Macro tubes are cheap and work with any lens. The only negative to them is that once on the lens the lens's focusing ability is limited. IE you can focus at closer points, but not out to infinity. This is not a problem unless you all of a sudden need to take a farther shot in a hurry (you just remove the tube). This is worth mentioning because a dedicated macro lens CAN to both just by focusing out to infinity, but they cost much more for that ability...

With your current lens, buy the kenko tubes (I'd recommend the auto set) and you're all set. There is no loss in IQ (image quality) since they are filled with nothing but air. The auto set means you can set the aperture with them in place (non electrical/manual versions need the lens in place to stop it down, then swap in the tub and it's locked in, wicked PITA). Also the electrical versions can also attempt to use your camera's AF (but they get a bit wacky when trying, about 50/50 with AF for me). This is what you want (they can be used with any lens):
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Tube_Set.html
$169 for all 3. You can buy them separately too for $75 for the 12mm:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Extension.html
and $79 for the 25mm:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Extension.html

for reference, a 12mm gets you closer, the bigger the tube (higher the number) gets you even closer, but the set works best because you can get any range by swapping and stacking down to about an inch.

Here's a sample shot with my kenko tubes and my 50mm f1.8 ($80 lens):

The link for the set of 3 is for a Nikon mount.(I didn't click the others) It won't make a difference for DX lenses or not, because like Ben said, they are just hollow tubes.

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.

how much are they?
could work very well if they are built right (light tight) as all these things do (tubes or bellows) is add distance between the lens and the sensor. So the bellows would be adjustable which would be cool...
Any link to that?

never mind on the link, they're super easy to find...
anyway, they ARE NOT "electrical" or smart or whatever so you'll have to force the aperture by putting the lens on the camera, stopping down, then pulling it off and putting it on the bellows at whatever aperture you need. (I've only used the electrical versions so that's what I've heard you have to do...) Anyway, besides that, they look like they would work pretty well because they offer more range (up to 150mm -vs- the 68 with all 3 tubes stacked). But do you need that much? I've never used all 3 except to prove it works... It's less expensive though so it's up to you. They seem interesting enough and "only" ~$46 shipped so I might even pick up a set to play with for fun... I'd love to modify one to take medium format lenses on the end, and tilt/shift too.....

i am trying to decide if i need to get the canon 60 2.8 or not. right now i have a 50 1.8, could i use the kenko kit to achieve the same shots of the 60?

yes. The only difference is if you want to suddenly change focus out to a non macro level you have to remove the tubes to do so with a tubes and 50mm setup. With a macro lens it can do macro and infinity focus w/o changing anything (usually there is a focus limit switch so it doesn't hunt one way or another in low light. IE one setting is 0~5' the other is 3'~infinity, so if you're doing macros it wont all of a sudden try to focus at infinity).

Ben

i still can't decide if i want the rings or the 60.

i've read that with the 60, you can focus as close to 7.9 inches from the sensor. it makes it about 2 inches from the hood. will the 50 be able to get that close with the rings?

I just tested my 50 with all 3 tubes for you.

The 12mm tube focuses about 8-9 inches out from the front lens element, the 20mm about 5-6", and the 36mm about 3-4". And don't forget that you can stack rings to get even closer.

If I could find my stupid measuring tape I could be more precise.

don't worry about that, you have been more than enough help! thanks alot!

actually I have that test done with a ruler and my rings, but I'm not sure what's in place in each shot.... Here they are though (with my best guess of the rings in place):

Just the 50mm minimum distance:


50mm with the 12mm tube:


50mm with the 20mm tube:


50mm with the 36mm tube:


50mm with the (it's 2 together, and not the 12 and 20, so either 12 and 36 or 20 and 36 for 48mm or 56mm):


here's the 50mm with all 3 (so 68mm):


those are all at MINIMUM focusing distance (set manually) on the 50mm, so you get a range that goes put as you focus manually to "infinity" on the lens (it will be to roughly the minimum of the ring before).

and yes I've stacked them. I don't often as that's SUPER close, but they (the kenko tube set) don't leak when you to it with the 50mm for sure. I've only used one at a time with the 70~200mm only because that's all I needed, but in that case just support the lens and it shouldn't be an issue.

Ben

rings have no loss in IQ.
Filters do and you need to buy them in specific sizes (for each lens thread size and each magnification).
I think filters are less expensive for one or two, but as you get them for all lenses and mags it's going to add up.

so it's taken us a whole week to convince you...

my conundrum is: i already have 2 lenses right around 60mm. i have the 50 and the 18-55 kit lense. should i get the rings or do i have a need for the 60. will it be a better walk around lense than the 50 or is the IQ any better?

my current goals are to get macro capabilities and a wide angle, i am probably going to get the 10-22.

I owned the 100mm macro. I sold it for rings and have never regretted it. The rings work with all lenses, are less expensive and smaller in the bag. The 100mm macro was only there for when I needed a macro and was heavy, large and expensive.

My 100 macro is one of my favorite lenses

It was a great lens, but that FL doesn't do much for me except for when doing product shots... So the rings with nifty, and the 90mm TS-E are more than enough... I did forget to mention the 90mm TS-E that it helped fund though... With rings they're > the 100mm macro due to the ability to tilt and shift.

My ultimate plan is to have both the 100 macro, wide and tele TS-E (probably the wide first though), and some more rings.

i ordered my tubes yesterday. i paid for 2 day air and the order is still processing. oh well, i guess.

they came in today! i am going to go try them out.

initial impressions:they work, but they are really frustating.

the 50 is having a hard time holding a focus. i am going to try them in my light box with a tripod.

they don't fit my 18-55 kit lense.

how do they not fit your kit lens???
If they don't try not rotating them into place all the way. IE don't rotate it fully to the click and see if that helps. (I now am remembering them not working with my lens baby).

But if you're using macro tubes I wouldn't use AF a whole lot anyway. The SLIGHTEST wobble front to back will make you move the focus plane from the subject before you can take a picture... Use MF and a tripod if you can (I still turn on the beeper for AF and hold the focus button while focusing so the camera beeps when it thinks the subject is in focus... Helps get it perfect in the small XTi viewfinder...) I always use MF with mine (and the AF "trick" with the beeper), I sometimes use a tripod. When not using a tripod be very conscious of your front to back movements while focusing and shooting. Thin DOF can play games with you.

i went outside to play around with it, and voila, the 50 is focusing just as good as it does normally. i am an idiot, inside lighting is a great way to judge a lense.

handheld, it is very easy to knock it out of focus, so i will need to figure this out. i am going to try it out on my tripod next.

Originally Posted by distorto

handheld, it is very easy to knock it out of focus, so i will need to figure this out. i am going to try it out on my tripod next.

Yeah, like I was saying, if you rock slightly forward or backward it's a big difference in what's in focus. Great shots for the first day. You'll get the hang of it. The other issue you'll have is setting up a tripod fast enough with things that can move on you (your cat/bugs/whatever)... But that's macro photography for you. Whole new world just in and around your house now.

I've never bothered with a tripod for shooting my cat, it's impossible. He's a pretty tough character to shoot.

I'm not sure what you just said at all Flintsoneskid but with macro, and in fact as you increase magnification, your depth of field is reduced considerably. If you shot macro with a point and shoot (real macro) you'd have the same problem. Most point and shoot cameras don't really reach true 1:1 magnification though. True macro capability is reaching at least 1:1 magnification, where a 1cm object covers 1cm on your sensor for example. If you took two identically framed photos with a P&S and an SLR, and both were of a 10" object, the 10" object is being imaged on a much smaller sensor in the point and shoot. Your magnification is not as high in that case.

Your actual magnification with your SLR is likely higher than with your P&S camera, so you will have less DOF as a result from that. Try using a tripod and stopping down the lens as much as possible.

As far as light boxes and ring lights, it depends on what you're doing. I'd suggest just starting with what you have and expanding as you discover you need something more. It might be easier for people to address all your questions if you start a new thread though.

like emo said but simplified if you're close to your subject, your DOF will be greatly reduced.

blah blah blah

Canon 50mm f/1.4 on a 5D with a Kenko 36mm tube:


that object it 5mm long by 2mm wide, so as you can see the DOF is roughly 4mm deep and that's stopped down to f/5.6.

^^What is that and why would you take a pic of it? It looks like a fetus piggie foot.

I guess you never saw my gross thread yesterday (in NASIOC OT) then...

That came out of my arm! I bumped some coral while diving in January and got a tiny cut (or so I thought). I'm not sure if that went in my arm like that then, went in smaller, or it was something completely different that my body calcified, but I had a bump where the cut was. About a month ago is started bugging me a bit so I started digging to see what was in there. I couldn't find anything, but over the last month it started to get larger (like a nice ingrown hair zit)... Well 2 nights ago I went to town on it and pulled that out...

I'm so terribly sorry I asked now.

Originally Posted by tardypizza

I'm so terribly sorry I asked now.

Never ask ben anything again, please.

Hey Ben, can you go back and shoot your skin giblet at 12mm?

dammit, that was funny!

that is definately gross. nice picture though.

It's in that picture up there...