Gear consolidation: How often do you use your extension tubes?

Moving forward, I hope, I have sold my 40D and 100-400. I used both for a year and given price differences between the USA and Australia it cost me around $300 for a year's use.

Now, we move forward and in coming months and purchase either the 50D or the 1D4; I have decided to not purchase the 1D3. If the 1D4 isn't born in time for my next trip I will purchase the 50D and then buy the 1D4 whenever it is born. When I return to Australia I will sell the 50D or the 5D2 depending upon the 1D4 specs.

Oh yeah, I have decided to go with the 100 f/2.8 macro rather than use the 500D - I am doing Mike Moats online course.

Now for a question: how often do you really use your extension tubes? I have two 25mm tubes on hold with Adorama; what types of images do you shoot with the tubes, which lenses do you use the tubes with most often, and how often?

You all have been so helpful I am just going to keep pushing the envelope :D

Cheers,

OOPS - I see that there is an extension tube thread running right now - I will ask this question over there!

Why the shorter 100mm macro, as opposed to the 180mm Sigma/Canon longer focal length?
FYI= the extension tubes are always in my field bag, and get used quite often.

Chas

It's always a good idea to have a couple of extension tubes. They're good for macro, and I also use them on occasion with a long lens when I have issues with minimum focus distance.

Hi Jay use them all the time. Long lenses make good macro images My 500 is great for dragonflies .. just use the extension tube !!!

I only carry the 25mm and have 3 !!!

Hi Jay, I have a 105mm macro lens and find the working distance is often too close to my subjects which are easily scared, so I use tubes with the 105mm macro lens to give me a greater working distance for a similar magnification of the lens without the tubes :) I have also used them with the Canon 100-400 with good results.

Tell

Hi,

Last night I must have been either drunk with happiness that I sold the gear, or crying in my beer that I sold the gear because I could pass a polygraph this morning (in Australia) that I put a lengthy post on Dave Brown's extension tube thread before going to sleep. :o

Anyway, the questions I asked: what types of images do you shoot with the tubes, which lenses do you use the tubes with most often, and how often I would appreciate expansion of your answers. I do love to push the envelope ;)

I will start another thread regarding Chas' comment about the 180 compared to the 100 - .6" difference in working distance!

Tubes: Everyone is saying in substance that they use the tubes often - see above chart (too bad we can't put images in the middle of text!).

Al: "use them all the time. Long lenses make good macro images My 500 is great for dragonflies .. just use the tube!!!"

Doug: "I use them on occasion with a long lens when I have issues with minimum focus distance"

Perhaps this should be in the General Photographic section as a discussion of macro techniques; however, here we are.

Al, you use them all of the time: you see a dragonfly while out shooting BIF; my perception is that by the time you remove that 8.5lb lens, put on an extension tube, and reconnect to the body the fly has flown!

Doug, in what circumstances do you find yourself with minimum focus distance issues?

Are you using them in other circumstances? For example, do you use them when you find yourself too close to a stationary bird?

I can understand going out for a shoot specifically with a long lens and the extension tube connected; I do not understand when you use them on the "fly".

Your additional comments are eagerly anticipated!

Jay when the bird action slows and dragonflies are available will go after them and the 500 with tubes is just perfect !!!

At the beach I also use the tubes since we do get that close to the little guys when we crawl around.
They are very useful and always carry them around !! Hook two together !!

Hi and thanks guys, had a long informative conversation with Mike Moats. The upshot was that the 300 w/1 - 2 tubes is perfect for bugs etc that you don't want to scare; given that I have the 70 - 200 and the 300 I will go with the 100 macro. Someday if I am super serious about macro I can upgrade to the 180. Whenever I am out and about and I have the 100 macro I would have the 70 - 200 to which I can add the tubes and that is almost the same as the 180.

Cheers,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

Hi and thanks guys, had a long informative conversation with Mike Moats. The upshot was that the 300 w/1 - 2 tubes is perfect for bugs etc that you don't want to scare; given that I have the 70 - 200 and the 300 I will go with the 100 macro. Someday if I am super serious about macro I can upgrade to the 180. Whenever I am out and about and I have the 100 macro I would have the 70 - 200 to which I can add the tubes and that is almost the same as the 180.

Cheers,

---

Jay,

Just my opinion...but, it appears from all your postings you are trying to cover too many subjects and disciplines at the same time. You know what they say - Jack of all trades, Master of none ;) It takes time, better to go slow and Master them all! I would skip the 100 macro, extra weight and the extension tubes will work quite well with 70-200 for now.

I would first get a good grounding in photographic fundamentals and understanding the functionality and ergonomics of your camera.

Respectfully,

Chas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charles Glatzer

Jay,

Just my opinion...but, it appears from all your postings you are trying to cover too many subjects and disciplines at the same time. You know what they say - Jack of all trades, Master of none ;) It takes time, better to go slow and Master them all! I would skip the 100 macro, extra weight and the extension tubes will work quite well with 70-200 for now.

I would first get a good grounding in photographic fundamentals and understanding the functionality and ergonomics of your camera.

Respectfully,

Chas

---

Thanks Chas, and you are absolutely right!

Because I am going on a 13-month trip I am exposing myself to a bit of everything. Believe it or not, this is the first time in 18 years that I have challenged myself in this way. In 2001 I sailed across the Pacific and have been sailing/drifting every since - it has been a blast/still is!

If I wasn't going away for such a long period of time I would concentrate on perhaps one or two areas only for a period of time and then move to another area. Instead, I am exposing myself :o to lots of areas - BIF (workshops with Jim, James, and everyone on BPN), landscape (workshop with John Shaw), macro (workshop with Mike), and Photoshop (studying everyday and a workshop with Robert).

Oh yeah, and I also dabble with underwater photography :D.

I do truly appreciate what you are saying and once I leave on our trip I am going to designate a period of time to only doing one type of photography and then another to both concentrate on that particular methodology and to limit the equipment I carry on a particular outing.

Again, I do appreciate what you are saying, and I do agree with you. Thank you for not hesitating to share your opinion; it is appreciated and respected. I look forward to a workshop with you in the future.

Cheers Mate

MFD can be an issue in several circumstances Jay. I've been places where there are feeders and you can't physically get far enough from them for a long lens to focus without extension tubes. The other situation is when a bird lets you get really close or you're working small birds from a blind (inside your MFD).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tell Dickinson

Hi Jay, I have a 105mm macro lens and find the working distance is often too close to my subjects which are easily scared, so I use tubes with the 105mm macro lens to give me a greater working distance for a similar magnification of the lens without the tubes :) I have also used them with the Canon 100-400 with good results. Tell

---

I thought the purpose of the tubes was to reduce the near focus distance of a lens. Tell, you are saying that you use the tubes to give a greater working distance - ???

I missed something!

Jay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

I thought the purpose of the tubes was to reduce the near focus distance of a lens. Tell, you are saying that you use the tubes to give a greater working distance - ???

I missed something!

---

I think what's happening in this case is the lens is an internal-focus design which focuses by changing its focal length. At the shorter focus distances it's a shorter focal length than at longer distances. Adding an extension tube reduces the focus distance without changing the lens' focal length so the magnification at any particular distance is higher - and conversely when holding magnification constant instead of subject distance, the subject distance is greater when the focal length is longer, i.e., when the extension tube is used to reduce focus distance instead of changing the lens' focal length.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

I thought the purpose of the tubes was to reduce the near focus distance of a lens. Tell, you are saying that you use the tubes to give a greater working distance - ???

---

Hi Jay, yes tubes do reduce the near focus distance but it also increases magnification for a similar subject distance, therefore you can increase your working distance while keeping the same magnification.

As an example, just suppose with a particular lens and camera you get x1 magnification at (say) 4 inches from the front of the lens to the subject, if you put a tube on then refocus with the front of lens to subject still 4 inches you will get more magnification, say x1.3 for arguments sake. Therefore you back away from the subject to (say) 6 inches and you are back to x1 magnification. So you have increased your working distance (in this case) by 2 inches for the same magnification. Obviously the measurements in my example are made up but the theory works, try it :)

Tell

Thanks Tell, you answer raises the question whether when on a tripod, for example, adding my two Canon 25mm tubes will move my 100 Macro closer to the working distance of the 180 at 1:1 magnification. Cheers, Jay

Jay,

I use my 100mm macro mostly for shooting larger insects and butterflys. The extension tubes really come in handy for shooting smaller insects such as honeybees, beetles and the like. I also use extension tubes when shooting small birds with an older 500mm lens i have. It is really helpful in shortening up the minnimum focusing distance needed for such work.

God bless,

chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

Thanks Tell, you answer raises the question whether when on a tripod, for example, adding my two Canon 25mm tubes will move my 100 Macro closer to the working distance of the 180 at 1:1 magnification. Cheers, Jay

---

Exactly Jay, and 100mm macro lens + extension tubes are easier to carry than 180mm macro lens :) There is always a down side and you do lose a little light but I have never found that to be a big problem.

Tell

That's great! I have used the tubes for my 70-200 and the 300; never thought about using them for the 100 to maintain 1:1 and have a greater working distance. Love BPN. Thanks Guys, Cheers!