Replacing Macro Lens with Extension Tubes

nerwin

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
3,486
Reaction score
1,449
Location
Vermont
Website
nickerwin.com
I know what you might be thinking. Why replace my dedicated 1:1 macro lens with extension tubes for my 50mm prime?

Well here is the thing.

I rarely use the full functionality of the lens and I hardly shoot at the 1:1 reproduction ratio anyways. So would I really miss having the lens? Probably not.

My idea is to sell the lens and use the money to pickup a set of Kenko AF extension tubes so I can still have the ability to shoot close up objects which is not often. I think I jumped into macro way too soon. I should have just bought extension tubes to begin with to see if macro photography was something I would be interested in before I made that big purchase.

I'd then use the rest of the money to buy a compact camera which will most likely be the Sony RX100 Mark 3 so I can have a good camera with me more often and allow me to take more photos. I think this might rekindle the passion I once had for photography.

I don't think the RX100 would replace my DSLR but it would be a companion.

Good or bad decisoon? I don't know. If it helps to get my mojo back and get me back in the game, then it's a good decision right?
 

jaomul

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
5,715
Reaction score
1,554
Location
Cork Ireland
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Personally I would keep it. A 105mm vr f2.8 lens is lovely on a fx camera for lots as said above. But it doesn't matter who thinks what here, you are the only one who knows what works for you
 

jaomul

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
5,715
Reaction score
1,554
Location
Cork Ireland
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Ok, I typed this without seeing your above response^^
 
OP
nerwin

nerwin

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
3,486
Reaction score
1,449
Location
Vermont
Website
nickerwin.com
Personally I would keep it. A 105mm vr f2.8 lens is lovely on a fx camera for lots as said above. But it doesn't matter who thinks what here, you are the only one who knows what works for you

Sure, it's a great lens. But you have a EM5 and that's a heck of lot smaller than a dslr for when you want to travel light. I got this full frame camera with big lenses and a stupidly huge strap because it's the only comfortable way to carry it. I get sick of it...I cant put my dslr in my pocket, I tried.

I just don't know if I really need that lens. I don't shoot portraits and rarely do any kind of closeups.
 

petrochemist

TPF junkie!
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
1,801
Reaction score
566
Location
North Essex UK
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Personally I'd supplement my macro lens with extension tubes, rather than replace it. Though in fact my first set of tubes predate my first macro lens by at least 20 years.

When I don't want to be carrying a load of macro gear with me I tend to stack/couple lenses to give me macro magnifications. Its fairly rare that I won't have at least 2 lenses with me, sometimes the combination isn't idea but the vignetting on such times can be dealt with by cropping :)
 

jaomul

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
5,715
Reaction score
1,554
Location
Cork Ireland
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
As I said, you know what you need. The definite downside of your kit is size. I know that I often take the Olympus over the Nikon when carrying, or pretty much if I feel I don't need the bigger kit.

The great thing about that macro is you will get a good price if you sell it. I have used 50mm and kit lenses with macro tubes and it's possible to get great results.

Enjoy your new Sony ;)
 
OP
nerwin

nerwin

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
3,486
Reaction score
1,449
Location
Vermont
Website
nickerwin.com
As I said, you know what you need. The definite downside of your kit is size. I know that I often take the Olympus over the Nikon when carrying, or pretty much if I feel I don't need the bigger kit.

The great thing about that macro is you will get a good price if you sell it. I have used 50mm and kit lenses with macro tubes and it's possible to get great results.

Enjoy your new Sony ;)

Today I dug out my Blackrapid RS7 and tried it again and remember what it was like, so much more comfortable shooting. I remembered the fact that I can easily remove the strap and walk around with my camera without any strap. I stopped using the strap because I've heard stories of tripod socket popping or failing...but there was only a few cases though and who knows exactly what they were doing. I've used mine for years when I had the D7000 and had no problems. Its amazing how comfort can affect your shooting ability.

I mean its not the end of the world if I sell the macro. Lived without one for a long time haha. But it might be more important for me to focus on getting back into photography and I don't think the macro lens is helping me at all.

It really is a tough decision especially when you just don't have money to blow.
 

table1349

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
0
Reaction score
2,772
Sounds like it is a matter of convenience along with money. Convenience for you in having a small camera to carry around.

For me I prefer quality over convenience. I have the trifecta of top quality Canon zoom L glass for convenience. When convenience is not the issue I always turn to my fixed lenses.

As mentioned by others only you can decide.
 
OP
nerwin

nerwin

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
3,486
Reaction score
1,449
Location
Vermont
Website
nickerwin.com
Sounds like it is a matter of convenience along with money. Convenience for you in having a small camera to carry around.

For me I prefer quality over convenience. I have the trifecta of top quality Canon zoom L glass for convenience. When convenience is not the issue I always turn to my fixed lenses.

As mentioned by others only you can decide.

True, but DSLRS are not very good at being inconspicuous and people are afraid of cameras these days. But I certainly do miss the compactness of my 35 f/2 lens. Ugh.
 

Derrel

Mr. Rain Cloud
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
48,227
Reaction score
18,923
Location
USA
Website
www.pbase.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Well, this is the third post that you've brought up your 105 VR lens, and second within a week's time...it's pretty clear that you're just NOT happy with the 105 VR lens, and you bought it thinking that it would fit into your photography life, but it clearly does not pull its weight, for you. First off...it was expensive, and it is also rather large and somewhat heavy, and it just is not a good fit. Get rid of it. Just get out from under it. It is 5 inches long, weighs 24 ounces, and began life as a roughly $899 lens.

Not sure how much you really need this lens. It is a sort of chubby-barreled, heavy 105mm lens. There are other choices to get a decent close-range image. The Kenko extension tubes are nice, but I have not found much use for the longest of the three...the shortest tube is very useful, the middle tube a bit less so, the longest one pretty much sees exceptionally limited duty for me.

If you JUST want a low-cost tube that's the right length for occasional closeups, and can live without automation, something like the Nikon M-2 tube, which is a "non-meter coupled" F-mount device (a special category in Nikon F-mount stuff, like say a bellows). THis would be a low-cost extension tube that you could use with non-G series lenses. The Kenko tubes are the Cadillac for Nikon tubes, and will work with everything in AF,AF-D,AF-S,AF-S G series lenses.
 
OP
nerwin

nerwin

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
3,486
Reaction score
1,449
Location
Vermont
Website
nickerwin.com
Well, this is the third post that you've brought up your 105 VR lens, and second within a week's time...it's pretty clear that you're just NOT happy with the 105 VR lens, and you bought it thinking that it would fit into your photography life, but it clearly does not pull its weight, for you. First off...it was expensive, and it is also rather large and somewhat heavy, and it just is not a good fit. Get rid of it. Just get out from under it. It is 5 inches long, weighs 24 ounces, and began life as a roughly $899 lens.

Not sure how much you really need this lens. It is a sort of chubby-barreled, heavy 105mm lens. There are other choices to get a decent close-range image. The Kenko extension tubes are nice, but I have not found much use for the longest of the three...the shortest tube is very useful, the middle tube a bit less so, the longest one pretty much sees exceptionally limited duty for me.

If you JUST want a low-cost tube that's the right length for occasional closeups, and can live without automation, something like the Nikon M-2 tube, which is a "non-meter coupled" F-mount device (a special category in Nikon F-mount stuff, like say a bellows). THis would be a low-cost extension tube that you could use with non-G series lenses. The Kenko tubes are the Cadillac for Nikon tubes, and will work with everything in AF,AF-D,AF-S,AF-S G series lenses.

I guess I gotta do what feels right.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Top