I would like to start doing some macro photograpy. I`m not sure wether to just buy a macro lens straight off, i`m thinking of the tokina lens, or wether to buy a set of kenko tubes first. I also want to get a flash unit as well so cost will be an issue. If i went down the route of buying a set of tubes then later bought the macro lens will the tubes still be useful or be made redundant by the lens?
extension tubes or macro lens?
- Thread starter jewbs
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,534
- Name
- Gareth
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My first macro lens was the Sigma 105mm F2.8. I still have this and consider it one of the sharpest lenses i have (and I have a few Canon L series). You can pick them up second hand for around £200 and they are a superb quality. The focusing is pretty quick, although not as quick as some of the more expensive alternatives as expected. I tend to manual focus when doing macro work so this isn't a problem.
You can put the extension tubes onto this lens to get even closer if needed, but bear in mind that DOF can get very small indeed so practise is a must IMHO.
You can put the extension tubes onto this lens to get even closer if needed, but bear in mind that DOF can get very small indeed so practise is a must IMHO.
thanks for the comments, anyone else have any views, would i be wasting my money getting the extension tubes first or should i just go straight for the macro lens and then pick up some tubes later second hand? I had thought of getting the tokina lens but is there much difference between that and the sigma?
You need to get both really - extension tubes (basic ones) are only a tenner anyway. But a 1:1 ratio macro lens is a must! 
Sigma 105, 150 or 180, Tamron 90mm I've read on here are very good.
I have the nikkor 105mm micro (d) and its great.
Only other thing you may need is a portable light source or flash ring to light the area. Onboard usually works initially, but manual focussing through f8 and extension tubes is somewhat dark
Sigma 105, 150 or 180, Tamron 90mm I've read on here are very good.
I have the nikkor 105mm micro (d) and its great.
Only other thing you may need is a portable light source or flash ring to light the area. Onboard usually works initially, but manual focussing through f8 and extension tubes is somewhat dark
You need to get both really - extension tubes (basic ones) are only a tenner anyway. But a 1:1 ratio macro lens is a must!
Sigma 105, 150 or 180, Tamron 90mm I've read on here are very good.
I have the nikkor 105mm micro (d) and its great.
Only other thing you may need is a portable light source or flash ring to light the area. Onboard usually works initially, but manual focussing through f8 and extension tubes is somewhat dark
Why is a macro lens a must, if you have a good prime lens (50mm to 135mm) and a set of let us say three extension tubes - 10mm, 20mm, 30mm?
I agree about the manual focussing at f8 and beyond, but is there that much difference in quality?
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
If you have a decent lens (I use a Canon 70-200L 4 IS) then I would give the tubes (Kenko?) a go first. That's what I did, and then sold my two macros. Quality is very good, the zoom adds a lot of very useful versatility in terms of magnification and shooting distance.
Ultimate quality is not quite macro standard, but unless you shoot small flat objects like stamps or coins, you will probably never notice it. If you do, then get the macro - you'll always find a use for some tubes. Don't get the cheap all-manual ones if you use Canon though - you can't stop the lens down without an amazing amount of faff which renders them useless.
Ultimate quality is not quite macro standard, but unless you shoot small flat objects like stamps or coins, you will probably never notice it. If you do, then get the macro - you'll always find a use for some tubes. Don't get the cheap all-manual ones if you use Canon though - you can't stop the lens down without an amazing amount of faff which renders them useless.
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Should be fine on the 70-300 around the mid range, and the 50. Use a high f/number for best quality - you'll probably need to anyway, for depth of field.
it seems a lot of people still use the extension tubes with a macro lens, does this just give you greater magnification or does it allow you to be slightly further away from the subject or is that just down to the focal length of the lens. As i think i`m going to need a flash as well for macro work i am edging towards getting the extension tubes first. Would there be much of a difference in image quality using tubes with my existing lens over a dedicated macro lens such as the tokina or sigma
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tubes dont have any glass in them to affect IQ and they will work well with your 50mm but you will lose some light , this coupled with the small apertures required with macro will mean you really need a flash to get the best from any macro setup. Using tubes reduces the minimum focus distance which increases the magnification of the lens - with the 50 and a full set of tubes you will get approx 1.5:1, and around 2:1 with a 100mm macro.
- Messages
- 313
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
That's not strictly true. By adding extension tubes, you are moving the lens out of its design parameters. A true macro lens is designed to work with the subject at a close distance, but normal lenses are designed to work with a long subject to lens distance and a short lens to sensor/film distance, that's why normal lenses work better when mounted in reverse for macro.
The main thing about true macro lenses is that they can be focussed from infinity down to life size without any additional accessories.
Don't overlook supplementary close-up lenses (SCLs). They screw into the front of a lens like a filter and, providing you use a good quality one, give very good results. There is (relatively) no loss of light compared to extension tubes and can in fact improve the quality of an image when using extension tubes on a normal (as opposed to macro) lens because the light path through the lens is nearer that of when the lens is used normally.
This image was taken with an 80mm standard lens on a Rollei 6006, mounted on a bellows with a +4 SCL. The magnification on film was approx 3x.
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For all practical purposes you will not see any image degradation with tubes on a 50mm lens unless you are photographing a flat object parralell to the focal plane of the lens where you may see some slight distortion at 100% magnification and theres some text involved , granted when using bellows at full magnification you may BUT as the OP is talking of using a 50mm lens with a max of 68mm of extension he wont so why try and over complicate things :shake:
- Messages
- 313
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
I disagree entirely. With extension tubes there WILL be a loss of quality on a standard lens. In fact, it will be LESS noticeable on an object parallel (please note correct spelling) with the film plane.
Not trying to complicate the issue, far from it. Supplementary close-up lenses are far SIMPLER than extension tubes!
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If i want you to correct my spelling i will ask - so Please don't correct my spelling as it ****es me off ,
As for the quality issues i think you've got it the wrong way around - a macro lens will project a flatter field so when you photograph a stamp / page from a book etc you will get all of the image in-focus - using tubes and a STD lens that image can be warped and will show as a sharp center and out of focus edges - a picture of a bug is less likely to be affected.
- Messages
- 7,314
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
depends how flat the field is anyway of the lens but yeh the distortions are more noticeable at close up distances.
I like old legacy lenses on tubes/ bellows/ macro teleconverters for close up stuff, cheap,cheerful and not bad IQ. I am looking for a dedicated 1:1 macrolens now to start with though, rather than 50mm standard lenses.
Zuiko 50mm f1.8 on Teleplus macro teleconverter. around 1:1.5 magnification.
Same lens, not so macro:
Both used flash for lighting as the old macro converter saps a lot of light.
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This was taken with a single tube on a Canon 85mm F1.8 - personally think even the 21mp image shows little distortion (if any
at all)
and this is with a full set of tubes (in the rain) from the garden a few moments ago using the same lens - just resized
Personally I've never had any issues with tubes and distortion and i wouldn't worry about it.
at all)
and this is with a full set of tubes (in the rain) from the garden a few moments ago using the same lens - just resized
Personally I've never had any issues with tubes and distortion and i wouldn't worry about it.
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
It depends on the lens, and how close you want to go. Mid-range primes like your 85mm perform well with tubes, consumer zooms less so. My 70-200L is pretty good with them.
But if you put tubes on a lower grade lens, maybe a kit zoom, and then try to photograph a postage stamp, it will no longer be square and the edges will be blurred. Problems like this just don't show up with most popular macro subjects, because they're 3D, the main subject is around the middle, and most of the image area is out of focus anyway.
In terms of image quality, the macro pecking order is usually:
- pukka macro lens (expensive)
- extension tubes (less expensive)
- supplementary close-up lens, eg Raynox DCR-250 or 150 (cheap)
Anyone close to you that has tubes? Or a macro lens... then you can try it and see which is more useful for you. Same for the Raynox.
You can use AF tubes to assist recording the Aperture. Or Manual tubes (like I have bought from on here for a tenner). Raynox 250 for around 40 ukp (amazon) works well on the longer focal length (such as your 70-300). Also as a screw fit attachment can probably be used on several lenses.
The reversing ring (fits in the screw filter and then you put a second lens usually 50mm, reversed on the end. You have to paly with the Aperture and get it to lock etc if its not an older lens.
If you check on Flickr you should get some hits for the Raynox and reversing ring. As I said, the link to the flickr site shows what I managed to do. Although I will admit that they don't look as crisp/close as the examples posted on here !
Oh and I think LensesForHire might have the 105mm/150mm macro lenses - you could arrange to borrow for a week and see what you think before spending 400+ukp...
- Messages
- 5,000
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Extension tubes give excellent results with a wide range of lenses.
Used with a Canon "Nifty Fifty":
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157625975281497/
Some of the wasp pics and others are taken with extension tubes:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157623715955928/
And, as has already been stated, you can also use them with telephoto lenses:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=313888
.
Used with a Canon "Nifty Fifty":
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157625975281497/
Some of the wasp pics and others are taken with extension tubes:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157623715955928/
And, as has already been stated, you can also use them with telephoto lenses:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=313888
.
- Messages
- 5,000
- Edit My Images
- Yes
some great shots , i will get the tubes and flash then look out for a second hand lens.
- Messages
- 145
- Name
- Mick
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks guys, this has helped me out too. My 15yr old son wants to try macro. Has Nikon D90 with I think an 18-105vr and 70-300 vr. So will it be best to try with tubes first and which would be the lens to of these two to use. And I take it that it would be best to manual focus?
look at hoppyuk`s reply above, he suggests the 70-300 would be fine in the mid range.