change focus through such a long range of magnifications. The higher optical quality options do tend to be fixed or much more limited in range. Many a time I've started at 2:1 and slowly moved into 5:1 because its a lot easier tahn trying to find the subject starting purely at 5:1


----------

