These things? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/375102-REG/Kenko_AEXTUBEDGC_Auto_Extension_Tube_Set.html
Price seems pretty reasonable if that's what they are.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Google Maps vs Waze vs Apple Maps vs physical paper maps?
Macro Photography
- Thread starter bwana
- Start date
-
- Tags
- photography
Price seems pretty reasonable if that's what they are.
marine1
Honorary Master
This is especially for Kalvaer (he knows the size of this beast), to show the advantage of extension tubes. These are not cropped.
Sigma 105 macro lens + 20mm extension tubes
Sigma 105 macro lens + 32mm extension tubes
Note how shallow the depth of field is (and this was taken at f13).
As usual, this one was in an unbelievably difficult position to get at, just to taunt me, so I'm still after that back aspect that Kalvaer got.
What is that?
Well this is close-ish up
http://www.flickr.com/photos/just_ice/3165941833/
And this is closer, (I promptly killed it after this pic...)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/just_ice/3165931967/
Bear in mind that you literally have to be on top of the thing when taking a really close up pic with a point and shoot camera
http://www.flickr.com/photos/just_ice/3165941833/
And this is closer, (I promptly killed it after this pic...)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/just_ice/3165931967/
Bear in mind that you literally have to be on top of the thing when taking a really close up pic with a point and shoot camera
Kalvaer
Expert Member
I only recognised it after looking at BigAl's photo's on the link he provided earlier in the thread. I believe they are "Lace Orb-web spider (Uloborus plumipes)" (taken from his link.. as I had no clue)What is that?
Kalvaer
Expert Member
I think so... From what I understand they extend the distance between the lens and the sensor/film on the camera, Thereby increasing the magnification of the subject on that sensor/film plane.
Surely that will cause vignetting? More so with EF-s lenses than EF.
(My apologies but I only speak Canon - EF-S are lenses designed for the smaller crop sensors)
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
No, the other way around. Moving them further away means the projected image becomes bigger, so you're cropping the sides. But it also alters the focus distance, so you lose (iirc) infinity.
Kalvaer
Expert Member
Have not been able to try it yet.. Though I might be able to get something simular when I get my new T mount for my Wifes Camera and use my old Astro Tubes.
The site I checked out when BigAl mentioned it was this http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/closeuplenses.html and http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/other/close-up_macro/macro_6.html
The site I checked out when BigAl mentioned it was this http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/closeuplenses.html and http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/other/close-up_macro/macro_6.html
This was no different. It was about 2m above the ground, under an awning, so I had to use two ladders - one to rest my elbows on, and one to stand on. Then trying to squeeze the flash into the space (at one stage I had my missus holding the flash); trying to take the pic vertically up (these guys always seem to have their backs pointing down); having my forehead trigger the exposure lock button while I was trying to get into position. I'm really surprised that these came out at all
I would try to convince you to do that too
Keep your eye on Outdoorphoto's classifieds, you can often pick up amazing bargains there when the guys dump "lesser" kit for snob lenses 
That's the set I've got. Mine is an older one though - doesn't work with EF-S lenses. I got it really cheaply off Ebay from someone in Hong Kong (about R700).
What is that?
The other thing to remember here (Kalvaer & I did talk about it on Anubis's violin spider thread) is that they are unbelievably small (this one about 8mm) and *totally* harmless - they don't have poison glands.
The pics here were taken with the 350d, and no vignetting there (no crop on the pics). With the tubes, you move closer to the subject, which is the reason for the larger image. I don't think there's any extra cropping going on.
With the 12+20mm tubes, max focus distance is just over a metre.
The magnification increase is roughly 1.3x with 32mm. IIRC, with all three tubes (68mm), the magnification is 2.6x, but then the minimum focusing distance is so short it's difficult to find your subject and you often end up bumping them (which you don't want
).
Duh - of course. Not sure what I was thinking.
Kalvaer
Expert Member
Sounds very simular to my situation
I wouldn't have spent so much time trying though if you hadn't helped me identify it. Still an ugly critter though.But But but.. The Omympus is just so.. Ahhh.. Runs away.. LOL.I would try to convince you to do that too
I know it makes sense to rather get a decent lens, but I've been dying to get the E520 for ages now, Specifically for its 10 x optical zoom focuser. It basically zooms the image 10x on a spot that you choose, allowing you to manually focus at that point to check the image. With Astrophotography (and macro work actually) I think this function will be incredible.
Any recommendations on a specific lens to look out for? I'll be researching www.cameralabs.com most of the day today, but always easier if you know where to start
A mate of mine has just gone into Oly (dunno what camera, not familiar with them). He's a Leica freak, and I'm sure his reasoning is the 4/3 compatability for one day when he can afford the Leica body.
[edit]He also has a Sigma 105 for 4/3 for macro[/edit]
With Liveview on the newer Canon cameras, you can also zoom in to check the focus. I tried it once, but was too difficult to get the hang of. I also prefer using the smaller (lighter) 350d, rather than the 40d, for macro.
All the macro lenses are super sharp, so it all boils down to how you use it. I'd recommend something in the 100mm range. The AF on the Canon is the fastest, but I never use AF for macro. The Sigma 105 and the Tamron 90 (dunno about Tokina - never seen one) extend to about double their length while focusing. This is a problem for some people, but has never bugged me (again, as I'm pretty much at the magnification I want before I take the shot, because of MF). The shorter lenses (50 - 75mm) are somewhat cheaper, so have a look at those too.
If I spot a bargain, I'll let you know.
Last edited:
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Late night posting
I'm pretty sure I remember there was, but I may be wrong. I had one of those bellow type ones - M42 mount. It makes sense: the circle on the back of the lens is smaller than the film frame (same goes for EF-S lenses and the crop sensor) so the projected image must enlarge somewhat - if you move the lens further away it must spread further then.
ToxicBunny
Oi! Leave me out of this...
This here would be my first attempt at Macro... Not a brilliant start, but hopefully i'll get to grips with it soon enough
marine1
Honorary Master
Very nice photo Toxic
ToxicBunny
Oi! Leave me out of this...
Why fanks...
Gotta just work on getting the WHOLE critter in focus
Gotta just work on getting the WHOLE critter in focus
Kalvaer
Expert Member
I agree with the focus part. I spent a long time yesterday trying to take photo's of this orange fruit beetle type thing that I found outside, but just couldn't get it all in focus or kept on shaking to much.
Though thats a pretty cool pic none the less. Dont know how you got that close with out him flying away. Dragonflies always seem to get away from me before I can even focus
Though thats a pretty cool pic none the less. Dont know how you got that close with out him flying away. Dragonflies always seem to get away from me before I can even focus