Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Macro lens with extension tubes
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 1:27 pm    Post subject: Macro lens with extension tubes Reply with quote
Hi

Right now I use a Nikon 55mm f/3.5 lens and it is great. I'm looking for another macro lens for a longer working distance. I'd like to know what to look for, etc.

Here is what I'd like it to have:

1) At least 90mm and preferably over 100mm. More important is working distance, for example the Canon EF 100mm has a longer working ditance than the Sigma 105mm.

2) Good feel of the focusing ring, preferably about as good or better than the Nikon 55mm, or at least not a significant downgrade.

3) At least as good optically as the Nikon 55mm f/3.5.

4) 1:1 magnification without any extra tube. The Nikon 55mm requires an extension tube for higher magnification than 1:2.

5) I also want to add extension tubes for even higher magnification than 1:1. Probably something like the Kenko tubes. I'm not sure if the lens matters here or whether some lenses work better with them or not? I'm guessing a f/2.8 lens would help since if I understand, extension tubes close the max aperture?

Thank you


PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here are a couple of macro lenses I have used with good success. In no particular order:

1:2
Canon FD 100 F/4 1:2 macro, about half meter minimal focusing, you can use matching tube to get to 1:1
Tamron Adaptall 90 F/2.8 1:2, about 160cm minimal focusing distance, you can use a 2X teleconverter or tube to make it 1:1
Vivtar Series 1 90 F/2.5, 1:2, made by Tokina, aka the Bokina, 40 cm minimal focusing distance, there is a dedicated 2x matching macro adapter making it 1:1, but you lose ability to focus faraway when attached
Tamron

1:1
Tamron 90 2.8 AF, minimal focuse distance, 29cm, Some older design is on Adaptall mounts, most modern versions are AF and goes to 1:1 without tubes
Vivitar 90 2.8 made by Komine, MF only, these are close cousins to the series 1 but is a different optical formula
Canon FD 200, F/4, goes to 1:1, 58cm minimal focus distance
Tamron 180 AF macro, about 50cm minimal focus distance, goes to 1:1.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:28 pm    Post subject: Re: Macro lens with extension tubes Reply with quote
clarnibass wrote:
I'm guessing a f/2.8 lens would help since if I understand, extension tubes close the max aperture?



Longer extension causes you to "lose" a lot of light. Essentially you're only using a small part of the image circle so much of the light is wasted.

f/2.8 might help you focus but depth of field is ridiculously thin at high magnification even at f/8.

I have good luck with a Pentax Super Takumar 100/4 macro lens, but I expect the other "brand name" macro lenses are equally good.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Also, at macro distance, the effective aperture is much smaller than 2.8. Since at macro range, lens group are extended very far from the film plan, lens behaves as if it is sitting on an extension tube. Cambridge in color has an excellent article of this effect. The formula for effective aperture is:

Effective F-Stop = F-Stop x (1 + Magnification)

So for a 90mm F/2.8 1:1 macro lens, when used at minimal focal distance, the effective aperture is only 5.6.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/macro-lenses.htm


PostPosted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 1:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I didn't see anything about your budget...
Leica R 100 macro, CV 125 APO, Nikkor 105 macro, Tokina 90....


PostPosted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:34 am    Post subject: Re: Macro lens with extension tubes Reply with quote
clarnibass wrote:

5) I also want to add extension tubes for even higher magnification than 1:1. Probably something like the Kenko tubes. I'm not sure if the lens matters here or whether some lenses work better with them or not? I'm guessing a f/2.8 lens would help since if I understand, extension tubes close the max aperture?


5) First try to use Your Micro Nikkor in reverse position, or a wide in reverse. Of course working distance will become smaller, the higher the magnification!


PostPosted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks very much everyone, I'll look into those suggestions.

To clarify a few things.

drjs wrote:
1:2

I have the Nikon 55mm which has the 1:1 extension tube. I decided that for this longer lens I don't want one that requires a tube for 1:1.

fuzzywuzzy wrote:
f/2.8 might help you focus but depth of field is ridiculously thin at high magnification even at f/8.

Yes, for such small objects I use focus stacking.

drjs wrote:
Also, at macro distance, the effective aperture is much smaller than 2.8.

Yes, not an issue other than maybe for focusing? If I understand, the larger the aperture, the larger it would also be once reduced from close focusing (i.e. at the same magnification)? Or is this more depending on distance from the lens and longer lenses would have the aperture reduce less...?

Lightshow wrote:
I didn't see anything about your budget...

I don't have a specific budget, but I'm trying to save by not buying AF lenses, especially with the newer motors, stabiliers, etc. which I never use anyway. Otherwise I could just get the new Nikon or Sigma. I realize some of the most expensive ones are manual focus lenses... but the Nikon 55mm is good both in optics and built. I'm only looking for something that is about as good (or better), longer and doesn't require an extension tube.

duckrider wrote:
First try to use Your Micro Nikkor in reverse position, or a wide in reverse. Of course working distance will become smaller, the higher the magnification!

The main thing I'm trying to get is a longer working distance. The Nikon 55mm is extremely short, not just because of the FL, but also because the front lens is recessed. I think at 1:1 it's maybe 5cm (2") away, preventing me from using light in a way that I want.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
clarnibass wrote:
Thanks very much everyone, I'll look into those suggestions.

To clarify a few things.

drjs wrote:
1:2

I have the Nikon 55mm which has the 1:1 extension tube. I decided that for this longer lens I don't want one that requires a tube for 1:1.


If you don't want to use tubes, there are a few flat field teleconverters that would let you reach 1:1 without having to move closer to your subject. For example, the 01F 2x TC from Tamron is flat field corrected which turns its Adaptall 1:2 90mm macro into a 180mm 1:1 macro. Of course, you will loss two stop of lights like the tubes. But considering the maximum aperture for the Tamron 90 is 2.5, it isn't that bad.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
clarnibass wrote:
Thanks very much everyone, I'll look into those suggestions.


drjs wrote:
Also, at macro distance, the effective aperture is much smaller than 2.8.

Yes, not an issue other than maybe for focusing? If I understand, the larger the aperture, the larger it would also be once reduced from close focusing (i.e. at the same magnification)? Or is this more depending on distance from the lens and longer lenses would have the aperture reduce less...?



It only has to do with focus distance. At infinity, the lens is at maximum aperture as indicated, as soon as you start moving close, the effective aperture becomes smaller. Interestingly, Canon cameras doesn't show this while Nikon does. In the world of auto exposure, the camera's light meter would take this effect into account. However, it does mean that at macro distance with a longer lens, you will be forced to use very high ISO or tripod to compensate the loss of light. When you use a fairly long telephoto macro lens (>100mm) at close to 1 to 1 with a reasonable sharp aperture (say F8 or lower), you will loss so much light making field work unpractical. It is less of an issue in a studio shooting coins but I generally find 1:1 to confining for bugs/critters in the field. For distance work, I prefer my 70-210 Tamron SP although it only reaches about 1:3


PostPosted: Fri Aug 01, 2014 7:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks again!

drjs wrote:
It only has to do with focus distance. At infinity, the lens is at maximum aperture as indicated, as soon as you start moving close, the effective aperture becomes smaller.

When you say focus distance, do you mean the actual physical difference or magnification? The former is different at same magnification between different FL lenses. If I have two lenses, one longer, both f/2.8, would I get a larger max aperure with the longer lens when bot hare at 1:1? This isn't clear to me yet, though it doesn't really have anything to do with my choice for the new lens anyway.
For example with my 55mm f/3.5 lens, I find a very significant difference if trying to focus at f/3.5 or at f/5.6. I mean the aperture marked chosen on the lens, not the real aperture.

drjs wrote:
When you use a fairly long telephoto macro lens (>100mm) at close to 1 to 1 with a reasonable sharp aperture (say F8 or lower), you will loss so much light making field work unpractical. It is less of an issue in a studio shooting coins but I generally find 1:1 to confining for bugs/critters in the field.

Pretty much all of my (approx) 1:1 macro photos are with still subjects in a "studio". I don't take any macro photos of bugs, etc. I need the longer macro lens both to allow using some lighting that is impossible with my short lens and because I want a lens that can get to 1:1 without an extension tube. My current one is just 1:2 without the tube and just 1:2 to 1:1 with the tube, making it annoying to constantly remove and re-attach.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 01, 2014 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Maybe you should take a look at the achromatic close-up lenses. In many cases they are a better alternative to extension rings and bellows. You do not need to use a specific macro lens to get a high performance, for example.

Leica has always promoted its Elpro lenses for macro photography. Nikon used close-up lenses in the Medical Nikkor line with great success:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/special/120medical.htm
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/special/250medical.htm

This article by Marco Cavina discusses the (surprising for him) performance of an achromatic close-up lens together with a Nikon 80-200mm F4.5 zoom lens:

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Achromatic_close-up_lens/00_pag.htm

Note: The article is in Italian but you may translate it with Google.

Marumi sells an extensive line of excellent achromatic close-up lenses at a reasonable price.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 01, 2014 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If you're primarily in a studio environment, and are working at 1:1 plus or minus, then a duplication lens will do best for you. They have no focus helicoid so you need to use bellows. One nice thing about such a setup is you can remove the camera for other purposes without disturbing the macro setup.

The best duplication lens for 1:1, within a reasonable budget, is the fixed-aperture version of the Rodenstock 75mm f4 Apo Rodagon D M1:1 (75ARD1). The 75ARD1 does pretty well from 1:2...2:1 without aperture adjustment. If you want to go smaller mag than 1:2, you would want to get the adjustable-aperture version so you can stop down a bit.

If you are serious about going beyond 1:1 and into the 2:1...4:1 territory with best IQ, the lens of choice is the Canon 35mm f2.8 Macrophoto (35MP). It also requires a bellows.

Note that for most purposes within macro photography there is no benefit in IQ using an aperture bigger than the DLA of your camera.

edited to add: don't let the 75mm FL bother you. Most dedicated macro lenses you have available to you shorten focal length at higher magnifications. This is how they get to 1:1, and is why a 100mm lens can have longer WD than a 105mm, ie it shortens FL less.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 02, 2014 6:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The KIRON 105mm F2.8 Macro lens goes to 1:1 without tubes and has a good working distance.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 02, 2014 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
o.k., nobody did it unitl now, as far I cann see:

Far away working distance will be recieved with the Micro Nikkor 200mm of course:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/200mm-f4-micro-ais.htm

Without the detachable tripot collar it's a handy lens to work with, higher optical quality not reachable!


PostPosted: Sat Aug 02, 2014 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
For 1:1 long macro lens, +1 on Canon FD 200mm f/4 Macro (especially you have mirrorless camera).
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1