Extension Tube VS Raynox

[Snake Man]

Im using the Sigma 105 for my macro work but want to get a bit closer.

Would a Raynox work with this lens? Which one would be best and would it be more suitable than using extension tubes?

Cheers.

 

[Slapo]

Well, I think you get extremely small DOF with either of those, close-up lenses tend to make issues of any lens you attach them to more pronounced, but there's no light loss and you can AF with those. Plus, you screw them in like filters. I have a Canon 500D btw
With extension tubes, you lose some light, they're not as fast to attach as close-up lenses, but they don't make any issues of your glass more pronounced, as they have no optical elements.
You can combine them too, but I don't think you'd get anything really usable with more than one of those in the end. I mean, I have a very hard time actually finding my target when I use either the Canon 500D or Nikkor BR-2A. Not sure if it's easier with a dedicated prime, but any additional close-up gear is going to make that worse

 

[scraggs]

I tried my MSN-202 with the Canon 100 macro and the DOF was terrible, I would say it was virtually unusable.
If you have to use a macro lens I would only use tubes.
Or use the raynox with a standard tele lens