I have a nikon 55-300mm that I use often with my D3100 for shooting wildlife and zoo animals. What would the focusing distance be like if I used extension tubes at 300mm? I understand that there are different tube lengths. Would using extension tubes let me get closer to an animal at the zoo, or does it move the focusing distance to very close so that everything more than a few feet away would be a blur?
Telephoto with extension tubes?
- Thread starter Eob
- Start date
If you put a 1.5x extention on the 55-300, my limited understanding is that you then have 80-450mm... Which will let you zoom closer on the animals - The downside is that you loose f-stops of aperture too so where the 55-300 @ 300mm is F5.6, you may find it only goes to F6 or f8 - So will only really be useful on bright days and / or high ISO.
Isn't that a teleconverter? To my knowledge an extension tube is purely for macro use since it shortens the focus distance and thus increases magnification. I think you can use TC for both but I'd not know if the same if true for ET.
You could well be right I have got all mixed up!
It piqued my interest so I tried it at 600mm without and with a 36mm extension tube. It does get you closer but the second part of your question I suspect would have to be a trial and error. At 600mm without a tube my focus distance was 7m. With the 36mm tube the distance was about 16-18m.
I believe it will give you more reach but depending on the distance and the amount of extension you use will dictate whether it's out of the focal range. Here's a snip first with the 36mm tube and then without.
I believe it will give you more reach but depending on the distance and the amount of extension you use will dictate whether it's out of the focal range. Here's a snip first with the 36mm tube and then without.
I think a teleconverter has a magnification lens...and an extension tube is just a hollow tube that moves the lens away from the sensor. I am probably wrong though.
I follow someone on Instagram that takes amazing close up zoo pics, and he said that he uses extension tubes. I didn't want to bother him with more questions so I'm still wondering about it.
I follow someone on Instagram that takes amazing close up zoo pics, and he said that he uses extension tubes. I didn't want to bother him with more questions so I'm still wondering about it.
Yes. Extension tubes focus only closer, it will no longer focus at infinity.
The wildlife effect you seek is a teleconverter, but NOT extension tubes. Both go behind the lens, but the teleconverter contains glass elements, and extension tubes do not. Extension tubes are for macro, to focus closer than the lens can otherwise focus. Teleconverter instead magnifies focal length of lens.
Teleconverter can still focus at infinity, still has same range. It does cost light, requires more exposure.
Attachments
I didn't know it worked but it makes sense it does at distance. It doesn't affect the lens in any way since it only creates more room between it and the sensor. The farther the sensor, the "greater" the image cast upon it.
I'm waiting on one to arrive so I can test it on both ends of the 200mm.
Yes, I wasn't sure what it would do either so that's why I decided to give it a test run. Looks like it works to some degree but like WayneF pointed out it's probably better for Macro applications. It messes with the focal length of your lens so certain distances won't be able to focus. And I noticed (at least with my Tamron lens) that it struggled a bit on subjects that I COULD focus on. With so many variables to calculate, how much extension you use, what type of lens and your distance to the subject it seems better to use a TC when trying to bring distant objects closer. Obviously for close subjects the extension tubes are ideal.
Again, extension tubes allow lenses to focus CLOSER than their normal close focus limit. We rack a lens out to focus close, and the extension tube also racks them out. That is what these two pictures do (owl and watch), focus close. The magnification is simply due to being closer to them.
The owl and the watch pictures are relatively close, certainly NOT at infinity. Extension tubes will no longer focus at far distances, like infinity, so would be useless for wildlife at most distances. Instead, that is what teleconverters do.
A 1.4x teleconverter adds one stop to the aperture settings, and a 2x adds two stops.
The Magnification of an extension tube adds two stops at 1:1 magnification, much less at much smaller magnifications.
f-stop number = focal length / aperture diameter.
When focal length doubles, then f-stop number doubles, which is two stops.
Extension tubes are fairly short ... 10mm to 40mm.... and have minor effect on long lenses like 300mm or 600. They have a tremendous effect on short lenses, like 24mm.
For more, search Google for Extension Tube Math
Last edited:
Don Kuykendall_RIP
RIP :(
What do you think you would gain? They so two different things?
Cash in my pocket?
The TC2x only works with AF-S lenses and can damage others, at least according to Nikon. I wanted one for macro but I'd have to buy the AF-S 105mm too which is about a 1000. A simple extension tube between both prevents the TC from damaging the lens and gives me some additional magnification for a fraction of the lens cost.
That's win-win.
I think I tried it just goofing around. I honestly don't remember the results but they likely weren't pretty. I can't test it anymore, since I got my Tamron I got rid of my 1.4x TC. All I have are extension tubes.
I never tried it, but probably so. Physically, they will bayonet together.
The extension tube just extends the lens a little more forward, which makes it focus closer. Has no glass in it, so it does not otherwise change anything, but an extension equal to the focal length can let it focus close enough to focus at 1:1 magnification. 1:1 is an extreme, which pretty much means it will only focus at that one distance (a few inches). Saying, the lens focusing ring will then have essentially no effect at all (at 1:1), no matter how you turn it. If we use a lot of extension (bellows maybe), then possibly the distance behind the lens (the focal length) is less than the distance in front of the lens (subject distance), and then it can be good to reverse the lens.
No matter what minor extension is used, the extension tube will no longer allow focus to a far distance. The combination is already limited to a closer distance.
The Teleconverter just puts a lens in between to lengthen the focal length. Ever use a telescope? The TC is just a Barlow lens. This is the opposite of a magnifying glass, it reduces the size seen. A reduced size is a reduced angle of view, and the narrow view simulates a longer lens - it puts less subject view over the width of the camera sensor. There are of course a few optical issues, less than perfect, but can be bearable.
Thanks Wayne.
That's basically all I needed to know. As long as the communication between lens and cam is working, it would serve its purpose. Since the extension is a hollow tube, it should prevent the TC from damaging the internals of AF lenses. It will be manual focus only but that's even the case when using the TC with the new AF-S micro. For macro this solution would be perfect since extensions don't affect quality and the TC is a lot better than a diopter quality-wise.
The 200mm has some room to sacrifice for magnification and that combo would also make the investment in a R1C1 worth it since you're close enough for it to function properly.
A good thing the OP posted the question else I'd never had discovered this pretty cheap solution.
That's basically all I needed to know. As long as the communication between lens and cam is working, it would serve its purpose. Since the extension is a hollow tube, it should prevent the TC from damaging the internals of AF lenses. It will be manual focus only but that's even the case when using the TC with the new AF-S micro. For macro this solution would be perfect since extensions don't affect quality and the TC is a lot better than a diopter quality-wise.
The 200mm has some room to sacrifice for magnification and that combo would also make the investment in a R1C1 worth it since you're close enough for it to function properly.
A good thing the OP posted the question else I'd never had discovered this pretty cheap solution.
It is for macro, but the Kenko extension tubes are special, in that they can still do AF (however, AF becomes questionable use when up extremely close).
B&H description is:
The Kenko Auto Extension Tube Set DG contains three tubes of different length - 12mm, 20mm, and 36mm - which can be used individually or in any combination to obtain the desired magnification. Actual magnification effect changes with each specific lens.
This DG Extension tube set has upgraded "Gate-Array IC" circuitry to work better with digital SLR's and some of the digital SLR lenses, like the Nikon DX (e.g. 17-55mm, 10.5mm) digital-only lenses.
Extension tubes are designed to enable a lens to focus closer than its normal set minimum focusing distance. Getting closer has the effect of magnifying your subject (making it appear larger in the viewfinder and in your pictures). They are exceptionally useful for macro photography, enabling you to convert almost any lens into a macro lens at a fraction of the cost while maintaining its original optical quality.
The extension tubes have no optics. They are mounted in between the camera body and lens to create more distance between the lens and film plane. By moving the lens farther away from the film or CCD sensor in the camera, the lens is forced to focus much closer than normal. The greater the length of the extension tube, the closer the lens can focus.
When using the camera's TTL metering system, no exposure compensation will be required (exposure compensation is required for handheld meters).
The Kenko Auto Extension Tube Set DG is compatible with Nikon DSLR cameras and F mount lenses and is optimized to work with Autofocus lenses.
Kenko's Auto Focus extension tubes are designed with all the circuitry and mechanical coupling to maintain auto focus and TTL auto exposure with most Nikon lenses given there is enough light (at f/5.6 or brighter) to activate the cameras AF system properly.
However, Nikon cameras need a f/5.6 lens to do AF reliably. At 1:1, this extension adds two stops. The TTL metering still meters the light accurately, but if adding two stops to a f/2.8 lens, this is now f/5.6, at the limit for AF.
Nikon used to make extension tubes back in the 1960s for Nikon F, but they had no communication in them, and are obsolete now. I don't know if they would be safe (damage free) for the new electrical contacts in there?
And extension tubes take some getting used to. If anywhere near 1:1, you have no focus capability, and you focus by moving the camera (or the subject) back and forth, to find the one spot where it will focus. Awkward on a tripod, so this is the purpose for focusing rails. I used to put the subject on a board, and moved the board back and forth.
A macro lens is vastly more convenient, specially made, so its focus works like any other lens, yet will also focus normally to 1:1, or at infinity too. Very easy to get used to.
Last edited:
I've been using macro tubes with various lenses for over a year now and it is quite difficult to explain how it works to someone who has never tried it. When I got my 12,20 and 36mm ETs I tried them all together with a lens and everything was totally blurred. Why? Because when you are doing macro with ETs you have to think back-to-front. I'll give the example of my 18-55mm lens mounted on a 36mm ET.
Now we know that a photo at 18mm seems much further away than one at 55mm because of the angle of view. Add a 36mm extension tube and you totally change things around. The ratio between the focal length of the lens and the ET comes into play. At 55mm you can take a photo of an insect at, let's say, 2 inches. At 34mm you are virtually touching the subject but, with correct angles, you have just enough light to take a photo. Take the lens down to less than 34mm and you are touching whatever the insect is sitting on and there is no light available to take the shot. The closer the focal lengths of the lens and the tube approach one another, the closer you have to get to the subject to focus on it and the less light you have available.
Therefore, the idea of fitting a TC onto a lens and mounting it on an ET is simply defeating the object of the exercise as this is increasing the ratio between the lens and the extension tube. You can focus from further away but the subject will be much smaller. As to what a lens mounted on an ET added to a TC on the camera would give I hate to think but I would probably accept that it would be totally unusable as a set-up.
Now we know that a photo at 18mm seems much further away than one at 55mm because of the angle of view. Add a 36mm extension tube and you totally change things around. The ratio between the focal length of the lens and the ET comes into play. At 55mm you can take a photo of an insect at, let's say, 2 inches. At 34mm you are virtually touching the subject but, with correct angles, you have just enough light to take a photo. Take the lens down to less than 34mm and you are touching whatever the insect is sitting on and there is no light available to take the shot. The closer the focal lengths of the lens and the tube approach one another, the closer you have to get to the subject to focus on it and the less light you have available.
Therefore, the idea of fitting a TC onto a lens and mounting it on an ET is simply defeating the object of the exercise as this is increasing the ratio between the lens and the extension tube. You can focus from further away but the subject will be much smaller. As to what a lens mounted on an ET added to a TC on the camera would give I hate to think but I would probably accept that it would be totally unusable as a set-up.