Extension Tubes - Nikon

Richie15 · 13 Jul 2009

Rather than switching my Nikon 60mm Micro to a 105mm VR I wondered if it is cheaper and as effective to use some extension tubes with my 60mm?

The problem is I am think that I may loose AF which isnt a huge issue but would be nice to have.

Could someone please explain how these work, the likely cost and if these are compatible with say a Nikon 70-300 VR and other Nikon lenses.

Final point what is the difference between extension tubes and a tele converter?

Thanks

Richard

puddleduck · 13 Jul 2009

Kenko extension tubes will work fine, and AF if you need it. Will work with any Nikon lenses I've tried.

Just Google if you need a explanation of "how" they work, too long to type up, and not that interesting!

Lisa · 13 Jul 2009

Agree with above, i have a kenko set and use them on both my nikon and sigma lenses. I got mine at xmas for about £90 from one-stop-digital.

http://www.onestop-digital.com/catalog/product_info.php?language=en&currency=GBP&products_id=227

Richie15 · 13 Jul 2009

I have read up, my understanding is that the tubes will reduce the minimum focus distance but my 60mm micro is already 1:1 so this will not help much.

Unless I have got this wrong I would be better off with a teleconverter. Does this retain AF and VR?

puddleduck · 13 Jul 2009

What are you trying to do?

I'm assuming you want to be able to go longer, so a TC might help.

A Kenko 1.4x Pro 300DG will retain AF and VR. You can't use any Nikon TCs. Be careful, 60mm is on the short side for TCs, its possible the elements will collide.

I have the 60mm f/2.8 AF-S which I could try for you. However the AF-S is optically a lot better than the AF-D, so even if it works on my lens, it might not on yours...

Richie15 · 13 Jul 2009

puddleduck said:
What are you trying to do?

I'm assuming you want to be able to go longer, so a TC might help.

A Kenko 1.4x Pro 300DG will retain AF and VR. You can't use any Nikon TCs. Be careful, 60mm is on the short side for TCs, its possible the elements will collide.

I have the 60mm f/2.8 AF-S which I could try for you. However the AF-S is optically a lot better than the AF-D, so even if it works on my lens, it might not on yours...

I am looking to shoot insects and have a 60mm AFD and a 28-105 Micro.

The 60mm is to short, its fantastic for shooting flowers and portraits but unless you are really close it does not do insects very well. The 28-105 is ok but the lens is not fast enough for insects.

So I thought a 105mm VR would be great as its fast and also does VR (so I could do handheld shots?) The problem is the lens is expensive (no 2nd hand ones around and I wondered if I had any options.

Having read up tubes are not the way to go for me, they would be great if I had an 85mm for example where the lens will not focus close. The alternative is a TC but these are not cheap (also wont work on a 70-300 VR) and I have heard the PQ will suffer so I am a bit stuck.

Any other options or lenses welcome.

puddleduck · 13 Jul 2009

I've got a 105mm VR as well. VR is pointless for macro 1:1 work.Nikon even says so in the manual. Its marketing feature. Nice lens, but forget the pointless VR feature for macro.

Richie15 · 13 Jul 2009

puddleduck said:
I've got a 105mm VR as well. VR is pointless for macro 1:1 work.Nikon even says so in the manual. Its marketing feature. Nice lens, but forget the pointless VR feature for macro.

Andy

Any other alternatives you are talking me out of the 105 which I think is a good thing

dalex_257 · 13 Jul 2009

Richie15 said:
I have read up, my understanding is that the tubes will reduce the minimum focus distance but my 60mm micro is already 1:1 so this will not help much.

Unless I have got this wrong I would be better off with a teleconverter. Does this retain AF and VR?

Kenko ext. tubes will retain AF - they pass all the signals and AF screw-drive (if exists) from the lens back to camera.

When you focusing the lens, you practically moving the whole optical assembly back and forth (this is simplified but it is enough for explanation) - closer to the sensor for further focusing (the closest for infinity) and further from the sensor to focus on closer subjects. So if you add the extension tube (which is basically just a spacer - it does not have any optics) then you will be moving the lens further away from the sensor allowing it in effect to focus on closer subjects. The drawback is that you loose the infinity focus since the lens won't be able to go as close to the sensor as possible. This does not change the lens aperture or any other optical characteristics (though the effective aperture is different but it is so in any lens focused on anything other than infinity).

The TC work in a different way - it extends the lens optics to amend it with the TC ratio - it changes the focal length and aperture and is like adding a bunch of other optics at the lens rear. It won't allow you to focus closer - in fact I think it multiplies the minimal focusing distance to the TC factor as well.

To photograph insects you'd need to get closer so extension tubes, macro bellows or reversed lens is the way to go.

puddleduck · 13 Jul 2009

Richie15 said:
Andy

Any other alternatives you are talking me out of the 105 which I think is a good thing

Pretty much any macro lenses is good - Tamron 90mm or Sigma 150mm (or a Tokina 100mm if you can find one)

If you do want to do bugs, the 150mm macro might be worth considering.