Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
Thread started 14 Aug 2013 (Wednesday) 18:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Extension Tubes - how many is too many?

 
Chiefy
Goldmember
Avatar
2,472 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 387
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
     
Aug 14, 2013 18:13 |  #1

I have searched through the forums but did not locate an answer to a question I had. Currently I have an EF 25 extn tube which I like to use on my 100-400mm. I would like to get even closer and add another tube, but I don't know how many tubes I can add before I go too far and the lens will no longer focus. I went through the lens documentation at the Canon website but again, I could not find an answer.

Is there a method to calculate how many tubes you can add before focus becomes impossible for each different lens?


IDX Mark III/1DX Mark II/EOS R5- 16-35L f4 IS - 135L - 24-70L f2.8 IS II - 70-200L f2.8 IS II- 100-400 IIL IS - RF 100 Macro f2.8L IS - 85mm 1.4 IS L RF 28-70 f/2 L- Σ 50 1.4 Art - Σ 70 Macro - TC 1.4 II - EF 12/25 II - Profoto A1 - Manfrotto 055CXPRO3/Really Right Stuff BH55
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,434 posts
Gallery: 223 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4798
Joined Dec 2008
     
Aug 14, 2013 18:50 |  #2

Theoretically, you can probably focus down to the front element. Will you have enough light, without it shining into the lens, and will your DoF be unusable? I don't know. But you might find this of use:

Suppose you have a lens of focal length F which can focus down to distance X when mounted on your camera. Suppose you use an extension tube of length L. Then you can focus down to the distance given by the formula
F(XF +XL - Lf)/(XL -LF +f^2)
In words, you do the following. First multiply the shortest distance by the focal length, the multiply it by the tube lenth and then multiply the tube length by the focal length. Add the first two numbers and subtract the third. Then multiply the result by the focal length. That gives you the numerator.
Next take the product of the shortest distance by the tube length and the product of the tube length with the focal length, both of which you already calculated, subtract the second from the first, and then add the square of the focal length. That gives you the denominator. Divide the numerator by the denominator, and you are done.
Here is an example. Let the focal length be 50 mm, the shortest distance 200 mm and the tube length 25 mm. Then with the tube, you can focus down to
50 x (200 x 50 + 200 x 25 - 25 x 50)/(200 x 25 - 25 x 50 + 50 x 50)
which comes out to 110 mm.I wish this were simpler than it is, but I don't see any useful way to simplify it further.

I found it here:

http://photo.net/nikon​-camera-forum/00IZwD (external link)


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 227
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Aug 14, 2013 19:01 |  #3

The longer the focal length of the lens, the more tubes you could add and still focus (manually). However, you'd better have very strong, rigid tubes or risk having the camera or lens (depending on where the tripod mount is) fall when that long stack of tubes snaps from the weight at the end of it.

Your main problem will be the decreasing aperture; if you add tubes equal to the focal length to any lens it'll cost you two stops, and get pretty dim. Where it gets tricky is where the lens is internal-focusing (like the 100 macro), which actually changes effective focal length as you focus closer. IIRC, at 1:1, it's really about a 70 mm lens (and at around f/5.6).

I've used my full stack of Kenko tubes (12, 20 and 36 mm) on my 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4 with no particular problem, although adding a TC to the stack does make AF problematic. The 100-400 would probably handle 40-50 mm of tubes with no AF problems.

If you want to figure the numbers, figure the physical aperture is fl (focal length)/f-stop. Take that number and divide the (fl+tube length) by that physical aperture value to get the effective f-stop. If it gets much past f/6.3 (f/9.6 if you've got the latest firmware on your Mk III), you'll lose AF.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dodgyexposure
Goldmember
2,874 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 234
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Aug 14, 2013 19:08 |  #4

My simple solution after buying some Kenko tubes (12, 20 and 36mm) was to put each of them, and combinations of them, on each of my lenses and measure the effect on focussing distance.

Broadly, for wider lenses, the maximum focussing distance reduces rapidly with increasing tube length. The effect is less for longer lenses. This is the result that you expect from the calcuations in the previous post (EDIT: Moose's post). From memory, multiple tubes (i.e. longer than 36mm) were practically useless for anything less than about 85mm (but I would have to check my measurements to be sure).

The effect on dedicated macro lenses is much less. I can use all 3 tubes on my 100L without any change on minimum focussing distance - the working distance is reduced by the physical length of the tubes, but still usable.


Cheers, Damien

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chiefy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,472 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 387
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
     
Aug 14, 2013 19:13 |  #5

I did not want to buy another extension tube if I could not use it but now I think I can fiqure out what will work. Thanks to all for the information.


IDX Mark III/1DX Mark II/EOS R5- 16-35L f4 IS - 135L - 24-70L f2.8 IS II - 70-200L f2.8 IS II- 100-400 IIL IS - RF 100 Macro f2.8L IS - 85mm 1.4 IS L RF 28-70 f/2 L- Σ 50 1.4 Art - Σ 70 Macro - TC 1.4 II - EF 12/25 II - Profoto A1 - Manfrotto 055CXPRO3/Really Right Stuff BH55
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Joe ­ Ravenstein
Goldmember
2,338 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2010
Location: E Tx
     
Aug 14, 2013 21:16 |  #6

I bought the Kenko 3 piece automatic ext tube set to let me get the best effects for the $$


Canon 60D,18-55mm,55-250mm,50mm compact macro, AF ext tubes. Sigma 8-16mm uwa, 18-250mm, 85mm F1.4, 150-500mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,005 views & 0 likes for this thread, 5 members have posted to it.
Extension Tubes - how many is too many?
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is johntmyers418
988 guests, 178 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.