Extension tubes - what lens do they work with best?
- Thread starter phinix
- Start date
OP
- Messages
- 1,121
- Edit My Images
- No
One more thing - I know macro lens are the best choice, but I cannot afford one right now, so looking for a substitude. I want to do macros of flowers and PC equipment, not bugs, so don't need 1:1 lens right now.. I guess...
I thought that filter or tube would be good to play around for a first time. Just bought that 50mm lens and I love it, its was so huge upgrade from kit 18-70
I thought that filter or tube would be good to play around for a first time. Just bought that 50mm lens and I love it, its was so huge upgrade from kit 18-70
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Tubes should work well with a 50mm prime, with better quality than close-up lenses, which tend to be blurry at the edges with lots of colour fringing. Okay for flowers perhaps, but not if edge detail is important.
Close ups are easier with longer lenses though, as you have to get very close with shorter focal lengths to get the magnification.
Very shallow depth of field is another problem, so you need a high f/number which, combined with light loss due to the tubes, means long shutter speeds, when camera shake becomes a problem. That's why ring-flash is popular with macro.
Close ups are easier with longer lenses though, as you have to get very close with shorter focal lengths to get the magnification.
Very shallow depth of field is another problem, so you need a high f/number which, combined with light loss due to the tubes, means long shutter speeds, when camera shake becomes a problem. That's why ring-flash is popular with macro.
- Messages
- 5,000
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've just got a set of Kenko DG extension tubes and have been trying them with my lenses.
With my 50mm "Nifty Fifty" and my 18-55mm kit lens they give excellent results, but with my 17-85mm IS USM and my 70-300 IS USM lenses they seem to cause quite a bit of Chromatic Aberration away from the centre focal point.
However I have also used a set of cheap close-up lenses (+1 to + 10 doptre) on my 18-55mm kit lens and these are also an excellent and cheap intro to Macro photography on this lens.
I can also use them on my 70-300mm lens but am limited to a +1 and +4 dioptre for the same reason : bad colour fringing.
The one other good thing about extension tubes is that one set fits all lenses whereas you need different size close-up lenses for different lenses dependant on the filter size.
EDIT: I have just re-checked some of the pics I took with my 70-300mm IS USM lens and colour fringing does not seem to be as much of a problem as I first thought - so may have been a bit hasty there - seems to depend on the strength of the tubes I use.
With my 50mm "Nifty Fifty" and my 18-55mm kit lens they give excellent results, but with my 17-85mm IS USM and my 70-300 IS USM lenses they seem to cause quite a bit of Chromatic Aberration away from the centre focal point.
However I have also used a set of cheap close-up lenses (+1 to + 10 doptre) on my 18-55mm kit lens and these are also an excellent and cheap intro to Macro photography on this lens.
I can also use them on my 70-300mm lens but am limited to a +1 and +4 dioptre for the same reason : bad colour fringing.
The one other good thing about extension tubes is that one set fits all lenses whereas you need different size close-up lenses for different lenses dependant on the filter size.
EDIT: I have just re-checked some of the pics I took with my 70-300mm IS USM lens and colour fringing does not seem to be as much of a problem as I first thought - so may have been a bit hasty there - seems to depend on the strength of the tubes I use.
- Messages
- 1,622
- Name
- Kevin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The problem with using extension tubes on a 50mm is that the working distance become minute. They do however work best with primes I often use them with my 105mm macro to get even closer and a 50mm f1.2 prime. I've even been known to use it on the 300mm too
- Messages
- 332
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
Just don't make the mistake I did and think zoom = magnification.
I was wondering why I got no depth of field when using my 70-200 @ 200 with a Raynox.
You are going to need to be around f11 due to a tiny depth of field most of the time anyway so fast glass isn't required. The main thing is light. Get your flashgun off camera if you have one, or use a bit of milk bottle to get light from the onboard flash to the end of the lens or you won't get enough light.
I was wondering why I got no depth of field when using my 70-200 @ 200 with a Raynox.
You are going to need to be around f11 due to a tiny depth of field most of the time anyway so fast glass isn't required. The main thing is light. Get your flashgun off camera if you have one, or use a bit of milk bottle to get light from the onboard flash to the end of the lens or you won't get enough light.
- Messages
- 5,000
- Edit My Images
- Yes
These are two test photos taken with the kenko extension tubes:
The second shot of the Cigarette Lighter Wheel was taken with the onboard flash on my 350D
Bothe were taken using the 50mm "Nifty Fifty" at 1600 ISO
The second shot of the Cigarette Lighter Wheel was taken with the onboard flash on my 350D
Bothe were taken using the 50mm "Nifty Fifty" at 1600 ISO
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Interesting that your Kenko DG tubes fit EF-S lenses. Are they new? My Kenkos are also marked "DG for C/AF" and EF-S lenses do not fit as the back of the lens extends too far and hits the baffle.
I've heard that newer EF-S compatible versions are about though. Just a point to watch out for when buying.
I wish my 350D looked like that at ISO1600
