E mount macro lens vs extension tubes

Ben johns

Ben johns

Messages
957
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
No
I currently have just the 16-50 for my a6000 having sold my Sony 35mm 1.8. I need a macro lens so I can scan film. I have an old Canon FD 70-210 F4 macro but its very soft in corners. The only macro option thats decently priced is the Sony 30mm 3.5 macro. The other option would be to get one of the Sigma DN lenses like the 30mm 2.8 or the 30mm 1.4 and get extension tubes, that way I get both the macro lens and back a decent general purpose lens.
What I dont know is how the sharpness of the Sigmas will hold up across the frame to the Sony when being used as a macro with the tubes. I've read that macro lenses tend to be better quality for the money but I have little experience with them
 
I've never really liked tubes partly because they need to be on for one shot and then off for the next as I've lost the ability to focus at a longer distance but that wont apply to you copying film as once the lens and tube are on you're good to go until you finish, but I don't like them :D I much prefer a macro or close focusing lens.

Have you thought about a film era manual focus macro lens? My old Sigma 50mm f2.8 1:1 macro lens cost me about £60 although prices may have risen as more people buy into mirroress and get into old lenses. Some old macro lenses aren't 1:1 without a lifesize adapter but I'd guess that a 1/2 lifesize "macro" might do the job? You'll obviously need a dumb adapter too and these start at about £10 or so.

Anyway. A film era manual focus macro lens and adapter are just something to possibly think about.
 
You can also use the Sony 50 f/1.8 OSS with extension tubes, another option to consider alongside the Sigma's.
The Sony has the advantage of OSS when used as a more general purpose lens.
 
woof woof said:
I've never really liked tubes partly because they need to be on for one shot and then off for the next as I've lost the ability to focus at a longer distance but that wont apply to you copying film as once the lens and tube are on you're good to go until you finish, but I don't like them :D I much prefer a macro or close focusing lens.

Have you thought about a film era manual focus macro lens? My old Sigma 50mm f2.8 1:1 macro lens cost me about £60 although prices may have risen as more people buy into mirroress and get into old lenses. Some old macro lenses aren't 1:1 without a lifesize adapter but I'd guess that a 1/2 lifesize "macro" might do the job? You'll obviously need a dumb adapter too and these start at about £10 or so.

Anyway. A film era manual focus macro lens and adapter are just something to possibly think about.
Click to expand...

The lens I'm using is an old film lens. Its the corners that are causing the problems. I sssume that a moden macro lens wouldnt have quite the same problem but I dont know
 
footman said:
Would a reversing ring work on your 16-50 lens to turn it into a macro lens? Cheap as chips if it works.
Click to expand...

It could work but I'd then be stuck to one focusing distance. I scan 120 film and will be soonm scanning 4x5 so being able to move in and out is a must really.
 
Ben johns said:
The lens I'm using is an old film lens. Its the corners that are causing the problems. I sssume that a moden macro lens wouldnt have quite the same problem but I dont know
Click to expand...

Old film era zoom lenses can be weak but old film era macro lenses can also be good.
 
Perhaps another thing to bear in mind is that not all lenses play along with tubes as the distance from film/sensor plane is different to what it was designed to work at.
 
Ben johns said:
It could work but I'd then be stuck to one focusing distance. I scan 120 film and will be soonm scanning 4x5 so being able to move in and out is a must really.
Click to expand...
With a zoom I dont think so
The issue with reversing modern lenses is the appertures are electronic controlled and the reversing rings dont do that (a few does but then they are not cheap as chips anymore)
 
There are a wide variety of ways to get macro images, and I've used most of them. In no case has it ever become an either or situation.
A macro lens is much more convenient to use but I'd definitely want one longer than 30mm (to get reasonable working distance). I use diopters, reversing rings, coupling rings, tubes, bellows, helicoids & a wide variety of macro lenses. :)

When shooting macro autofocus is irrelevant so I find this is an ideal place for adapted lenses and this also opens up an option not practical with native lenses. You can get adapters that have a built helicoid allowing them to be used at their shortest length for infinity focus or use of the lens in it's normal mode, then with a twist of the helicoids ring extra extension added in a flexible way. The degree of extension that can be dialed in like this depends on the mount & adapter for LM & LTM lenses I'm limited to less than 10mm extension, while one of my other lenses has over 50mm of extension available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top