>>3710896Weird timing, I'm waiting for one I ordered to experiment with right now. The achromatic ones like the Canons actually seem pretty decent.
As I've understood it though, the magnification you gain from a closeup lens is relative to your focal length, and unless that's fairly large it generally doesn't seem worth introducing aberrations and degrading IQ for that little gain i magnification. They also reduce your depth of field even further, which is already problem, unlike extension tubes. (I should point out that I've used neither, I'm still a beginner, so please correct me if I'm wrong).
Can't say about increased light gathering, but it could in theory allow you a higher shutter speed, and definitely does so compared to alternative solutions that decrease the amount of light that hits the sensor. But since you're probably capped at something like 1/250 because of x-sync anyway I don't think that would be relevant to most people since a flash seems to be pretty much required for macro.
Basically the only benefits I can realistically see to them is that they can give you an extra boost if you're shooting without a flash, and they're easy to put on and take off if you're just out with your walkaround lens. They're cheap too, but if you're on a budget I think there are still more efficient ways of achieving a higher magnification.
This all being said, I'm kind of sick of seeing the same "Closeups suck bruh don't add inferior glass man just get extension tubes bruh" answer in damn near every thread I've found about them so if anyone can speak in their defense I'd be delighted. Sorry about the mildly autistic wall of text.
