extension tubes

m147 · November 21, 2010

i will be looking to get some extension tubes. i have considered the kenko set, which comes in: 12, 20, and 36mm. also i have looked at the nikon PK extension tubes; PK-11A, PK-12, and PK-13. they come in: 8, 14, and 27.5mm. has anybody come across either? which would you recommend? thank you.

Wil Davis · November 21, 2010

m147 wrote: »

i will be looking to get some extension tubes. i have considered the kenko set, which comes in: 12, 20, and 36mm. also i have looked at the nikon PK extension tubes; PK-11A, PK-12, and PK-13. they come in: 8, 14, and 27.5mm. has anybody come across either? which would you recommend? thank you.

Have you thought about a bellows? A focusing rail might also be a useful addition…

HTH -
- Wil

m147 · November 21, 2010

richy wrote: »

FWIW I haven't used the nikon ones but there is an oft quoted saying that canons air is no better than kenkos air which basically means theirs no optical elements involved so less reason for a price premium (unlike a teleconvertor which has glass in it so you have to evaluate sample images). The main difference comes in the strength of the mounts \ build quality, the canon (and I assume nikon) ones will have a higher build quality.Last I saw the kenkos retained AF just like the canons.
I would probably go for the kenkos set. Then again im tight lol

actually, ordering off amazon.co.jp, the three nikon rings come to 15,383¥ (184$) and the kenko set is 16,702¥ (200$).

what i was wondering is if the extended lengths of the kenko tubes are not more beneficial. i am inexperienced so i am not sure. actually i forgot to mention this in the initial post.

Simo70 · December 6, 2010

I have used the kenko uniplus 25 and thinking on getting the entire set of 3 as well. I agree on the fact that it works better on primes than on zooms. I have tried it with my nikon 50mm f/1.4 with excellent results and on both, the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 and the Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8, although the result without the last two lenses was a little bit worse. Overall it works great and allowed me to try macro photography without spending big $$$.
I decided on the kenko versus the nikon because of the AF and TTL capability.

JimKarczewski · December 6, 2010

How's $9?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Macro-Extension-Tube-Nikon-D60-D40X-D40-D80-D50-D70-/220663641521?pt=Lens_Accessories&hash=item336093f5b1#ht_1606wt_1139

Seriously, I'd check on ebay too for some buy it now deals, possibly direct from the Mfg's in China?

dannypa · December 10, 2010

here under $5, so crazy...but the quality ?

http://www.linkdelight.com

Bend The Light · December 10, 2010

The cheaper ones won't have AutoFocus confirmation and so on, but how useful is that anyway?
I use a cheap set with no chips and wires, and I focus by a gentle "swaying in the breeze"...squeeze the shutter at the right point in the "sway".
If the macro you want to do is more controlled, indoors on a workbench, perhaps, then AF-confirm might be more useful.
Still get Exposure and so on with the cheap tubes, in AF mode.

I don't really know, just putting in my 2 penn'orth!.

m147 · December 14, 2010

JimKarczewski wrote: »

How's $9?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Macro-Extension-Tube-Nikon-D60-D40X-D40-D80-D50-D70-/220663641521?pt=Lens_Accessories&hash=item336093f5b1#ht_1606wt_1139

Seriously, I'd check on ebay too for some buy it now deals, possibly direct from the Mfg's in China?

that would be wonderful. unfortunately i have no credit card, and here in japan for gaijin (foreigners) it's extremely hard to get one. also japan paypal don't allow to withdraw funds from bank account to paypal account. so i'm out of luck with ebay.

EXILER · December 14, 2010

personally i think i might pick up some of the kenko's myself.

ive been looking at B and H photo and they have a 3 pc set for 167.00
Kenko 3 PC set.

puzzledpaul · December 14, 2010

<< The cheaper ones won't have AutoFocus confirmation and so on, but how useful is that anyway? >>

Depends what you're doing and the lens being used - been using a Kenko set for several yrs or so, on various lenses.

For macro, yes AF is generally irrelevant as using MF - but if they're being used on a longer fl lens, to essentially decrease mfd / increase image size @ same working distance - then AF facility is v. useful.

Buying AF capable tubes gives you the option / greater flexibility of use (at downside of cost) - provided the lens / ext. tube combo stays within the equivalent aperture range that your body will AF.

<< The main difference comes in the strength of the mounts \ build quality, the canon (and I assume nikon) ones will have a higher build quality >>
Whilst I've not had any problems / issues with mine, I do know of someone who cracked some Kenko ones (as plastic) - whilst Canon are Ali.

No experience with Nikon gear as use Canon.

pp

basflt · December 15, 2010

puzzledpaul wrote: »

<< The cheaper ones won't have AutoFocus confirmation and so on, but how useful is that anyway? >>

no its not
if your lens has contacts , you must use tubes with contacts
aperture is cotroled by camera
without contacts , it stays closed
only lenses with aperture-ring can be used

Bend The Light · December 15, 2010

basflt wrote: »

no its not
if your lens has contacts , you must use tubes with contacts
aperture is cotroled by camera
without contacts , it stays closed
only lenses with aperture-ring can be used

There is a way around this, with my canon, at least. Set the aperture, then remove the lend while holding down the Aperture Preview button. Add tubes, replace lens, which is at the set aperture.

Yes, this is a faff, but it is possible.

But I only use manual lenses for macro, anyway, with aperture rings. Until I can afford that MPE-65 thing...:)

puzzledpaul · December 15, 2010

m147 - if you're considering buying a set of extension tubes with the intention of having a go at macro, then with the issues involved in getting half-decent shots, you'll already be having to contend with a steep learning curve

To add other (and imo) unnecessary factors (financial ones aside) would make things even more difficult for yourself at such a time.

If you want to take pics of static subjects in a fairly controlled environment, then yes, it's possible to mess around, using the various workarounds available - these will give you a feeling / flavour of what's involved in macro shooting.

However, if you're having to manually stop down a lens (for whatever reasons / in whatever way) prior to actually taking the pic, then you have things to consider.
Do you compose / focus wide open (with brighter vf image etc) then adjust aperture to correct value, then take pic - or the opposite, stop down first, then compose, focus etc (with dimmer vf)

When I used to use MF lenses (in the field, with support), I generally took the first route, so I know it's possible - but would I want to go back to this method after using equipment where I don't have to bother - what do you think?

If you have any intention of getting pictures in a dynamic environment, I'd strongly suggest you save yourself a lot of aggro and get the appropriate kit. Decent (electronically coupled) ext tubes cost more, but it's unlikely you'll regret their purchase (for real-world, non static situations) - and there's always people after used ones, so you'll have little difficulty selling them if you want to.

But - they're very useful in non-macro situations too - as I said before, when used with longer telephoto lenses - provided they transfer body > lens info.

pp

Taken with a MF lens via home-made FD/EOS converter. using sequence described above.

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=624&highlight=

extension tubes

Comments