Extension Tubes WITH a Macro Lens?

[Mike K]

Has anyone tried this? I've got a Tamron 90mm Macro but would love to get closer and/or bigger.

 

[mjhoward]

Lots of people have tried this.... and it works.

 

[Tony S]

What is the minimum focusing distance on the lens? You might end up so close that you have such a shallow dof that it might be tough to work with.

 

[Derrel]

Yes, I've used tubes on my Tamron 90 macro...ehhhh...it's a big PITA, really it is...you have to be ULTRA-close. ANd by that I mean right on TOP OF the subject...it ruins natural lighting, since the lens and camera and me are right there, blocking much light,most of the time...it's better to MAGNIFY the image by using a tele-converter or by using quality "plus diopter lens", which is a lot like a fancy filter. Canon makes the 500D and I think it is the 250D (???), which are high-quality, two-element lenses (mounted in filter rings that thread onto the filter threads)...

The Raynox company also makes some very nice close-up lenses that thread onto filter threads...pretty sure Overread and Ron Evers have or have used the Raynox close-up filter/lenses...these are kinda' like reading glasses for your macro lenses!!! There are some really cheap, single-element filters that do this same thing, usually sold in sets like +1 diopter, +3 diopters,etc---these are not nearly as good as the multi-element lenses like the Canon 500D or the Raynox close-up lenses.

 

[djacobox372]

I often use tubes with my macro lens, it's the only way to get beyond a 1:1 enlargement. A teleconverter will give you more working distance, but will also degrade the image more then tubes.

 

[Derrel]

I often use tubes with my macro lens, it's the only way to get beyond a 1:1 enlargement. A teleconverter will give you more working distance, but will also degrade the image more then tubes.

That is the common "wisdom"...and yet...John Shaw's excellent books have many,many images done using a converter and the now somewhat outdated Nikkor 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF lens...I think in most cases, the degradation from a quality 1.4x or even 2.0x converter on APS-C bodies is mostly theoretical.

 

[Mike K]

Yes, I've used tubes on my Tamron 90 macro...ehhhh...it's a big PITA, really it is...you have to be ULTRA-close. ANd by that I mean right on TOP OF the subject...it ruins natural lighting, since the lens and camera and me are right there, blocking much light,most of the time...it's better to MAGNIFY the image by using a tele-converter or by using quality "plus diopter lens", which is a lot like a fancy filter. Canon makes the 500D and I think it is the 250D (???), which are high-quality, two-element lenses (mounted in filter rings that thread onto the filter threads)...

The Raynox company also makes some very nice close-up lenses that thread onto filter threads...pretty sure Overread and Ron Evers have or have used the Raynox close-up filter/lenses...these are kinda' like reading glasses for your macro lenses!!! There are some really cheap, single-element filters that do this same thing, usually sold in sets like +1 diopter, +3 diopters,etc---these are not nearly as good as the multi-element lenses like the Canon 500D or the Raynox close-up lenses.

Excellent info since you have the same lens. Thanks for this and thanks to all for helping out.

 

[Big Mike]

I often use tubes with my macro lens, it's the only way to get beyond a 1:1 enlargement. A teleconverter will give you more working distance, but will also degrade the image more then tubes.

That is the common "wisdom"...and yet...John Shaw's excellent books have many,many images done using a converter and the now somewhat outdated Nikkor 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF lens...I think in most cases, the degradation from a quality 1.4x or even 2.0x converter on APS-C bodies is mostly theoretical.

Good point about the 'real world' quality from teleconverters. I was on a meet-up with some forum photographers and one guy had both the Canon 1.4 and 2.0 TCs. He had no hesitation to stack them behind a 70-200mm F2.8 L. My initial reaction was to say "you can't do that....the quality will be terrible"...but I tried it myself and it wasn't too bad at all.