Acceptable/Quality Macro Extension Tubes

Hello to all,

Like some others in the forum, I'm looking at my options for macro photography (bugs, flowers, fungi) without much budget. So I'm investigating tubes to hold me over until I can afford a Tamron 90. (BTW, I have A57+SAL18-135+SAL75-300.)

I see sets ranging from <$50 to $200 from Vivitar, Meike (metal or plastic mount), Pro-Optics, Kenko, etc. And reviews vary widely with the Kenko having the advantage but the highest price.

So, would you all recommend cheap and quick, medium price with average reviews or the most expensive? Or, maybe spend ~ $150 on a cheap Vivitar/Phoenix/Cosina 100mm?

Thanks,

LarryS

I suggest you wait a little longer and get the Tamron 90. In the long run you'll get what you want sooner and spend less money. I think you'll only be disappointed with a half way solution.

The Raynox 150 or 250 might be a better interim option. Go to their website and see what you think.

LarryS said:

LarryS wrote:

Hello to all,

Like some others in the forum, I'm looking at my options for macro photography (bugs, flowers, fungi) without much budget. So I'm investigating tubes to hold me over until I can afford a Tamron 90. (BTW, I have A57+SAL18-135+SAL75-300.)

I see sets ranging from <$50 to $200 from Vivitar, Meike (metal or plastic mount), Pro-Optics, Kenko, etc. And reviews vary widely with the Kenko having the advantage but the highest price.

So, would you all recommend cheap and quick, medium price with average reviews or the most expensive? Or, maybe spend ~ $150 on a cheap Vivitar/Phoenix/Cosina 100mm?

Thanks,

LarryS

Click to expand...

Larry,

Since extension tubes do not have optical element - difference is only in af contacts and build quality.

I have Kenko tubes. I use them very seldom, mainly when I need stronger macro abilities than Tamron 90mm does. For example tick macro.

However in general, I completelly agree with previous comment, that you may not need tubes at all, but get Tamron 90mm instead.

Extension tubes are very hard to work with, because of inflexibility - extreme limited focus.

other problem - slow lenses you are goung to attach to extension tubes. (50mm f/1.7 prime would be better). You will need very long exposures / tripod / no wind whatsoever.

LarryS said:

LarryS wrote:0

So, would you all recommend cheap and quick, medium price with average reviews or the most expensive?

Click to expand...

Regardless of what other specialized macro gear you eventually acquire, if you get a set of good tubes they are likely to stay in your collection and see use with various lenses from time to time - at least it has worked that way for me. Plastic construction is okay, but I suggest you only consider tubes that provide AF capability, auto aperture capability, and the full 8 electrical contacts. Without those features you probably won't want to keep the tubes for long.

u can find SH cheaper

LarryS said:

LarryS wrote:

Hello to all,

Like some others in the forum, I'm looking at my options for macro photography (bugs, flowers, fungi) without much budget. So I'm investigating tubes to hold me over until I can afford a Tamron 90. (BTW, I have A57+SAL18-135+SAL75-300.)

I see sets ranging from <$50 to $200 from Vivitar, Meike (metal or plastic mount), Pro-Optics, Kenko, etc. And reviews vary widely with the Kenko having the advantage but the highest price.

So, would you all recommend cheap and quick, medium price with average reviews or the most expensive? Or, maybe spend ~ $150 on a cheap Vivitar/Phoenix/Cosina 100mm?

Thanks,

LarryS

Click to expand...

Macro tubes will get you pretty high magnification if that is what you want. pick ones with contacts and the aperture control. my only comment is that if you can find a cheap cosina 100mm macro with the 1:1 adapter for the end jump on it it is as good as the Tamron optically! and you used to get them in A-mount fairly cheap, I haven't sen one in years now though they are all plastic construction so wherever you get it make sure you can look at it.