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

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.

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

16 can let the lens focus closer than 11. Can't we always go back use less magnification? Why do we need 11 as well? What I'm missing to understand?

I'm used to ef-s 24mm f/2.8 lens. While it's not any where close to macro lens it has great capability to shoot close subjects than the Fuji primes (23 1.4, 56 1.2) I'm about to receive. I'm doing a system swap.

So advice me which one is to get for my primes?

ms18 wrote:

16 can let the lens focus closer than 11. Can't we always go back use less magnification? Why do we need 11 as well? What I'm missing to understand?

I'm used to ef-s 24mm f/2.8 lens. While it's not any where close to macro lens it has great capability to shoot close subjects than the Fuji primes (23 1.4, 56 1.2) I'm about to receive. I'm doing a system swap.

So advice me which one is to get for my primes?

You don't necessarily need both. The length of an extension tube has a different effect on lenses of different focal lengths. You need a longer tube for lenses of longer focal length to make an appreciable difference in magnification.

Here is Fuji's table of the effect of their two tubes on each lens - it's from their global site....

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

You'll see that either tube is really too long for the 23mm you're expecting. They will work but with ludicrously short working distances. I woudn't recommend either tube with the 23mm. If you want close-up magnification, use a longer lens.

If you check out the data for your 56mm, you'll see that the 16mm extension tube takes you to a magnification of 0.39 with reasonable working distances. That's not high, but practical and better than the bare lens. I'd suggest the 16mm for the 56mm lens.

Fuji should (IMO) offer a third longer tube for the longer lenses in the system. One could buy both to stack them and get more magnification, but there are sometimes electrical connection issues when stacking multiple extension tubes. More so with heavy lenses like the 55-200. I personally probably wouldn't buy both the 11 and 16mm tubes. Unless Fuji offered a longer tube, I'd buy two 16mm tubes if I wanted more magnification.

Regards, Rod

Having read all this thread I think you'll be best off using the 55-200 zoom.  That will give you enough working distance and also a more pleasing perspective of background.  This is related to angle of view not DoF.  This lens reviews well on extension tubes provided it is stopped down a bit, but DoF makes that essential anyhow.

Shorter lenses will be difficult to use as you will end up very close to your subjects.

Zooms are a bit odd on extension tubes, but much more versatile.

For a big lens aiming for longer focal lengths the Fuji 16mm tube.  Cheap ones may be less solid and you'll need longer extension for the longer focal length.

Iamvicdiesel22 wrote:

Will it work on the 35mmf2 as well??

Yes - you will use smaller apertures for macro anyway. Working distance is quite close though.

Vikdaddy wrote:

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

Take a look at 3rd party ones. Quite a few brands have it. I am using the jjc ones. Full reliable af and electronic coupling. There is no glass. U don't have to worry abt degrading image. They r waaaay cheaper n gets the job done.

Actually u Don really need af. Set a focus and move camera forward or backward. The af is not going to help much under such magnification

Photos-Mike wrote:

I have both.

The 11 is much easier to use than the 16. As others have pointed out the DOF is quite narrow.

It needs a steady hand, and I use the 50-140 F/2.8 with it, since the stabilisation helps a lot.

The first 40 shots in this gallery are shot with the 11 on the 50-140:

https://mikekatz.smugmug.com/Mikes-Photos/2016/2016-06-07EdwardGardens/

Here's one of them:

Great Galley..

My advice is to get both FYI I got the 10 and 16mm macro ext tibes from MEIKE at 30$ and I strongly recommend them they work perfectly below is macro with the 18-55 at 55mm using 10-+16 tubes together

the price of the Fuji ones is just exhorbitant ....

At 55mm with both 10+16mm you get a 0.69 repro ratio

For what it is worth, the Meike extension tubes are available now on Amazon for $26 USD. The only issue is that Amazon is taking its time shipping them.

baobob wrote:

At 55mm with both 10+16mm you get a 0.69 repro ratio

I put together a spread sheet which calculates the magnification and I have the 27mm F2.8. Theoretically the combined extension tubes will yield a 1.06 ratio. Its not clear that I can actually use both on the 27mm but I am going to find out when the tubes arrive.

On a 27mm it is useful that you can use the flash as the lens does not obscure it.

I use a cobra flash in macro with the 55-200mm at 200mm + Raynox bonnette without any issue

Vikdaddy wrote:

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

First think about how you want to use the camera and if you really want surpass the 1:2  barrier.

about 99% never ever go that far and those who do buy special equipment and special lenses.

I propose to buy a used 2,4/60mm macro lens which is a very ,  wry good lens for nearly everything you can do.

Try first to test this lens if your budget might be enough for a  2nd hand 2,4/60 in good condition (about 300-250 €)…