Extension tubes?

[NateNLogansDad]

Anybody have experience using them for macro shots? I've seen different video's where some people really liked them and some said they weren't worth the $$$. I'd like to get a few nice and close pictures of some bugs, flowers, etc but currently am restricted to the kit. Any opinions?

Also, if there are no optics involved, would there be a huge difference between a $20 kit vs a $150? I know you get what you pay for but I'm kind of skeptical. Thanks guys.

 

[YesDear]

Back in my film days when I had more hair, I used them with the 55 micro nikkor. Have not used since then. They were not hard to use but everything was manual in those days!

 

[C&B Young]

I've got the $10 version and use them on occasion. They're sometimes fun to play with, but I could certainly live without them. For macro purposes, your depth of field is very limited. Also, your lens has to be very close to the subject matter and you have to manually focus. Because of this bug macros are pretty much out of the question, unless you've got a very cooperative (or dead) bug. Here's a picture I took of a screw-head with the cheapie extension tubes:

 

[sanschag]

The advantage to ext tubes is that they're a cheap way to do macro. The disadvantage is that you lose infinity focus. I have the Pro Optic set for Canon EOS (http://www.adorama.com/MCAETEOS.html). They're perfectly fine for what they're supposed to do. (I don't use them much anymore as I went ahead and bought a dedicated macro lens.) The problem going with the cheapest ones is that they likely won't include electronic contacts. This means you'll lose autofocus (not a big deal in macro since generally MF is better), but you'll also lose the ability to control the lens' diaphragm and have to use stop down metering. (This is not even possible with standard Canon EOS lenses since there is no aperture ring on them.) In terms of the depth of field, I don't think there's a difference in between tubes and a dedicated macro lens. It's all about the aperture and magnification.

In addition to using them for macro, using a thin ring on a long lens is a way to get a way out of focus background. (I learned this trick from a member of my former camera club.)

 

[boBQuincy]

I have some old manual focus Minolta extension tubes, they work well but are difficult to use, add a +1, take off the +2, take off the +1, put on the +3, etc.

As another option I suggest looking at (through?) Canon's 500D close up lens. With two elements this is not the standard close up lens and image quality is very good. Here is one taken with a 70-200 f/4 and 500D:

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I've got a macro lens, extension tubes, and a Canon 500D filter. Obviously, the macro lens is the best for shooting macro. It's the easiest to use and provides the best IQ.

I prefer using the filter rather than the extension tubes. It is true that it adds two additional elements of glass. I just find it easier than using the tubes.

My extension tubes are from Kenko. They aren't as expensive as the Canon ones but perform just as well. I didn't want the super cheap ones because I didn't want to risk not having the electric connectors work, have fit problems, etc.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

Guys, thanks for the responses. I really appreciate it. I did see a video by Bryan Peterson recommending the Cannon 500d but right now I need to watch what I'm spending and the tubes seemed a tad cheaper. It's sounding like a dedicated lens is the way to go, just not yet. But hey, Christmas is coming tight?

 

[MarkBarbieri]

If you just want to experiment, another approach is to get some cheap +1, +2, and +3 diopters. These are like the Canon 500D, but they are optically inferior. Canon actually makes four close-up filters. They have a pair designed for lenses up to 70mm and a pair designed for lenses over 70mm. Each comes in a single element and a double element model. The double element models introduce fewer distortions.

All of these close-up filters are basically like reading glasses for your lens. You lose far focus but gain near focus.

If you plan on doing non-tripod macro photography, a ring flash is another good investment. The problem with macro is that DOF is extremely shallow. You can make up for that by narrowing your aperture, but then your shutter speeds get long. You can make up for that with flash, but a normal on-camera flash doesn't work well for little stuff really close to your lens. A ring flash solves that problem by sitting right at the front of your lens. You can usually tell when someone is using a ring flash because the background in their picture is significantly darker than the foreground because the light from the flash has fallen off.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

I looked up ring flash on Ebay and was impressed with what I saw, really nice stuff. Is that something you would use with a Macro Lens or is that more to help if you don't already have one?

With the diopters, do they degrade the image enough to where cropping the picture would give the same results? I had the camera out for a walk last week and got a few close ups that were "OK" for a new guy (in a new guy's opinion ) but want to learn to do better. I'm still not ready to by my next peice of equipment, but when I am I'd like to know exactly what I want. TOO MANY OPTIONS!!!!!

 

[JoeDif]

I looked up ring flash on Ebay and was impressed with what I saw, really nice stuff. Is that something you would use with a Macro Lens or is that more to help if you don't already have one?

With the diopters, do they degrade the image enough to where cropping the picture would give the same results? I had the camera out for a walk last week and got a few close ups that were "OK" for a new guy (in a new guy's opinion ) but want to learn to do better. I'm still not ready to by my next peice of equipment, but when I am I'd like to know exactly what I want. TOO MANY OPTIONS!!!!!

Here is a good explaination for Ring Flash

If you are like me, that list keeps getting larger and larger.

 

[Groucho]

I've got a set for my M42 lenses... they are only for (very) occasional use but are fun to have, not unlike the bellows which I have but use even less.

The problem is not even that you lose infinity focus, you lose anything close to infinity focus! You will probably have to focus as much by moving back and forth as using the focusing ring.

Still, they do let you get very close and they can give you some really wild bokeh!

As for quality - well, they're basically just empty tubes, there's really not much to them...