Introducing the 2 element lens you are talking introduces the glass than light must pass through in which case it reduces the sharpness and would deteriorate the actual sharpness. The extension tube (not tele converter) has no elements so the lens would remain as sharp as normal except you have a closer focusing point and no infinity range on the lens. So I do not understand how this is possible, I mean even introducing a filter will reduce light transmission, albeit negligible.
Peter K ----- Original Message ---- From: Henning Wulff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 9:07:29 PM Subject: RE: EOS EF 135mm f/2L > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wayne S >> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 6:58 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: EOS EF 135mm f/2L >> >> How well does the 135/2 work for close-up with extension tubes? >> >> Wayne S >> > > >Hi Wayne, > >I've never use it this way. Maybe other have but I would imagine the 135 2L >to be stellar. > > >Cheers/Chip Actually, not that good. IF lenses like the 135/2 do better with good 2 element achromat close up lenses like the 500D than extension tubes. -- * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm *********************************************************** ____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
