Macro rig with a 50mm f/1.8, what tubes? [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

View Full Version : Macro rig with a 50mm f/1.8, what tubes?

MadCow

13th of April 2008 (Sun), 18:48

LordV

14th of April 2008 (Mon), 02:27

What tubes should I look for if I want to do macro with my 50mm f/1.8? I see kenko's tubes on B&H, but they are $170 and that's a little too much. Do I really need auto focus with a macro rig? I'll have more n00bish questions later ;)

You don't need AF but you do need aperture control. You can get a cheaper set from Adorama - pro-optic around $85 I think. It's worth getting auto ext tubes. working with no aperture control on an auto lens is a pain (either shooting wide open or getting a dim viewfinder).

Brian V.

MadCow

14th of April 2008 (Mon), 17:49

http://www.adorama.com/MCAETPX.html?searchinfo=tubes&item_no=1

Are those the tubes you are talking about? Is there actually any glass inside a tube? Or are they just hollow tubes with lens mounts on them? and the electronics of course. But thanks Brain!! that price is just perfect. Hey, one question though, how is the quality of pictures that I will get? Ohhh I might even look into making a flash bracket!!!!

darkdragon

14th of April 2008 (Mon), 17:55

Is there actually any glass inside a tube? Or are they just hollow tubes with lens mounts on them? and the electronics of course.

There is no glass, just hollow tubes with mounts and maybe electronics. I got my Kenko set on ebay for about $100 after shipping. So if you have time, you might try that route.

I use a full set of Kenko on my 50mm to get some good images. I think i ended up with something like 2.5:1 macro with the setup.

MadCow

14th of April 2008 (Mon), 21:41

darkdragon

15th of April 2008 (Tue), 11:53

That is ridiculous!!! $80 for some metal tubes with some PCB in them!!! I don't think $80 is worth that. I'm looking at getting a Sigma 50mm macro lens instead. I'm looking around for samples with it, any links would be great!!

$80 is too much to turn all your lenses into macro or near-macro lenses? I'd have to argue with that. If you buy a Sigma 50mm macro and find that you don't get many shots because you have to be too close, then you'll have to buy a 100mm. How is that a better "deal" than the tubes?

I've found that the set of Kenko tubes I purchased have been used a LOT and i can get 1:1 and 2:1 easily. Of course when I want to move in closer, I'll need to get the 5:1 MP-E - but there is a bit of difference between $80 tubes and $950 lens.

tenoverthenose

15th of April 2008 (Tue), 12:42

I had the Sigma 50mm Macro. Its a great lens and very sharp, but I didn't find it as useful in practice. In use as a macro, you have to be really close - so close that lighting becomes a serious concern. I eventually sold the lens and got a full set of kenko tubes originally thinking of using with my 50mm 1.8.

It was one of the better equipment decisions I have made. The tubes work great with the nifty fifty (cost less than the sigma) and I can also use them on my other lenses.

Also, if you ever do feel the need to get a Canon 100 macro, the tubes will work just fine on it.

darkdragon

15th of April 2008 (Tue), 13:03

Also, if you ever do feel the need to get a Canon 100 macro, the tubes will work just fine on it.

Funny, i was just coming here to do a search about that exact thing. You read my mind.

Blue S2

15th of April 2008 (Tue), 13:10

Tubes are fantastic! I've used a 12mm with my 35L for interesting results!

Also you must consider working distance. The longer the lens, the longer the working distance. This means more chance for light, and less chance of spooking living creatures. (or getting stung, bit, squirted, etc...)

It depends what you are shooting for. The 150 sigma or 180 canon would be ideal for working distances, especially with a full set of tubes. I use the 100 macro, and with a full set of tubes, I'm working at about two inches from subjects.

I have the Kenko auto set that I got very cheap on ebay. I use the full set. I love em' .