Macro Questions concerning AF extension tubes.

What advantage would I see getting the Oly 60mm 2.8 over the Sigma 60mm 2.8 with AF extension tubes? I like the results from the Sigma 30mm 2.8 with extension tubes, but it is inconvenient.

I've been using the Oly 40~150 4-5.6 and extension tubes with some success. two hand held examples:

So what way should I go?

What is the working distance at 60mm? Would a non Macro 60 sacrifice quality?

This page at Cambrigde in Color discusses disadvantages of the extension tubes, and has a calculator for magnification and focusing distance. For the calculator you will need the native magnification of the lens, which you can find in the technical specs on the manufacturer's web site, and in the lens database here at DPReview.

Vlad

alfredo_tomato wrote:

What is the working distance at 60mm? Would a non Macro 60 sacrifice quality?

It seems the big disadvantage of extension tubes is having to take the lens off to shoot other than Macro.

I am not that interested in extreme closeups. I seem to be more interested in using macro for composition.

tt321 wrote:

AF extension tubes also allow AF, but you are right AF is less useful in macro, unless it's the new AF bracketing feature you are using.

I'd think that AF in macro would work very well with the touch-screen focus point selection.

Until recently, I used manual lenses with extension tubes and/or reverse rings.  One thing I liked about the reverse ring was that the adaptor worked like a lens hood. A swap between macro and standard was quick..

I do like the lower price of the Sigma 60, but the Oly appears to be an excellent portrait lens too.

Touch focus is tough with my fat fingers.

alfredo_tomato wrote:

It seems the big disadvantage of extension tubes is having to take the lens off to shoot other than Macro.

The most fundamental disadvantage is the inferior image quality with extension tubes compare to true macro lenses.

Vlad

Vlad S wrote:

alfredo_tomato wrote:

It seems the big disadvantage of extension tubes is having to take the lens off to shoot other than Macro.

The most fundamental disadvantage is the inferior image quality with extension tubes compare to true macro lenses.

Vlad

That depends on a lens used with macro tubes, doesn't it?

alfredo_tomato wrote:

What advantage would I see getting the Oly 60mm 2.8 over the Sigma 60mm 2.8 with AF extension tubes?

I've been using the Oly 40~150 4-5.6 and extension tubes with some success.

What advantage do you expect from Sigma 60mm compared to Oly 40-150 set at 60mm with the same set of extension rings?

OrdinarilyInordinate wrote:

Vlad S wrote:

alfredo_tomato wrote:

It seems the big disadvantage of extension tubes is having to take the lens off to shoot other than Macro.

The most fundamental disadvantage is the inferior image quality with extension tubes compare to true macro lenses.

Vlad

That depends on a lens used with macro tubes, doesn't it?

I doubt it. The lens optical corrections are designed for a limited range of operating conditions. When you take a lens outside of that envelope by forcing it to focus closer than designed, I would expect all sorts of aberrations crop up. That's just my guess though, I'd love to hear from people more experienced with extension tubes.

Vlad

Certainly, it's a budget solution, and you also give up infinity focus, but some lenses are really good and still produce good macro results. Here were my tests with my Sigma 60mm + extension tubes:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56005421

Obviously not elaborate tests, but the results look good to me.  The only issue to watch out for--and it's still the case for non-macro shots, is purple fringing.  I have to fix that with the Sigma lens on E-M1 even for normal shots, depending on contrast.

alfredo_tomato wrote:

What advantage would I see getting the Oly 60mm 2.8 over the Sigma 60mm 2.8 with AF extension tubes? I like the results from the Sigma 30mm 2.8 with extension tubes, but it is inconvenient.

I've been using the Oly 40~150 4-5.6 and extension tubes with some success. two hand held examples:

So what way should I go?

Well to muddy the waters, you might try diopters. Here is a quick shot with a +6 diopter on my 75mm to give you and idea of magnification.

+6 diopter

Diopters are more convenient since they mount on front of the lens.

They can add aberrations or distortions since you are putting another piece of glass in front of lens.

Generally speaking diopters magnify more on telephoto lens and tubes more on wider lenses.

They are relatively inexpensive.

They can be stacked for different combinations, the above was a +5 and +1 stacked.

No I was referring to the Sigma 60mm 2.8 Art with extension tubes.

OK, that is another option to explore. Thanks.