So, which would you rather have? The dedicated macro lens or the macro extension tubes? See something on the show that you want to buy? Head on over to kit.com/PhotoJoseph •• MEIKE MK-P-AF3A Automatic Extension Tube •• geni.us/1GosC2 •• Panasonic 30MM f/2.8 Macro •• geni.us/6oztGL •• Panasonic Leica 45mm f/2.8 Macro •• geni.us/HBe88NJ •• Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm f/1.4 •• geni.us/ww4A6LA
very informative video, I normally use reverse adapter ring with tubes and 35mm lens, and the results quite impressive rather using only tubes. but takes hell lot of practice to use adapter ring, but it's worthy if you not going to buy expensive macro lens. Cheers for video
Many many many years ago, I used a Vivitar 90mm macro lens on my Konica Autoreflex TC. About 4 years I bought a FujiFilm X-E3 camera and today I put an X-mount adapter on the old macro lens. I will give it a go to assess its performance. It looks like I made the right decision to resurrect the old lens instead of going the extension tube route.
I started my photography journey back in 1962. Back then we tended have one, two, maybe at most three lenses. No macro. They were rare back then. I didn't shoot any macro before the late 70's when I stepped down to 35mm. Back then most macro was shot using tubes, and many so called macro lenses only went to 1:4, 1:3, or 1:2, and to get 1:1 required adding tubes to the macro lens. I often laugh at RU-vid reviewers who claim that only 1:1 is true macro. When I was starting out 1:4 was common, and 1:2 was considered great. Only bigger studios could afford a Nikkor 1:1 or some other fancy-schmancy expensive macro lens, and us little guys rarely saw them. However, back then true macro meant 10x magnification and between 1:1 and 10x was often called micro-photography mostly because the photos were often shot using a microscope for scientific purposes. People often wonder why Nikon calls their macro lenses "micro." It is because they were early into macro lenses, and they started making them when 1:1 was commonly still called micro. It is just a hangover from the 1950's. When competitors started making their own versions, they misused the macro name to make their lenses seem to be even better than the Nikkors, and the macro name stuck. Just a bit of trivia from living a long time :) Tubes worked just fine with manual lenses. The era of macro lenses becoming common didn't happen until auto focus arrived. Once AF arrived, lenses needed electronic connections with the camera body, and tubes didn't have electrical connections. It seemed to take years before tube makers worked out that they needed electronic contacts to be attractive to buyers, but by that time people had started buying macro lenses, and so the tubes became uncommon, and these days a lot of photographers don't realize how useful they can be. Panasonic used to make them for MFT but a combination of overcharging and lack of popularity lead to Panasonic discontinuing them. They sometimes come up for sale on eBay, but it has been a while since I have seen the Lumix ones. But be ware that "automatic" extension tubes with electronic contacts for communication with the camera are best. Too many people buy the very cheapest then discover there are no contacts and can be frustrating to use.
This is honestly one of the best reviews of any photo equipment I've seen on here. Non-bias, approaches from multiple viewpoints, both practical and analytical. Excellent! Earnt yourself a sub :)
Thanks for an excellent video. I do a lot of close-up and macro work (pathology, flat artwork, flowers, insects, coins, jewelry, paper money). I use macro lenses, extension tubes, bellows, lens reversal rings, and supplemental close-up lenses. All work well and all have their pros and cons.
I use the Olympus macro 60mm. The other macro lenses were too close to the subject, which requires pushing a lot more light around the lens to compensate. A little overpriced, but the Olympus 60mm Macro has the best lens hood I've ever used.
i used this on my sony emount 18-105mm G lens, i used both tubes and no wonder i have difficulties on focusing.. now i know why.. THANKS a BUNCH i feel blessed to watch your tutorial
Exactly the right video at the right time. Answered my questions. Very direct, not a lot of meandering. Excellent content and, again, right when I'm considering these options. Thanks!
I had the canon 100 mm macro. It’s an awesome lens. I now have a Sony 90mm macro, which is also an excellent lens. Great portrait lens, too. Super sharp. I also tried the extension tubes on a canon 70-200. It worked great but not quite the same image quality.
great explanation and answered all the questions I had, especially "can a macro lens be used as a regular lens". I hadn't seen anyone else address certain points. Great video. Thank you!
Hi! What would be the magnification of the use of an APS-C camera having a 50mm lens and 68mm of extension tubes? And, if I were to add to the above, a lens reversal adapter, what would the magnification be? Many thanks for your anticipated response - love you vids!
I liked the clear explanation of the tubes vs lens usages and drawbacks: the real life shots were particularly helpful. I'm looking at a Fuji mcex-11 second hand tube on sale for £40 (about $54) to use with my Fujifilm x-t3, so will probably go ahead. If I get hooked on macro photography there are plenty of options out there for actual macro lenses - when I find the cash! Thanks for the review :-)
Speaking about the difference between a macro lens and a non-macro lens, another aspect is the optimization of the optical schema to a certain focusing distances (at least it was in the pre-CAD era). It is quite hard to create a lens that would be equally sharp/aberrationless through the whole range of the focusing distances at all its aperture values. Instead a trade-off is usually made according to the most likely usage scenario. For example, a wide lens (say,
Very well explained! The difference in sharpness is however noticeable, although on a rather small level, but noticeable nonetheless. One thing I would add is using a telephoto lens for macrophotography with extension tubes. The minimal focal distance with extension tubes for wide angle lenses will be too narrow. Using a telephoto lens will increase the minimal focus distance and make it more practical.
thanks.. One other factor is the size of the macro lens. I have a 200 mm macro that seems to put the macro subject out of arms reach (literally). With tubes and a 50 the subject is right there.
This video is so helpful. I was about to buy a extension set, but your advice on the minimum focal distance is crucial since my 18-55 wont be able to handle most of the tubes
I bought a set of macro tubes from Amazon not that long after you last macro video that were cheaper than the Meike ones were where. I personally think they are made by the same company just with different branding on them as the ar identical and they work great. All of the m43 mount ones listed on Amazon Australia are 2 piece sets of a 10 and 16 which is a shame as combining them for 24mm to use with the 25mm primes would have been great in some situations but often find the FOV too tight. One specific issue I have found with using the tubes is with chromatic aberrations on some mostly zoom lenses often when shooting flowers there is a large red/orange border to some petals which can be more than Lightroom can fix. One tip I have found useful when handholding is to manually focus often somewhere in the middle of the range and "zoom" with your body in a burst and hopefully you will get one where you wanted it focused.This is better than trying to use the AF most of the time as it is faster and if you take enough similarly framed images with different focus you can stack them to increase the DOP without getting too much of the background in focus. I would also use a shutter speed as fast as you can get it (500+) without needing to push the iso too high and in general especially if you are shooting flowers you will want to be using an aperture of at least f8 too. I don't have a dedicated macro lens and am not sure I need one now as the 25mm with the 10 or 16mm tube on are good enough for now. I would also say any edge softness is in probably 90% of cases an advantage as long as the softness doesn't start where your subject is as it will help make the background or other framing parts of your images more soft and less of a distraction. On a side not as you are a Panasonic ambassador I hope you are going to be releasing a video about the new full frame cameras that are going to be announced in just over 4 hours from the time I am writing. I am sure many like myself would be very interested in seeing what you think about it and maybe seeing you test it like you did with the GH5. As it is a different mount I would be interested to know if you think you would likely switch to it or at least shoot partly with it and partly m43? I know I am mostly like to be interested in the 24mp version as that is all the resolution I need but not sure if I want to start a 3rd system especially as I could also get a Z6 as I shoot with Nikon gear too.
Great video...might also be worth mentioning that when shooting macro with a micro four thirds sensor you'll get an image crop that appears to be increased magnification over crop and full frame sensors using the same kit anyway due to the mft sensor size. Whole different discussion but some say this is a big advantage for mft over other sensor sizes. I shoot in all three and slightly prefer crop sensors over full frame and mft when shooting macro videos.
This cleared up a few things for me thank you. I had a 90mm Tamron macro and loved it. When it was stolen along with my 7D and L series lenses I had to slowly replace my lenses. I tried the extension tubes due to the low cost. I like them but I feel like they are just ok. My dedicated macro was much easier to use and I was able to get better pictures with it. After watching your video it makes more sense why the pics were better with the true macro lens. Liked and subbed!
Why don’t my Kenko extension tubes work in my Canon R6 with a Sigma 105mm macro lens. They have worked with all my previous Canon cameras and the same macro. Lens. Thanks!
Awesome video and for the cost much easier to decide to try this before opting for a full on macro lens. That being said, I'm now to photography, I'd like a recommendation for what tubes to buy. Want to help out so if you provide a link so you can get some credit that be great. I shoot a Panasonic GH5 but have the Metabones Speed Booster Ultra to fit EF lenses. My lenses are all EF at this point. I have the Canon 50mm f1.8, Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6, and the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8. Please help if you can and thanks again
Hm, a rube on an adapted lens might not work but it’s worth a try. I’d put the tube between the camera and the speed booster. So, the same tubes I linked to in the description would do the trick. Good luck!
Usually it puts the focus point too close, but it is worth trying if you’re going for that super macro! Remember depth of field, already tight in a macro lens, may become too shallow to work with.
So helpful in explaining what the diff is. I have a E Mount Sony A-6000. What mid priced macro lens would you recommend for Shooting Flowers? Again, thanks so much and will definitely buy through your site. Thank you!!!
I have a question. Can I use extension tube with a true macro lens? Does it make more effective? Also if I use the Raynox DCR 250 with it, can I have even better macro?
Great comparison. Every few minutes, you had me changing my mind on whether to return these extension tubes and save up for a macro lens instead. LOL! I'm having an issue with these extension tubes. I just got them. I can't get them to autofocus with my lenses/camera. Could you give me a hand/tip please? I have a Nikon D5100, a 17-70mm lens and a 50mm lens. I bought the MEIKE N-AF1-A Macro Electronic Mount Auto Foucs Macro Metal Extension Tube Adapter for Nikon DSLR (Amazon).
Thanks for a very helpful video! Would you recommend using extension tubes for scanning 35mm negatives? I'm using a Lumix G85 with a light box. Thinking I could photograph an area a little larger than the negative, so I could crop to reduce distortion around the edges.
I am doing the same and found them blury at the edges but I stopped down the apature a lot plus more light or longer exposure and it improved dramaticly. I tested this with some fly screen in a slide holder to gauge the result clearly. You also want a bit of depth of field as the film may not be quite flat.
You'd have to test it. As you saw here it's not as sharp, but it's pretty darn good. I suppose it depends on how good you want it to be ;-) And smart to plan to leave a border to crop out, for sure.
With all respect, the aperture was wide open so it's softer, but usually in a macro you want lots of details, around f/8, which would fix the softness in the edge. Another thing, you could use reverse rings, by doing that the 24mm would have more magnification compared to 35mm and it's a even cheaper solution, not to mention, as annoying as it is to hold, it can be done by only reversing the lens without the ring, cost, $0,00
Hi Joseph, thanks for the informative video! I found it while wondering about the same combination (ex tubes plus PL 25mm), but I wonder where did you find the 10+14mm tubes? Everything I find is 10+16 (as you do at the end of the video), and I was wondering whether that 1mm of surplus would still make impossible to focus? Thank you!
thanks for your video I have a question about the maximum focusing distance, I know if you add an extension tube on a lens. you will lose the focus to infinity. however I also wanna know how it affects the maximum focusing distance? I mean it shorten the minimum focusing so as to take macro photography what if i just want to take a portrait photography at indoor but not macro, I just want to have a closer focusing distance but still have some space between the object , Does extension suit for these situation? Thanks a lot
Helpful, thanks. I'm almost on board. I have used neither tubes nor macro lenses and trying to learn. My concern with the macro lens was that I have to get so close to the subject that the camera blocks light or casts a shadow. Before this video I misunderstood and thought that there was a sort of "macro mode" on the lens that I switch in and out of, and I assumed that in "macro mode" I HAD to be about an inch or so away. I still don't clearly understand. - Are you saying that I can back up and shoot at ANY distance from the subject (1 inch, 2 inches, 4 inches...)? - If I'm shooting a piece of jewelry with my G9 and that Panasonic 30mm f2.8 and I want to shoot a "macro" shot from 3 inches away to get as close as I can and still get proper lighting, can I do that? - Is "macro" nothing more than a term that means 1:1 actual size?
Nice questions. 1. Every lens (macro or not) has a “minimum focusing distance”; that’s the CLOSEST you can be when in focus. You can be ANY distance from that closest distance to farther away on a regular or macro lens. So if the lens has a closest focusing distance of 3”, you can be 3”, 4”, 5”, and on to infinity. If you use a lens with a MACRO TUBE, then you can focus more closely, but you lose the ability to focus to infinity. You will have a range you can focus at, say from 1” to 12” but nothing farther. 2. Yes, but as you get closer, lighting can be challenging for the reason you pointed out (the camera can block the light). You need light coming from the side(s) that won’t be blocked. There’s something called a ring flash that you can use as well. But I don’t think I used a flash anywhere in this video. 3. “Macro” simply means very close focusing. There’s no defined distance or ratio. It’s a pretty loose term. You’ll find conventional lenses that say “macro” because they focus closer than most lenses in that category. True macro lenses often go 1:1, but not always.
PhotoJoseph - Great video, great topic, and great answers. Thanks for taking the time to reply. Now, to answer your question... For me, that Panasonic 30mm macro lens looks like the way to go. Can’t beat the price, I’ve seen three reviews and they are all positive, good edge-to-edge sharpness, and as you just explained, I can focus at any distance from the closest on to infinity, so I can use it for portraits as well as product photography.
You were talking about the speed of the macro lens. I bought my first macro lens which was the Canon EF L Series 100mm 2.8 which I escaped on the Canon EOS R. The camera since the last firmware update about four months ago has been super fast especially with eye autofocus. But when I use this particular lens. And I like doing 100mm for portraits. I really noticed that the Lynn is super slow when it comes to autofocus. So is that the reason why?
I think I follow your message… I believe autocorrect got the best of you. But macro lenses are usually slower to focus because they have really long focus racks, to facilitate precise focusing over very short distances
Awesome video Joseph, I learned quite a lot, but I have a question. I'm very new in photography, ridiculously new, I'm just learning to handle a camera Canon Rebel T6 with kit lens, my hobby is making jewelry of gems stones, crystals. I have an extensive collection that would like to make some money with them. But I photo good photos, I've tried my kit lens 18mm 55mm which also says it is a macro o.25mm/.08ft. Here is my question if I get a macro lens extension tube which works better with my kit lens and which brand should I buy.
Hello; I have a Fujinon 16-50; the minimum distance from the object to be in focus is about 15cm so is not clearly for me if I add an extension tube/s I can obtain a closer photo of this small subject that I need to take. I mean; if I go closer than those 15cm still can be in focus or will be blur? You know still cannot understand how a ring (without electronics; the cheapest ones) can solve the focus if not only the lens will be closer (due to the extension) but me closing it to the subject.Or I just need to keep it to that minimum distance (in the case of the 16-50, 15cm?) Hope the question is clear. Thanks
The ring allows you to be closer to the subject. It’s optics, not electronics, that makes this work. Like moving your eyeglasses farther away from your face
Subscribed.....good vid....use my soligor tubes quite a lot....Maybe strange but i like to use them on my tamron G2 zoomlenses...24-70 and 70-200.....can set my aperture with them and even my autofocus works quite well......but prefer manual....and as you said....real world....pretty awsome....and if i want to shoot something further away....i have my other camera standing by....but be real....if you are going to do macro.....you are doing macro....and not bird or kids shooting.....kids shooting....sounds disturbing 😁
I have been indecisive for about three years now on what system to choose. And the internet doesnt make it any more easy as it apparently is just like a religion to people. I hope you can help me out here, im dead set on the G9 it just looks like an incredible camera! (You convinced me to choose the M43) The thing I really dream of doing is macro but I see a lot of negative talk about the two Panasonic macro lenses. Would i be able to get great macro shots with one of them? Like nice clear shots of the whole bug or whatever it might be. So here comes a ton of questions: Which of the two Panasonic lenses should i choose? Can I in some way use other M43 lenses like the Olympus 60mm? and if yes, then how? I have seen some very interesting results with the Laowa 15mm f/4 Wide Angle Macro lens, you can get Nikon and Canon M43 mounts for it, but would any of them work on the G9? Will I still be able to do focus bracketing, focus stacking with any of them? - And I know im not just gonna pop the lens on and go get good shots, it´s gonna take practice, time and probably a whooole lot of frustation, but im more than willing to do that. I spend most of my free time in the outdoors and always have. So far I have used my phones and with great results actually! But I want to get even closer, I want those extreme details on bugs, critters, moss, fungus and so on. Im sorry for the whole load here.. But i just get so many contradicting answers when I google this stuff that i get even more confused.
Sounds like a good plan to me! Just remember not to let the tube length go beyond the focal length and you’re good. The longer the tubes the more limited your focus range seems to be, so having the option to stack them is key.
@@photojoseph Pre-digital it used to be a standard way of duplicating transparencies. I used Bowens Illumitran slide copiers for many years. Here is a link to a PDF of a Bowens Illumitran slide copier manual. www.cameramanuals.org/pdf_files/bowens_illumitran-3.pdf On page 13 it discusses the best lenses to use.
@@photojoseph I am a lack of knowledge, just getting into macro, and I have some equipment but not extension tubes, it puts some distance between the lens and subject i would figure, allowing for light and seclusion from subject ie bugs.
You can actually also use extension tubes with macro lenses for even higher magnification. The shorter the focal lenght of the lens, the bigger the increase. Furthermore, since macros are optimised for close focusing and low field curvature, they are much better suited for use with extension tubes than most non-macros. Zooms are the worst choice, because their field curvature varies with the focal length.
Fun. I tried adding tubes to macros but the lenses I have were already so close-focusing that the tubes made even the farthest focusing point inside of the lens!
@@photojoseph I can stick 68 mm of extension tubes behind my 50 mm macro lens, focus at minimum focusing distance ... and get something like 3x magnification. I can even put that same 68 mm of extension on my Minolta 3x-1x macro zoom, which has a built-in, motorised, variable extension tube (0-65 mm extension) at full extension for a maximum total extension of 133 mm (2½-3 times the focal length) - and still focus just in front of the lens, which has a focal length of 45-52 mm depending on the magnification ratio. In theory, 1:1 magnification is reached at four times the focal length, and focusing at twice the focal lenght or shorter is not possible - or: it wouldn't be ... were it not for retrofocus lenses. Luckily, most normal and wideangle lenses for SLR's are just that: retrofocus. I can't say for MFT, though. However, very short flange distances imply very sharp angles for light hitting the corners of the sensor. With retrofocus, light hits the sensor more perpendicularly.
So I have the 60mm macro lens from Olympus and it only goes to 1:1. What would I need to get closer to bugs like a 1:6? Would I use extension tubes or reverse macro adapter?
The extension tube over the mm of the lens isn't exactly accurate. If you're not using a wide angle lens you can add a lot more extension tubes. You can shoot a 50mm with 120mm of extension tubes without any issues. You'll just need to get closer to your subject as you increase the extension length. At least that's my experience on a 5D Mark III. Great video otherwise.
I am thinking about scanning my 35mm negatives with my canon 70D, would extention tube and my sigma 50mm 1.4 art lens do the job or will quality not be great?
I think the quality will be pretty good but you'll need a very good even light source, a stand to hold everything consistently in place, and some photo editing skills. Honestly it may be easier to just pay for a service to do it for you with a proper film scanner.
I have quite a few negatives so The plan is to get a lightbox, a scanning mask and ‘negative lab pro’ software. I have goood tripod and i am good with retouching. What can i use if I need to clean the negative?
Ok, sounds like you've got it figured out. I would say try the Extension tube first and see how it is. It might be a little soft around the edges but it's worth trying. You can always return it. For cleaning they negative I don't have a specific recommendation sorry. It's been twenty years since I cleaned a negative 😁
I'd like to think i have got it all figured out haha. wish me luck. (just ordered the KAISER Table Lumineuse LED extra-plate 16 x 22 cm - SLIMLITE PLANO and GIft Viltrox DG-C 12MM 20MM 36MM AF Auto Focus Macro Extension Tube Set.) if it will be soft around the edges, maybe just back off little bit with camera and crop the photo a little bit(?). I'll give it a shot and see what happens ;-)
I use rings for Nikon , and thinking about macro lens, I use 12mm(20 mm) meike plus nikon af-p 70-300mm and i am satisfied with result, I thinking about sigma 105 os hsm macro can you tell about that?
Just to say I am a Joe sub and came here after you show together. So i have olympus but i have a panasonic lens 14-42mm which i like more than the pan cake olympus version due to it motor extends when turn on. you say the tubes cant be more than the lens so with this a 100mm lens would mean you could but it would propably go really bad put on up to 100mm worth of tubes so how many tubes can you really use before the result goes bad or unacceptable. since tubes are not all you can get you can get screw on front lens lenses with times what would be the best between lenses or tubes
This is by far one of the most clear videos explaining the pros and cons of extension tubes/macro lenses. What do you think of the Laowa 50 mm 2:1 macro vs. M.zuiko 60mm?
Depends on the lens. I've tried it where it worked, btu giving very minimal advantage, and I've tried it where the farthest focus point possible is still inside the lens, so basically you can't focus on anything! Short answer is that it's probably not worth it.
Wow, awesome explanation. I feel like I knew this information already but after this video I understand it all so much more. Thank you! Ordering those tubes from your link now 👍
