macro with prime lens and extention tubes question

W

wildtracks

Suspended / Banned
Messages
222
Name
Martin Prothero
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi peeps
This is my first question here, so please be gentle.

I am really hankering after making some close macro shots - insects and plants. Not able to justify a Nikon 105 VR just yet...so I was wondering about getting something like a used (older manual) 135 prime and playing with extention tubes (which I already own). I had a play with a manual 50 1.8 that I have still hanging around and image quality is wonderful. Problem being that I need to be a few mm away to get large enough magnification.
Am I on the right track looking for a bargain 85, 105 or 135 and using the tubes? Will this give me more distance from the subject?
What about lens reversing...

Any advice most welcome

Oh I'm using a Nikon D40 for now.
 
HI and welcome, i remember people always say a dedicatd macro is normally the way. you do not have yo buy a nikon 105VR at £500 you could get a sigma 50 which new are about £160

hth

mark
 
Hi Mark.

Yes I was considering the Sigma 105. Very impressive results, but I guess I was just hoping to see if I can get really good quality and keep them there older lenses recycled.

I just love the idea of using a heavy lump of metal and glass that they made in the days before...
 
Try the tubes, it's a cheap way of getting into macro with good results, I always think it's good to try them and if you enjoy doing macro you can get a lens later.
 
Yep i agree give the tubes ago first, i think water is agreat subject so try some of that and i tink your plan will work well.

btw i was on about the sigma 50mm f2.8 which is just a shorter version of the 105
 
Thanks chaps

Any suggestions on which prime to look for. Will 85mm give enough working distance with tubes or should it be nearer 135mm? I have seen a few around, so I know I can get the lens, but I can't afford to buy and make a mistake. Not good resale value on manual lenses.

Advice welcome...
 
Mark. You posted as I was writing the last one. Does the 50mm macro give a decent enough working ditance for insects? I am thinking about summer and getting real close to hornets :help:
 
A 135mm is probably going to be a little bit long to use with tubes....you'll need a lot of them to get close to macro size.
Something between 30-60mm would be your best bet.

Roughly speaking a tube the same length as the lens focal length will double the magnification of the lens. Hence a 135mm lens will require about 135mm of tubes to achieve this increase in magnification. The exact correlation is not too easy to guess as all lenses have some internal extension which is not always publicised by the manufacturer. True macro lenses achieve their 1:1 magnification by having a quite large inbuilt extension whilst regular lenses have quite small inbuilt extension to keep the overall physical length of the lens as short as possible.

If too many tubes are used it can end up that the maximum focus distance is so short that it is actually inside the lens

Using a 135 and all the tubes that it would entail will lose you a lot of light in the process and results would probably be less than your expectations.

If you send me the exact model of the lens then I may be abe to calculate the possible magnification.

Bob
 
For working with insects 100mm+ is normally required. Most really good shots i have seen were from teh 105mm macro and the 150mm.

remembering you have extension tubes ( i am guessing full set) the 85mm would be fine but you may find the focus will be slower so it is a good idea to manual focus.

i a hope that helps

Mark
 
mate i use a 2.8 105mm sigma 1:1 macro lens with 3 extension tubes and i cant fault it, plus as an added bonus its a great portrait lens! very crisp results
 
Thanks Bob for that info. I am beginning to understand now. I hoped that putting my tubes on a longer lens would give me the same mag but further away, but now I understand it doesn't work that way. I have seen an 85mm and a 135 for sale. Both older AIS lenses so no metering or AF for me. I have 3 tubes (PK 11, 12 and 13) adding up to 49.5mm. 1:1 on my existing prime.
My 50mm 1.8 is fine but I need to be too close for comfort to get the mag I require.
Lots of thought needed, and perhaps penny saving!

Cheers guys for the responses.
 
To give an example for the equivalent Canon lenses....this is not neccessarily the same with other manufacturers (or even different versions from Canon.

My 135/2L has a mag of 0.19x at mfd. Add a 25mm tube and it becomes 0.41x
My 85/1.2L has a mag of 0.11x at mfd and goes to 0.42x with a 25mm tube.

This makes it clear that the 135/2L has a greater built in extension but the 85 is catching up quickly with the 25mm tube and overtakes it when 27mm is added.

I hope that was clear.

Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top