Using extension tubes with teleconvers |
Page 12> |
Author | ||
Frankman
Emeritus group Knowledge Base Editor Joined: 02 July 2006 Location: Australia Status: Offline Posts: 6916 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: Using extension tubes with teleconvers Posted: 31 May 2011 at 06:02 |
|
Many of us use teleconverters to get a bit of extra reach. However, extension tubes, when combined with teleconverters allow us to get just that bit more reach. They say a picture tells a thousand words, so here we go.
The gear: Sony A850 Minolta 1.4 x APO TC (original) Teleplus 2 x MxAF TC MC7 Kenko extension tubes (12mm, 20mm and 36mm) Method: I set up a test subject around 10 metres from the camera. Tripod used. Camera set to Aperture priority, set to shoot at maximum aperture. ISO set to 200 Autofocus The Results: Converted from RAW to JPG, then downsized to 1024px across, a dash of smart sharpen. 300mm f4 1/8000 300mm + 1.4TC f5.6 1/4000 300mm + 1.4TC + 12mm tube f5.6 1/2000 300mm + 1.4TC + 20mm tube f5.6 1/500 300mm + 1.4TC + 36mm tube Will not focus - image is beyond the reach of focus limit. 300mm + 2TC f8 1/500 300mm + 2TC + 12mm tube f8 1/320 300mm + 2TC + 20mm tube f8 1/320 300mm + 2TC + 36mm tube Will not focus - image is beyond the reach of focus limit. 300mm + 1.4TC + 2TC f11 1/80 (Camera would not autofocus - manual focus used) The results don't really need much explanation. However, I must add that the lighting was changing as I was swapping converters and tubes, so the shutter speeds may not be reflecting the true situation. The tubes do "steal" a bit of light, however they do not affect the maximum aperture that you can use. I'll also add that you will lose infinity focus when you use extension tubes. The combination of 300mm lens + 1.4TC + 12mm tubes will focus to 20 metres. Using the 300mm + 1.4TC + 20mm tubes will five you focus up to around 10 metres. Note that since extension tubes contain no glass, they will not degrade image quality. I hope this demonstration was useful. Cheers, Frank |
||
*** Sony A850 * A700 * Minolta 5D and other stuff ***
|
||
Alex H
Senior Member Knowledgebase Contributor Joined: 06 November 2008 Country: Sweden Location: Stockholm Status: Offline Posts: 1591 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 11:20 | |
How did You attach tubes and converter?
Lens-converter-tubes-camera or Lens-tubes-converter-camera as it may influence the quality of image. Alex |
||
Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence photography - A7, A77, NEX6, NEX6-FS - Gallery
|
||
Frankman
Emeritus group Knowledge Base Editor Joined: 02 July 2006 Location: Australia Status: Offline Posts: 6916 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 11:36 | |
Hi Alex
I used the Lens, TC, Tubes configuration. You can't put the APO TC's between the tubes and the camera. Won't fit because of the design of the APO TC's. However, the Teleplus TC is able to be fitted either before or after the tubes. I went for the similar configuration to the Min TC for this test. I must admit that I didn't even consider that quality could be affected by the order that they're stacked. If I have time tomorrow, I'll give it a try. Cheers, Frank |
||
*** Sony A850 * A700 * Minolta 5D and other stuff ***
|
||
Alex H
Senior Member Knowledgebase Contributor Joined: 06 November 2008 Country: Sweden Location: Stockholm Status: Offline Posts: 1591 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 11:46 | |
I think it was in J. Shaw's book "Closeups in Nature" where he discussed this thing, but I do not have the book any more to check this. I would expect at least difference in sharpness/micro-contrast/resolution between different combinations, but I too did not try it myself, even though nothing stops me from doing this. Should try this weekend.
Thanks for Your test, Frank Alex |
||
Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence photography - A7, A77, NEX6, NEX6-FS - Gallery
|
||
Pavel
Senior Member Joined: 23 April 2007 Country: Czech Republic Location: The Hague Status: Offline Posts: 2598 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 14:04 | |
I always thought adding ex.tube between the lens and camera will not change the magnification.At least no more then shifting the lens closer to the subject by the size of the ex.tube-s 12-20-36mm.In your case the lens is fixed to the tripod while keeping the 10m distance, so you actually moved the camera from the subject,or?
Perhaps somebody can explain to me where do I go wrong? Edited by Pavel - 31 May 2011 at 14:09 |
||
A-900+VG;16f/2.8fish;50f/1.4,Sig20f/1.8;Tammy 90f/2.8;Sony135STF;M200f/2.8HS;M 200 f/4 Macro;M 300f/4HS;Sony500f/8reflex;M600 f/4HS;M3x1xmacro;16-35CZ;24-70CZ;70-200SSM;70-400SSM;1.4xTc;2xTc
|
||
Alex H
Senior Member Knowledgebase Contributor Joined: 06 November 2008 Country: Sweden Location: Stockholm Status: Offline Posts: 1591 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 14:20 | |
One thing to remember is that the lenses with internal focusing design change their actual focal length when focusing, e.g. focal length decreases when the lens is focused closer. Adding the extension tubes to the lens changes that.
Will try to explain. The 300 mm IF lens without the extension tube will be focused at 10 meters (and its focusing mark will be set to ten meters), which will decrease the lens's focal length (let us hypothetically assume it will become 260mm, as I do not know real numbers) and thus will decrease the magnification of the lens. The lens with extension tubes that is again focused at 10 meters will cause focusing mark on the lens per se to be set NOT at 10 meters, but at a different distance, lets say 20 meters, thus the actual focal length of the lens will be longer than in previous case. Let us hypothetically assume it will become 280mm). Increase in the real focal length of the lens will increase the magnification. Adding even longer extension tube to achieve the maximum focusing distance of the lens+tube combo to be set at 10 meters will cause the lens focusing ring to be set to infinity, thus restoring marked focal length of 300mm, and maximum magnification. Please correct me if I am wrong Do not ask me about what happens with zoom lenses Alex |
||
Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence photography - A7, A77, NEX6, NEX6-FS - Gallery
|
||
Frankman
Emeritus group Knowledge Base Editor Joined: 02 July 2006 Location: Australia Status: Offline Posts: 6916 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 14:39 | |
Pavel - No, the camera was not moved during the exercise. Interestingly, the focus distance scale on the lens does show a "shift" as I increase the size of the extension tubes. This verifies what Alex has written above.
Cheers, Frank |
||
*** Sony A850 * A700 * Minolta 5D and other stuff ***
|
||
klw10
Senior Member Joined: 06 May 2009 Country: United States Location: United States Status: Offline Posts: 1366 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 14:43 | |
I have played with tcs abd extension tubes as well. I got intetesting results with the za 135 plus tcs and tubes.
|
||
momech
Senior Member Joined: 27 August 2006 Country: United States Location: United States Status: Offline Posts: 2934 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 14:57 | |
Tubes do 3 things, all by moving the lens further away from the body:
1. Increase magnification. 2. Decrease minimum focus distance. 3. Decrease DOF. The longer the tube, the more change you get. The longer the lens, the less change you get. You also lose infinity focus and some light, the longer the tube the more light loss. Adding the TCs means more light loss and magnification, but I don't think they change the MFD or DOF. There may be some kind of chart out there that lists characteristics for different combinations, but all I really know to do is experiment and try to remember which combo is good for what. |
||
Pavel
Senior Member Joined: 23 April 2007 Country: Czech Republic Location: The Hague Status: Offline Posts: 2598 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 15:38 | |
I forgot the lens must have refocused with the ex.tube so you got closer to the real 300mm and that's where the increase of the magnification comes from. That's good point! |
||
A-900+VG;16f/2.8fish;50f/1.4,Sig20f/1.8;Tammy 90f/2.8;Sony135STF;M200f/2.8HS;M 200 f/4 Macro;M 300f/4HS;Sony500f/8reflex;M600 f/4HS;M3x1xmacro;16-35CZ;24-70CZ;70-200SSM;70-400SSM;1.4xTc;2xTc
|
||
berlin steve
Senior Member Joined: 08 April 2009 Country: United Kingdom Location: Berlin, Germany Status: Offline Posts: 1583 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 19:13 | |
I understand that teleconverters ´steal´light due to the extra glass. But surely extension tubes without additional optical obstructions should maintain the amount of light... or have I missed something?
BTW, the idea of mixing tubes and TC is pretty cool. I have both but assumed that tubes were just for macro, but this proves me wrong. |
||
F-Stop? F-Stopped! Anyone know how to get it going again???My Flickr
|
||
DaveK
Senior Member Knowledge Base Contributor Joined: 08 October 2006 Country: Netherlands Location: Center Status: Offline Posts: 3960 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 31 May 2011 at 22:08 | |
You had great results Frank. I never get these results with the (Sony) convertors I use. But I'll try again, seeing yours! TFS!
|
||
Pete Ganzel
Senior Member Joined: 05 August 2006 Country: United States Location: Little Canada Status: Offline Posts: 941 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 01 June 2011 at 23:15 | |
Steve: Extending the lens from the sensor decreases the light available to the sensor due to an inverse square relationship (the projected area covered increases at the square of the distance extended and thus the light available to a given area is reduced). So there is definitely an exposure penalty with extension tubes. I believe teleconverters "use more light" for a similar reason in that they are essentially "beam expanders", though that expanded area may be cut off as part of the teleconverter design. The loss due to light transmission of the glass is actually a small part. Pete Edited by Pete Ganzel - 01 June 2011 at 23:18 |
||
fem2008
Senior Member Joined: 29 January 2009 Country: United States Location: Ohio - USA Status: Offline Posts: 1400 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 02 June 2011 at 17:19 | |
Great point, Pete. Another way to look at it (and I could be wrong), if you think of it as a decrease in effective aperture. Since effective focal length is increasing, but lens opening is not, then the effective aperture must be smaller. Here is the equation. Area=Pi*Focal length^2/(4*Aperture^2). |
||
Fem2008
My Flickr Page |
||
> Forum Home > Dyxum Community > Knowledge Base | Page 12> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.
Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania
Feel free to contact us if needed.