Fuji macro extension tubes - MCEX-11 or MCEX-16?

georgehudetz wrote:

Rod McD wrote:

Hi George,

Thanks. They look good.

I usually prefer using a Canon 250D on the 18-55 and 55-200 simply because you don't get the effect that if you zoom to alter the reach or framing, you immediately lose focus and have to refocus. Close-up lenses just seem more compatible with the zooming function than tubes, and the achromatic ones are so good these days that I doubt most viewers could discern which was used. You don't lose any light with them, which is another advantage if you're trying to maintain shutter speed, but there's no free lunch - you lose focal length and therefore reach. Horses for courses, I suppose......

Cheers, Rod

Yes, I've been meaning to try a close-up lens. They look like an even better solution. Of course, the tube works with all lenses, like the 50-140, which I have been meaning to try - I've heard good things about that combination too.

Hi George,

Yes they'll work on both - the difference is only about the convenience of zooming and sometimes shutter speed versus reach.

FWIW, I wouldn't bother trying tubes on the 55-200 if you also have one.  I have the 55-200, not the 50-140, and have found it rather unwieldy with tubes especially at longer FLs.  Neither 11mm or 16mm give you much extra magnification at 200mm anyway.   And when Fuji warn against stacking, they must have had that lens in mind.....  It gets horribly front heavy.  The 50-140 has a tripod collar and so should be far better balanced.

I really think that the X system needs a third longer extension tube with it's own tripod socket.  That would work beautifully with the 55-200 (and the 90mm?), but as things are, that zoom is one that works much better with a close-up lens.  (I also bought an old 52mm Nikon PN11 tube to use with an adapted 90mm lens for the specific reason that it (the tube) has a collar.  A suggestion from Slimandy if I recall.)

Cheers, Rod