Has anyone try the lens tube extensions? Does it really work? Is there an alternative solution?
I have a Nikon D3100 with standard lens, i would like to take some macro photographs but i can not afford a macro lens, so i was wondering if there was a cheaper solution that works.
how about the M42 lenses or is it better to use the extension tubes or neither?
Regards
Erv
Loc: Medina Ohio
You can also consider reverse mounting a short focal length lens to your standard lens for high magnifications... This is done by simply buying a $6 or so male to male adapter..
Reverse lens is amazing but problematic in that the working distance is only about 2" or less and generally it needs to be aided by an external flash... Here is a photostream of a guy that uses a reverse mounted lens to lens setup... He also uses macro lenses so you have to read his descriptions to know which setup he used on different photos. but generally the extreme closeups were done with reverse lens, the problem with reverse lens is that it is only good for very high mag close up,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ecs-photography/
Yes. But you are getting some drop dead great macros! On line there are some great tube extension buys. One shooter I talked to gets great results with an off brand set of tubes from Amazon - paid under 20$.
thank you for your reply, been really helpfull
Your question about extension tubes is answered here:
Frequently Asked Questions & Answers Concerning Macrohttp://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-36372-1.htmlI would encourage you to review all four of the first threads on this forum.
i use extension tubes on my macro lenses.i like them.tom
john Muriel wrote:
Has anyone try the lens tube extensions? Does it really work? Is there an alternative solution?
I have a Nikon D3100 with standard lens, I would like to take some macro photographs but can not afford a macro lens, so i was wondering if there was a cheaper solution that works.
how about the M42 lenses or is it better to use the extension tubes or neither?
Regards
When I started with macro, I didn't want to spend lots of money and find that I didn't like it. I bought the cheap, manual tubes for about $10. Since I like to use manual focus and exposure for macros anyway, I didn't need the auto features. The manual tubes work fine. Afterall, it's just a hollow tube to put space between the camera and the lens.
Removing the tube from the body can be a problem if you don't know how. There is a small silver knob that releases the tube. That must be slid one way or the other, and the tube comes right off.
I eventually got the Nikkor Micro 105mm - great lens.
http://www.slrphotographyguide.com/camera/lens/extensiontube.shtml
With your camera, when using ordinary tubes, the lens can't communicate with the camera and your lens will remain at its smallest aperature. While desirable for depth of field, the f32 your lens will go to can make it too dark to see anything. I bought a manual lens for that use. That way you can set the aperature any way you want. You will need to use the manual setting on your camera.
is the kenko $190.00 dollars better than the fotodiox for $9.00?
Gerald Sr wrote:
is the kenko $190.00 dollars better than the fotodiox for $9.00?
Auto-extension tubes contain elecronic connections so that your lens can talk to your camera, preserving auto-focus, auto-aperture, and recording to your Exif mega-data. You can focus wide-open, then the lens automatically closes to chosen aperture when you depress shutter release button.
Straight extension tubes are like a TP roll tube with camera mount on one end, and lens mount on the other.
Use the Canon close-up filter lenses 500D or 250D on whatever lens you have. Diameters are 52-77mm and cost ? $75-150. Easiest to use and no light loss.
I have a 25mm Canon tube that I use for more magnification of either of my macros primes
without
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.