No, you need this extension when you are focused at infinity, not at the lens' MFD. At MFD you already have some extension. All 3 Kenko tubes with the 90 give greater than 1:1.
The TS-E 45 works well with tubes and a TC too... but the 45 is bigger and heavier, the 90 makes a nice walk around lens if you like a 90 for this (I do sometimes).
john_edwards wrote:
You will need 90mm of extension to get 1:1. 180mm of extension for 180mm lens, 50 for 50, etc. Easy to remember once you know. And I like Brent's pumpkin photo as well.
Brent, those food shots are incredible. Wish I could light my stuff like that and get the same clarity in my images. How many lights were you using in total?
I used the TSE-90mm for a job I had for an afghan restaurant. I'm def. not a food photographer, but I was able to get the following shots w/ the lens:
The shots in this thread are really inspiring, especially the watch, interesting and excellent, though I reall didn't need another lens to lust after
J
Jeff Kingston wrote:
Wow. Is this a timely thread! I have been mulling getting the TSE-90 for watch photography. Right now I have to really push things to get decent DOF, shooting at f14 most of the time (now using my new 7D which I consider a huge improvement over the 50D). Current lens is the 60mm 2.8 macro although sometimes I shoot the 100mm macro.
Others have said I need TWO extension tubes to approach 1:1 macro with this lens. Is that your experience?
Here is an example of one of the shots with the 7D.
If I am following this correctly, the minimum focus distance for the TSE 90 is 1.5 feet. Sorry to sound so ignorant, but does an extension tube change that? Does the MFD change if a tube is used--asking because I have never shot with a tube.
For wristwatches, the holy grail is extreme detail for what are breathtakingly small components. This means filling the sensor with the watch. This provokes the question then of how long an extension tube is needed to fill the sensor with a watch that is 36mm in diameter?
Jeff,
I used a 24mm extension tube with the 90mm TS-E and I couldn't get the entire length of a AA battery into the frame of a FF camera. It is just a little short on both ends. I would guess that two extension tubes, a 24mm and 12mm, would do the trick. Maybe not quite 1:1 but it would be sufficient to fill the fram of a typical watch. I would get a set of Kenko extension tubes of varying lengths and play with the different lengths if I were you. The main advantage of the TS-E lens over a typical macro lens is the tilting will give you a more extended depth-of-field, if the position of the watch is not straight perpendicular but at an angle to the camera/lens axis. For straight up shots, a macro lens would still be more applicable.
OceanView wrote:
Will a TS work for full body people shots at a distance of about 5-7 feet from the subject and about 2 feet high off the ground?
I get funky distortion of peoples legs and feet when I use the low end of my 24-70 and want to avoid this.
I have not use any TS-E lens for full-length shots but it doesn't mean it cannot be done. However, generally, people, especially women would like to get their legs accentuated; they would like to see their legs to be rendered longer. Using a wide angle lens from a lower angle, will get you that perspective. If you don't like that view, then you can use a longer focal length lens but you have to back away and that might pose a problem in a tight area. I guess you can indeed use a TS-E lens for that, maybe not a 90mm but a 45mm TS-E would probably be better for that purpose.
AGeoJO wrote:
I have not use any TS-E lens for full-length shots but it doesn't mean it cannot be done. However, generally, people, especially women would like to get their legs accentuated; they would like to see their legs to be rendered longer. Using a wide angle lens from a lower angle, will get you that perspective. If you don't like that view, then you can use a longer focal length lens but you have to back away and that might pose a problem in a tight area. I guess you can indeed use a TS-E lens for that, maybe not a 90mm but a 45mm TS-E would probably be better for that purpose....Show more →
I would probably use a 24mm TS as I need to be close.
The long leg effect that your referring to also makes peoples feet unproportionatly big which is not flattering. This is one reason I thought maybe the TS lenses may actually work. I guess I better try to rent one and try it out myself.
I already said in this thread that all 3 Kenko tubes gets you a little more than 1:1. Exact length is 36+20+12=68mm. 56mm doesn't quite get you there. That is from focusing on a ruler.
More precisely, it gets 32mm in an EOS 3 VF (not 100%) at MFD.
You can also get to 1:1 combining tubes with a TC...
Jeff Kingston wrote:
If I am following this correctly, the minimum focus distance for the TSE 90 is 1.5 feet. Sorry to sound so ignorant, but does an extension tube change that? Does the MFD change if a tube is used--asking because I have never shot with a tube.
For wristwatches, the holy grail is extreme detail for what are breathtakingly small components. This means filling the sensor with the watch. This provokes the question then of how long an extension tube is needed to fill the sensor with a watch that is 36mm in diameter?
Jeff Kingston wrote:
If I am following this correctly, the minimum focus distance for the TSE 90 is 1.5 feet. Sorry to sound so ignorant, but does an extension tube change that? Does the MFD change if a tube is used--asking because I have never shot with a tube.
Thanks,
Jeff
Hi Jeff, an extension tube does allow the lens to focus closer and there is a fairly simple formula to estimate the new mfd that's quite accurate.
I won't bore you with the formula unless you really want it but for the 90 TS-E here are the results for 3 popular extension tubes:
Well this thread was wonderful and the advice, wisdom, and coaching were, as always on this site, superb. Just pushed the buttons, enriching B&H and ordered the TS-E 90 and Kenko tubes. Looking forward to the results now!
