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 Photo Sharing & Discussion Macro 
Thread started 07 Mar 2010 (Sunday) 21:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Extension tube Magnification

 
silvrr
Goldmember
Avatar
2,755 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 134
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Chicago,IL
     
Mar 07, 2010 21:42 |  #1

Quoted from LordV's macro thread:

Magnification with extension tubes
For a non macro lens with extenson tubes the magnification is given by the formula
magnification = length of ext tubes (mm)/focal length of lens (mm).
So for a 50mm lens with a set of extension tubes totalling 68mm the max magnification = 68/50 = 1.36:1

Does the orginal MFD of the lens used effect this equation? 70mm on my 24-70 does not give the same result as 70mm on my 70-200. Using the above equation 70mm should always give the same mag.

It makes since to me as with tubes it all about decreasing your working distance but it makes me question that equation. Or is that equation just a guideline?


Past Sale Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LordV
Macro Photo-Lord of the Year 2006
Avatar
62,297 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6868
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Worthing UK
     
Mar 08, 2010 00:11 |  #2

silvrr wrote in post #9749365 (external link)
Quoted from LordV's macro thread:


Does the orginal MFD of the lens used effect this equation? 70mm on my 24-70 does not give the same result as 70mm on my 70-200. Using the above equation 70mm should always give the same mag.

It makes since to me as with tubes it all about decreasing your working distance but it makes me question that equation. Or is that equation just a guideline?

Hi the equation is just a guide but is normally fairly accurate with prime lenses.
I think the situation with zooms is a bit different where because of the optics the focal lengths when focused at min focus are rather different (generally lower). I think if you try your two lenses at 70mm on a tripod focused on a subject say 10 feet away the FOVs will be slightly different.

The other thing is that if one is a "semi macro" lens ie it does focus a lot closer giving a significant magnification then that should be used in the equation.

ie Mag= existing mag + (length of tubes/focal length) - normally the existing mag of non- macro lenses is not significant.
Hope that helps.
As I've said a few times it's always better to check the magnification by photographing the mm scale of a ruler.

Brian v.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lordv/ (external link)
http://www.lordv.smugm​ug.com/ (external link)
Macro Hints and tips
Canon 600D, 40D, 5D mk2, 7D, Tamron 90mm macro, Sigma 105mm OS, Canon MPE-65,18-55 kit lens X2, canon 200mm F2.8 L, Tamron 28-70mm xrdi, Other assorted bits

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
silvrr
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,755 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 134
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Chicago,IL
     
Mar 08, 2010 07:55 |  #3

LordV wrote in post #9750125 (external link)
Hi the equation is just a guide but is normally fairly accurate with prime lenses.
I think the situation with zooms is a bit different where because of the optics the focal lengths when focused at min focus are rather different (generally lower). I think if you try your two lenses at 70mm on a tripod focused on a subject say 10 feet away the FOVs will be slightly different.

The other thing is that if one is a "semi macro" lens ie it does focus a lot closer giving a significant magnification then that should be used in the equation.

ie Mag= existing mag + (length of tubes/focal length) - normally the existing mag of non- macro lenses is not significant.
Hope that helps.
As I've said a few times it's always better to check the magnification by photographing the mm scale of a ruler.

Brian v.

Thats what I figured but figured I would ask. Thanks.


Past Sale Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MDJAK
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
24,745 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 204
Joined Nov 2004
Location: New York
     
Mar 15, 2010 20:30 |  #4

wish I had even a little math smarts to be able to understand this stuff.




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

2,007 views & 0 likes for this thread, 3 members have posted to it.
Extension tube Magnification
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Macro 
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 Monkeytoes
1362 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.