User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  14
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: Macro extender

  1. #1
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    14 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    686
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Macro extender

    Hi all,

    Wondering the pros and cons (other than losing a stop) on getting an extender for my 100mm f2.8 macro lens. Looking to get the really close up bug shots where you can get the super fine details in focus.

    I read a little about a Raynox 250s, and Canon EF 2x II Extender, and not sure which would be the better option. From what I'm reading, the Canon would be?

    Thanks in advance

  2. #2
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Canon x2.0MkII Tele-extender will NOT mount on the EF100F/2.8 Macro lens.
    You can use a 12mm extension tube, to facilitate the connection.

    ***

    Adding the x2.0MkII (and the 12mm tube) will give you roughly additional x2 magnification and capacity to work at a slightly longer working distance, but at the cost of two and a little bit more stops.

    For example:

    The object for reference:


    The 100mm at closest focus – WD is about 5inches:


    The 100mm plus 12mm Tube + x2.0MkII tele-extender at closest focus – the WD is about 6 inches:



    WW
    Last edited by William W; 03-11-2011 at 11:07am.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Oct 2010
    Location
    Greenwich
    Posts
    1,708
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Kenko 2X should fit, and works well, and is very cheap to boot.

    I have used one with my Sigma 150mm macro, and it really allows you to get those very tiny bugs.
    All my photos are taken with recycled pixels.
    Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
    Wisdom, is knowing not to serve it in a fruit salad.

  4. #4
    Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    14 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    686
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks guys. Have either of you or anyone else had any experience with the Raynox 250s? I have seen some good results with it, and it's quite cheap...

  5. #5
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    . . . no I haven't.

    I think the Raynox are akin to what Canon term "Close Up Lens".
    These devices mount onto the FRONT of the lens.

    If I am correct, you are comparing apples to oranges between the Raynox and using the x2.0MkII tele extender (or a Kenko tele extender) regarding the technicalities and also likely the results.

    Close Up Lenses added onto the front of a lens can add an optical vignette and also stray dramatically in image quality and focus (or sharpness) at the edges.
    However that is not to say that a C/U lens will not give a suitable and artistic image, because often a soft edge of slight vignette is a welcome addition to a super macro of a bug's head.

    Also if using an APS-C camera, the edges are lost as the Lens's Image Circle is larger than sensor, so the Raynox might be just fine - if researching by viewing images: "what camera was used?", would be one question I would ask.

    However the Canon C/U lenses: 250D and 500D are excellent quality and would be a much fairer comparison for you to make against the Raynox. As mentioned I have not used the Raynox or have I ever seen one, but I can say that the optics on the Canon C/U lenses is quite good and both the 250D and 500D are made in a 58mm size to fit the Filter size of the EF100F/2.8 Macro.

    The 250D will allow a maximum magnification of about x1.4 and the 500D will allow a maximum magnification of about x1.2 when used with the 100/2.8 macro.

    But as opposed to using a tele-extender, a Close Up lens will generally necessitate a very small WD (Working Distance).

    Re-iterating with a x2.0 tele-extender and the 100 macro lens, you are basically getting x2 macro at about 6 inches WD, but, for example with a 250D close up lens you can be expecting to have a WD at about 1~2 inches typical, and only x1.4 magnification.

    I have no idea on the specs of the Raynox - but it would be expected that the WD would be short and magnifications would be less than using a x2.0 tele-extender.

    WW

  6. #6
    Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    14 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    686
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's given me a good headstart, WW. Thanks!

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    201
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had a raynox 250, I bought it on ebay,for under $100.00 as I remember
    very frustrating to use in that the dof is exremely shallow & you may not get a bugs entire head/face in focus

    I don't think it would be a positive step putting it on a fine lens such as your 100 f2.8
    William W has pretty much defined the close up lenses which are very similar, possibly better in quality

    Have you thought about a good set of extension tubes? might be the way to go
    Bryan

  8. #8
    Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    14 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    686
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm considering that now. Before this thread I didn't even know their purpose lol.

    Any extension tubes (or good places to get one) you guys would recommend that would compliment my 100mm 2.8?

    Thanks!

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    201
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    if you buy a set of tubes its worth buying the electronic (AF) type, others are cheaper but you end up with man focus only as they're dont connect the lens to camera electronically
    here's a starting point: http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/...&Submit=Search you may find them cheaper on ebay etc

  10. #10
    Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    14 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    686
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks heaps! So to be sure, This is What I'd need to get the super close, high detail bug shots where you can see the tiles on a fly's eye for example with my 100mm 2.8 (assuming skill)?

    Sorry this is a dodgy post, I'm writing from my phone lol

  11. #11
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use the Kenko set of three tubes. I recommend them, for your use, They are not expensive and well finished and have a good inside and have the electronic connections for AF etc. It was the 12mm Kenko Tube I used in conjunction with the x2.0MkII tele-extender to take that sample image.

    ***

    WARNING: Kenko's latest series model is the "DG". But there are TWO versions of that series.

    The first version does NOT allow the connection of EF-S lenses. This may or may not be relevant to you.
    The second release of the “Set of Three” Kenko tubes, which do allow connection of EF-S lenses are clearly identifiable by the WHITE SQUARE EF-S mounting alignment mark on the FEMALE mount end of the extension tube.

    ALSO: Kenko sell (or sold) two tubes, each separately, the 12mm and 25mm AFAIK, neither of these separate items will allow mounting of EF-S lenses

    WW

  12. #12
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by B D H View Post
    I had a raynox 250 . . . I don't think it would be a positive step putting it on a fine lens such as your 100 f2.8
    Thanks for the 1st hand info - I've filed that.

    WW

  13. #13
    Ausphotography Regular
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    14 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    686
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks heaps WW. Am I confused, or will I need these extension tubes as well as the Extender (http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/...p?idProduct=52)

    Sorry, I get confused easily.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    201
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    these tubes work on their own with your lens, there are 3 sizes depending on how close you want to go
    all or any combination can be used
    its all about experimenting until you get your desired result
    they can be used in combo with extenders but that could be further down the track
    I've just seen them on fleabay for $136.00 with free freight
    Last edited by B D H; 03-11-2011 at 7:29pm.

  15. #15
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    . . . well you "need" based on what you want to do.

    You can use ONLY the tubes with the 100/2.8 macro and that will get you more magnification - or you can use the extender also - and that will give you more.

    I am cooking dinner ATM . . . I have some teaching visuals on my HD and I will post them and some magnification figures and Working Distances later on tonight or tomorrow and you can work out what's most suitable for working with your bugs.

    Anyway whatever the maths of it, I expect using the tubes will be a starting point as a good purchase for your macro kit - it you get "involved" you'll be buying a macro fine adjustment table and some macro flash lighting and . . . etc etc.

    WW

  16. #16
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    . . . yes what Bryan said also . . . "later down the track": the tubes will always be a useful addition in your bag - for other lenses.

    Gotta go now

    WW

  17. #17
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I just caught this post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Fedgrub View Post
    Thanks heaps! So to be sure, This is What I'd need to get the super close, high detail bug shots where you can see the tiles on a fly's eye for example with my 100mm 2.8 (assuming skill)?

    Sorry this is a dodgy post, I'm writing from my phone lol

    NO. It is not: not easily done.

    The specialist lens MP-E 65F/2.8 Macro is the lens for that job.

    But you will get close.

    Numbers coming later

    WW
    Last edited by William W; 03-11-2011 at 7:36pm.

  18. #18
    Ausphotography Site Sponsor/Advertiser OzzieTraveller's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Oct 2009
    Location
    Forster- Tuncurry, eastern Australia
    Posts
    1,600
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    G'day FG

    The Raynox 250 is a 4-dioptre multi-element close up lens that can fit onto the front of any camera lens [of the appropriate filter-thread size]. The "250" is the working distance of 250mm or 1/4metre from the +4 dioptre lens

    This lens is a very high quality lens - much the same IQ as the Canon or Nikon equivalents and could be a serious contender if you chose to use it. As you will probably know from other threads, the close up lens has a defined focus distance / working distance and it matters-not what prime camera lens it is attached to ... 50mm or 100mm or 300mm for that matter, the focus distance is 250mm for this lens

    As others ^ have mentioned, Ext'n tubes are a distinct possibility but they have potential issues with compatability too

    Hope this helps a bit
    Regards, Phil
    Of all the stuff in a busy photographers kitbag, the ability to see photographically is the most important
    google me at Travelling School of Photography
    images.: flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/

  19. #19
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    847
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    OK.

    A different opinion of the Raynox. Assumed you have used it?

    Thank you, noted.

    WW

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Oct 2010
    Location
    Greenwich
    Posts
    1,708
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Extension tubes will allow you to get closer to the subject, and the Kenko's are excellent.
    I have a set of them and they work fine on EF-S lenses, and cost me about $150 from Top Buy.
    Extenders DO NOT have any glas sin them, so they ca'nt degrade the IQ.

    A converter will actually magnify the subject, so you don't need to be so close, but you may lose just a little IQ.

    You can use both of these things together to get the item at just the size you want.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •