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

Hi

Want to get one of the official Fuji extension tubes. Any advice on which to go for? If it helps, I intend to use them on either the 35mm f2 or the 56mm f1.2. I also own the 14mm and the 55-200mm but it's unlikely I'll be using those?

Any advice appreciated. I'd like to pick up one or the other for shooting with this Sunday.

Thanks

Here is a link to Fuji's magnification chart. It might help to determine which you need, or both. Fuji recommends not to stack them, but I have read on this forum, that people do without a problem.

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/accessories/pdf/mcex_01.pdf

Notice the mecx-16 is not compatible with the xf14; even though you don't intend to use it on that lens.

I only have the mech-11 and I really like it. It kind of addicting on the xf35 (1.4). I have tried it briefly on the xf60 but I was too lazy for to breakout my tripod to get the best from it. Seemed quite good, though.

The mcex-11 was underwhelming on the xf55-200. Again, not your intention.

This is the 11 on the xf35 @F10

I would avoid the Fotodiox ones. I have a pair I am about to return where the plastic is about the same quality as the toys you'd find at the checkout at the local mini-mart. The Fuji ones are an entirely different beast.

http://www.fujivsfuji.com/fuji-mcex-11-mcex-16-extension-tube-review/

I'm starting to experiment with the 11.  FWIW, it seems that the 18-55, @55mm, mounted on the MCEX-11 gives only slightly less magnification than the 60/2.4 (note that this is not true of the 56 - it's MFD is such that it cannot achieve that level of magnification).  So, I'm going to give that combo a try at a botanical garden in Puerto Vallarta next week, with the logic that the OIS will make hand-held shots easier.  Not sure how that will turn out, and I know the 18-55 isn't as sharp as the 60, particularly at 55mm, but I'm not looking to crop or print large so I'm hoping the results will be acceptable.

georgehudetz wrote:

I'm starting to experiment with the 11. FWIW, it seems that the 18-55, @55mm, mounted on the MCEX-11 gives only slightly less magnification than the 60/2.4 (note that this is not true of the 56 - it's MFD is such that it cannot achieve that level of magnification). So, I'm going to give that combo a try at a botanical garden in Puerto Vallarta next week, with the logic that the OIS will make hand-held shots easier. Not sure how that will turn out, and I know the 18-55 isn't as sharp as the 60, particularly at 55mm, but I'm not looking to crop or print large so I'm hoping the results will be acceptable.

The 18-55mm lens has a maximum aperture of 4.0 at 55mm. It's MFD is 219mm (sensor to subject) with the MCEX-11. This gives a DoF of 2mm. If you intend to get that close, you will need a very, very steady hand to focus and shoot. I would recommend a tripod.

I just ordered the same tube and was very close to getting a dedicated macro rail along with it. But I need to do some research first. I have plenty of rails to play around with. We'll see.

Vikdaddy wrote:

Thanks for all the tips guys. It seems that people have erred towards the mcex-11, I wonder why not the mcex-16?

The MCEX-16 provides higher magnification and shallower DoF than the MCEX-11. It is quite tricky to focus without special gear. If we take the 35mm F2 as an example, the DoF would be 1mm at MFD and F2!

Not having much experience with macro, I personally decided to start out with the MCEX-11. That looks daunting enough to me.

There is also another, very important aspect you haven't mentioned yet, I think: what is it that you want to take pictures of, and what is it you expect?

Vikdaddy wrote:

nixda wrote:

There is also another, very important aspect you haven't mentioned yet, I think: what is it that you want to take pictures of, and what is it you expect?

Good question; flowers probably, and other things from nature. I don't have a set idea of what though. At that price point I figure I'll just get one for sporadic use.

Sounds good.

I was asking, because, if you intend to take pictures of compound eyes, for example, one would need a completely different setup. Flowers and other reasonable large things are fine.

55-200 works really well for closeups from a distance with ext tubes (support it it with left hand if using the cheap ext tubes).

nixda wrote:

georgehudetz wrote:

I'm starting to experiment with the 11. FWIW, it seems that the 18-55, @55mm, mounted on the MCEX-11 gives only slightly less magnification than the 60/2.4 (note that this is not true of the 56 - it's MFD is such that it cannot achieve that level of magnification). So, I'm going to give that combo a try at a botanical garden in Puerto Vallarta next week, with the logic that the OIS will make hand-held shots easier. Not sure how that will turn out, and I know the 18-55 isn't as sharp as the 60, particularly at 55mm, but I'm not looking to crop or print large so I'm hoping the results will be acceptable.

The 18-55mm lens has a maximum aperture of 4.0 at 55mm. It's MFD is 219mm (sensor to subject) with the MCEX-11. This gives a DoF of 2mm. If you intend to get that close, you will need a very, very steady hand to focus and shoot. I would recommend a tripod.

I just ordered the same tube and was very close to getting a dedicated macro rail along with it. But I need to do some research first. I have plenty of rails to play around with. We'll see.

Here are a few shots with the 18-55/MCEX-11 combo, hand-held. Shot at F8 (no need to shoot wide-open when you have OIS working for you). I'm pretty happy with the results. No doubt the 60 would do better if mounted on a tripod, but the 18-55+MCEX-11 makes for a pretty nice combination in scenarios where you don't want to use a tripod, or simply don't want to carry an extra lens, IMO.

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