"Gary Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As a "general rule", don't extension tubes work better, if you attach them
> to a good lens to begin with? Last summer I did some "close-up" stuff of
> flowers mostly, using the 70-200 f/2.8 and 1.4X extender. I kind of liked
> the shots and am thinking about getting into some actual macro shooting this
> spring. I'd thought about getting a macro tube or two, to use with the
> 70-200, 28-70 L or the 28-135 IS. Is this a viable direction to take, or
> should I be looking for an actual micro lens? Whaddaya think?
Hi Gary,
Thanks for the question. The answer to this is not so simple, and takes
up a lot of space in the List archives. It might be helpful to read
Chuck Westfall's view at the Close-up FAQ:
http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/faq30/closeup2.htm
After I read Chuck Westfall's comments, and the EOS "Close-Up System"
brochure, I decided to get a set of Kenko extension tubes (12, 20, 36mm),
which could fit all my lenses even though they had many different filter
sizes (52, 58, 72, 77mm).
You might not have the same problem if your lenses have only 72 and
77mm filter threads.
The loss of light due to extension always required the use of a
tripod. However, I wanted to try handheld macro shooting using
Image Stabilizer lenses (28-135 and 100-400). I bought the 250D to
facilitate this, but have not had much of a chance to experiment.
Early results are quite promising.
I value the opinion of other List members, and am always intrigued
at how and why they come to their decisions.
Cheers
Julian Loke
P.S. The Vivitar 100mm f/3.5 macro is another attractive option,
but it is not available locally, and would have to be imported.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
