- This topic is empty.
Macro Lens vs Extension Tubes
-
Hi,
I want to try out Macro photography.
I understand that Extension Tubes lose some light, so if my standard lens is a 3.5-5.6 18-55mm Nikon zoom, will the tubes be more or less a waste of time?
Should I save my cents and the €190 price-tag on the Kenko tubes for Nikon and buy a Nikon 60 or 105mm 2.8 Micro lens instead later on (but wow! they are expensive! It will certainly be later on).
Thanks
Walter
Hi Walter. The current issue (April 2010) of “Digital SLR Magazine” has a feature called “Shooting Macro on a Budget”.
I bought the cheap set of macro rings on ebay for approx €10. The major problem with the cheap set is that you can’t control DOF.
There is however a ‘crack’ – by using the DOF preview button if your camera has one. I think also you can set the aperture before you attach the ring tubes. The professional Kenko version has electronics – so you will retain on camera controls.
Another ‘budget’ option is to use magnifying filters.
Maybe go for the ‘cheaper’ options first if you only want to occassionaly do some macro. If its going to take up most of your work – then its a no-brainer – get a good macro lens.
Hope this helps.
bren
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brencullen/I sometimes fiddle about with manual extension tubes. £8 from Ebay. The big problem is the loss of light, but you can use table lamps to help that. I got a pair of garage lights a while back from Lidls at £12 each, big bright halogen jobs on tripods and they’re a great help. I think brendancullen’s right about setting aperture, then mount the rings, but you’ll maybe find you need the aperture wide open on account of the light reduction.
Alex.
PS I’d love a Macro lens.Hi,
I’ve been playing around with macro for a little while, and I took the plunge and picked up the Nikon 105mm f2.8, and all I can say is WOW. It is an amazing lens.
The photo attached was taken out my back garden with terrilble light ona D300. Very little processing after the shot, just exposure tweeks in Lightroom.
I couldn’t reccomend the lens highly enough, Also, is a great portrait lens.
Aidan
Hi,
thanks for the replies.
I could never afford the Nikon 105mm lens, though truly it sounds the way to go – I would be divorced! Perhaps if the Lotto comes up for me…… I must enter it some day then.
The Extension Tubes I had some experience of way, way back in the time of film and my Canon AE1 – pretty good stuff but the camera and lenses seemed to be more robust back then. I don’t believe the tubes I had then cost me the equivalent on €190!
I did research the Magnifying Filters on the Internet and have decided to go that way for the moment – I have little to lose, they are very cheap – perhaps that in itself is an indication of the quality I can expect. Some of the images on the Internet looked mighty well though.
However, the filters will, I hope, either fan the flames of my enthusiasm for macro photography – or douse them, and then maybe I won’t be envying those of you producing fantastic macro photos!
I am hoping the filters arrive soon.
Thanks again
Walter
An old favourite is picking up a (cheap) old 50mm prime lens (preferably with aperture ring) and also getting yourself a reversal ring for that lens.
The upshot is that you’ve just also got yourself a nice portrait/low light lens as well. Caveat: you’re pretty much limited in your reprodution ratio.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
