Macro Lens and Extension Tubes HELP!

Are you sure that a teleconverter will fit the 18-200mm? In my experience most zooms like that have a very flush rear element (or even one that protrudes out on its own). Teleconverters all have a protruding front element, even the pro series Kenko (which has the smallest one and is still very good quality) has a protrusion. This physically prevents them being attached to certain lenses. Sigma has the next biggest with Canon being the biggest of all (although there isn't a vast difference between the Canon and the Sigma - whilst the Kenko is quite noticeably smaller).

Check that it will fit and with the macro lens when checking make sure to read "how" people are attaching them; because most use a teleconverter on macro lenses for more magnification many use a teleconverter and an extension tube together with the tube on the teleconveter so that it allows the protruding front element to slip into the extension tube and then onto the lens itself.

I don't know how the 90mm macro is setup - all I can say is that the Sigma 70mm will accept a Sigma brand 1.4TC without problems (I also assume it will fit a Kenko pro series teleconverter as well).


Note - the Kenko series teleconverters come in two kinds - you want the more expensive pro series as the cheaper series option is a lower grade.

After a lot of googling I have determined that the Kenko Pro 1.4 will work on this lens and is in the budget :) It looks like there is a possibility that I would have to use an extension tube to attach it to the 18-200 I can't really find a straight answer on that but if that is the case I'm sure I can shop around and find something later if need be.

This guy uses a reverse mounted 28mm lens on a cheap 2x converter: Thomas Shahan!

You might also check out his video:


Wow, his work is amazing!! Very inspirational for sure. I am going with the 90mm because I like the versatility of it on top of it's macro capabilities :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are entering an area where accurate, factual knowledge,and experience with lenses and accessories, is worth a lot in the equipment selection process. There are a lot of accessories; extension tubes, bellows, lens reversing rings, reverse-mounting rings for lenses, high-quality, well-designed, thread-in two-element + Diopter lenses (they look all the world like "filters"!) from Canon (their 250D and their 500D models), or from Raynox, another company that has some GOOD +Diopter lenses available.

One can use lens reversing rings to mount, say a 24mm wide angle in reverse orientation, to the front of a standard, low-cost 135mm/2.8 or 200mm f/4 lens, like an older Nikkor or Pentax thread mount, and get some pretty decent high-magnification stuff.

I mean, "on the cheap", you could buy a Fotodiox-brand reverse lens-mounting ring and thread it in to the front filter threads of ANY brand of 50mm f/1.8 lens with a 52mm filter thread. Then, slap that onto an EOS 60D, and be able to get high-magnification images! For eight dollars American!!!! The drawback??? It'll only focus from VERY close-range. Which may, or may not, be an issue. If all you want is high-magnification photos of insects placed in the center of the frame, and can get close to them, this will be fine.

IF, however, you demand flat-field and edge-to-edge image quality...you'll probably want a macro lens. Shooting images of FLAT things, like textiles, stamps, coins, things like that---that's where a macro lens is nice.

HONESTLY...I think the 60mm and 70mm, and even 90mm macro lenses are...kind of short for much work. I prefer a 180mm macro. It gets to 1:1 (life-sized) at about 18 inches from the subject to the sensor plane. The Tamron 90 loses I think about 20mm at 1:1, being roughly 70mm in effective focal length at 1:1, somewhere around there as I recall...that makes it a great lens for things like fruits, flowers, small crafts, things like that..spider web "scenes", but NOT just "spiders, alone, seen huge".

When people say "macro" they can mean anything these days, from close-up photography at 2 feet or 3 or 4 feet, shooting flowers and plants and vegetables, still-lifes, or small products and table-top work, all the way to people using the specialized Canon MP-E65 "ultra-macro" lens as some call it. And also, a lot of stuff in-between!! SO, what to buy is, or can be,tricky!!!

If you shoot everything with electonic flash, that's one thing; if you want a field macro for natural light, you might well want something else. If all you want to do is the traditional close-up photography, which many erroneously nowadays refer to as "shooting macro's" [sic], well, you might be plenty happy with any number of simple, low-cost set-ups.
 
I am going with the 90mm because I like the versatility of it on top of it's macro capabilities :)

For versatility the EF 100mm f/2.8L would be a better choice with its IS. Mine compared nicely with my 135L and was even a tad sharper (that is saying a lot about the lens). Right now the 100mm f/2.8L is on sale at $100 over your budget and well within your budget if purchased used.

I agree with Darrel, for macro work I also prefer the extra working room that a longer lens gives and would be my recommendation for a dedicated macro lens.

I will also say this, Canon L glass tends to hold its value unlike the Tamron. Many times I have either broke even or made money dealing with Canon glass.
 
Thanks Derrel and David, I am back to undecided, great food for thought...
 
Pixel - get yourself a dedicated macro lens for certain. Honestly there are lots of ways to get into macro; indeed there are a massive number of combinations that can deliver very good image quality. But, in the end, a dedicated macro lens makes the whole process a lot easier and simpler.

Many macro subjects also don't need 1:1 - indeed when out with the MPE the 1:1 limit is often a pain with some insects that just want a bit more frame for the shot.

Also 1:1 is a good point to start and build from - get there, master shooting and lighting and then push for higher magnifications; because the difficulty quickly rises a lot so getting a good 1:1 grounding really helps. Note the Sigma 180mm Derrel mentions and the 150mm are both discontinued lines, but only very recently and they have very good optics in them (the new versions were mostly adding OS - optically they are alittle better but its not leaps and bounds - macro lenses are just that good to start with )
 
PR.. check out the Tokina 100 macro... it is an excellent lens! That and the Tamron 90 are the two best, least expensive choices. With a set of Kenko tubes, you can get really "close" as you put it. Not like the MPE65 that Kurt (Orion Mystery) uses... but that does require a lot of GOOD technique and specialized macro skills that you don't have yet. Light for Macro is also something you will need to learn... a good flash and diffuser system is a must.

What Overread said above is absolutely true... learn on a 1:1 macro... work the kinks of the that out. Then go for more...
 
Thanks so much for your help guys, I'm still mulling this over. It has taken me a while to wrap my head around all of the options and details but I think I'm getting there!

I'm sold on the 1:1 but I'm wavering on focal length. I'm leaning towards over 100mm since I'm so used to my 18-200mm. I do want this lens to be amazing for small stuff but I also want it to be versatile, iirc Charlie posted pictures of a duck with his macro lens and it was awesome.

Is it possible for someone to post a 1:1 picture of something small uncropped so I can see what it looks like? (I'm very much a visual learner, I need to SEE!!)
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure I didn't crop this; taken with the Tokina 100mm macro Charlie mentioned--it's my favorite lens (okay, granted, I only *have* four lenses, and one is the 18-55 kit lens, but still...).

I do also have a set of Kenko extension tubes, so I could get closer if I wanted, and if the bug wanted to cooperate. :D


stink_0020web by sm4him, on Flickr

Oh, also, if I remember, I wasn't even as close as I could get with just the macro on this. I wanted the entire bug in the shot, so I backed up a good bit.

This one is also uncropped (actually, I *may* have cropped it a very small amount), and is probably at the closest focusing distance with just the Tokina. Again, I could have put one of the extension tubes with it, but then I'd have been focusing with the lens pretty much ON the flower! :lol:


passionflower_0057 by sm4him, on Flickr
 
Not like the MPE65 that Kurt (Orion Mystery) uses... but that does require a lot of GOOD technique and specialized macro skills that you don't have yet. Light for Macro is also something you will need to learn... a good flash and diffuser system is a must.

What Overread said above is absolutely true... learn on a 1:1 macro... work the kinks of the that out. Then go for more...

Thanks Sharon for posting the shots, both are great and perfect examples :)

Charlie and Overread, yes you guys are right, learning the ins and outs of how to shoot at 1:1 is going to take a while and I think I will be satisfied without any extras like the teleconverter or extension tubes (oh side note, if a mod is reading this can you PLEASE correct the spelling in the thread title, it's starting to drive me insane!!).

Thanks for the specific lens suggestions, I'm looking into all of them as well as ones 100mm+

I appreciate everyone's help, I'm getting closer to picking!
 
All in your price range right now! And you would have enough left over for tubes if your budget is $800.

Canon EOS 100 F2.8 TOKINA MACRO D ATX PRO (55) *WITH HOOD, CAPS , 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

Canon EOS 90 F2.8 TAMRON MACRO SP 1:1 (55)(172E) *WITH HOOD, CAPS , 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

Canon EOS 150 F2.8 SIGMA APO EX MACRO DG HSM (72) *WITH CAPS 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

Canon EOS 180 F3.5 TAMRON MACRO DI INTERNAL FOCUS LD SP (72) *WITH CAPS, CASE , 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com


You should be able to get to 1:1 with this with tubes, correct? And it would serve a triple purpose as you could use it for portraits and birding as long as there is good light.

Canon EOS 400 F5.6 SIGMA APO TELE-MACRO HSM (77) *WITH CAPS, CASE (FILM ONLY) , 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com



****, you could get the tamron 90mm or tokina 100mm and the sigma 400mm and still have cash left over for tubes!
 
Brilliant link Jake, thank you!
Thanks for your thoughts and the links to KEH, I will go through them all :)
 
The Canon 100mmL is ruled out, I don't like the bokeh it renders :(
 
The Canon 100mmL is ruled out, I don't like the bokeh it renders :(

Tokina 100mm f2.8 at-x pro d


5760613780_f19b6a2143_b.jpg




6572903849_69b9221a3c_b.jpg



5883126311_c125f0d6e6_b.jpg



6989278345_5c8c9a6757_c.jpg




5389251721_f1957fe6a9_z.jpg



5389857148_e8d5935e0a_z.jpg




 

Most reactions

Back
Top