Toronto Photography Meetup Group

I've been getting interested in doing some macro work lately and have been doing a lot of investigating online as to the best way to go about it. Some people seem to say that a macro-specific lens is the best way to go while others say that extension tubes on a regular lens is just as good and far more affordable.

Does anyone have any experience with extension tubes and if so was it good/bad?

I would suggest getting a macro lens. If you get into it enough you will probably end up using a macro lens and extension tubes.

When getting a macro lens you should decide what your focus is:

1) Macro only
2) Macro + portrait

If it's #1 then I would only go with a 1:1 lens. If it's the second then I would consider lens like the Zeiss Makro Planar 50mm or 100mm. These are incredible portrait lens with that 3d like look. They are only 1:2 however and for the really small creatures you would need tubes. They are perfect for bees, dragonflys and all those huge macro creatures.

And if you get crazy about macro then eventually you will try your hand at a MPE-65.

There's also reverse bellows. Haven't personally tried that method yet.

How crazy do you want to go?

My old 40D with a 50 and a few extension tubes and close up lens:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/14195211@N07/5554451463


And a pic with that stupid setup.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/14195211@N07/5569605544

Read all the macro articles starting with this: http://digital-photography-school.com/g ... -up-lenses
And then get back to us with your budget.

At a pub I experimented with the thought of a tilt shift reverse macro. http://www.flickr.com/photos/metrix_fee ... 0/sizes/o/

go with the most affordable option, probably extension tubes.

Unless you're an obsessive personality macro photography will likely wear off you very quickly. Macro photography is at least 99.9999% technique and craft, almost never creative inspiration, extremely rarely is it remarkable beyond the one or two "look what I can do" image. But when macro does rise above the mastery of technique the images can be truly spectacular. For me, Ken Liebrecht's snow crystal images remain the best ever macro photography in the otherwise boring world of macro photography.

You can go with cheap extension tubes, say <$20, but you give up auto-focus and maybe aperture control and metering. If you expect all of the normal automation, then expect to pay much more.

I like my macro lenses (105mm and 180mm) becuase they suit my shooting style -- I tend to get close to things and macro lenses allow me that kind of flexibility without going wide.

I'm sure there have been other threads in the forum with tips on macro lenses and tubes.

I have tamron 90mm macro and I also have two set of kenko extension tube. Sometimes I use Raynox 250. Here is the pictures of my setup with macro lens 1 set of extension tubes and a Raynox 250



here is the link to my macro pictures

http://s168.photobucket.com/albums/u189 ... =slideshow

I hope you will like them.

Very nice.

I agree, those are very nice macros and interesting set up.