formula4speed wrote:
It's hard to find a bad macro lens, but this lens is interesting to me as a "general purpose" lens to pair with a moderate wide angle.
The FL is different, for me 50mm is neither here nor there and too close to my true love, 35mm lenses. It's relatively fast and focuses close. My FE 55 is really nice, I like a lot about it, but I hit the MFD all the time and it drives me nuts (note to self, buy extension tubes). This will probably have a really nice manual focus feel. I enjoy the process of taking photos about as much as the end result themselves, so having something that functions nicely is fairly important to me.
bjornthun wrote:
Essentially there is only the Kenko 10mm+16mm full frame set to choose from.
Those getting these tubes need to make sure they get the full frame set, as there is an APS-C version that will vignette on full frame.
Commlite/Vello's with metal mounts work out fine for MF lenses or getting more extension out of a macro bellows, and they're generally cheaper. For reliable interoperability with native AF lenses, I would look elsewhere.
freaklikeme wrote:
Commlite/Vello's with metal mounts work out fine for MF lenses or getting more extension out of a macro bellows, and they're generally cheaper. For reliable interoperability with native AF lenses, I would look elsewhere.
The Voigtländer 65/2 has electrical contacts and is heavy at 635 grams, though it's manual focus. I wouldn't want electrical problems with such an expensive lens, so I'd still go for the Kenko tubes.
I had a set of commlites, which look like the neewer and are likely the same thing.
They ripped out the electrical contacts on my old A7r! Thank goodness there's a decent private repair shop that fixed it for $200 rather than the grand that Sony wanted. Something protruded.
So it was an expensive $30 for me. I now have Kenkos (though they are not perfect)
I've heard horror stories about many of the cheaper brands. The Kenkos are overpriced, but I bought them since they seemed the best available; they feel flimsy (especially the release button), but no problems so far.
DavidBM wrote:
I had a set of commlites, which look like the neewer and are likely the same thing.
They ripped out the electrical contacts on my old A7r! Thank goodness there's a decent private repair shop that fixed it for $200 rather than the grand that Sony wanted. Something protruded.
So it was an expensive $30 for me. I now have Kenkos (though they are not perfect)
The Kenkos are USD129.90 at B&H. Could you elaborate on why they're not perfect? Is it the flimsiness that Danny mentions?
DavidBM wrote:
I had a set of commlites, which look like the neewer and are likely the same thing.
They ripped out the electrical contacts on my old A7r! Thank goodness there's a decent private repair shop that fixed it for $200 rather than the grand that Sony wanted. Something protruded.
So it was an expensive $30 for me. I now have Kenkos (though they are not perfect)
genji wrote:
The Kenkos are USD129.90 at B&H. Could you elaborate on why they're not perfect? Is it the flimsiness that Danny mentions?
There's a small amount of rotational play between then if you use two. I think the pin that holds them in place in small compared to the hole they fit in. Doesn't affect the lectrical contact. I also worry about the robustness of the release mechanism.
But in practice none of this matters, it's just annoying given the price....
And I may just have got very unlucky with the cheapies. I'm sure lots of people will chime in saying they were fine for them.
I also wish that they didn't have the interior masking. It causes slight vignetting, shaped like the corners of the mask, on my Voigtlander 180/4 Apo-Lanthar. So far I haven't seen it with other lenses; I don't think I've used them on anything else longer than 100mm.
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
I also wish that they didn't have the interior masking. It causes slight vignetting, shaped like the corners of the mask, on my Voigtlander 180/4 Apo-Lanthar. So far I haven't seen it with other lenses; I don't think I've used them on anything else longer than 100mm.
I like the masking; but the optimal mask is focal length dependent.
Any of the masked extenders is useless with my 2.8/300 Canon FD and causes huge vignetting.
On the other hand a smaller mask, or no mask, will potentially give less contrast in some situations with a shorter lens..
I'll chime in. I have four sets of the Commlites. I use them to fill in on flange distance with my enlarging lenses and one on the back of my Minolta Auto-Bellows III so I can get to 1:1 with a 135. I started with them when I was using the a7 regularly because they were well-baffled and easy to flock. I've got two 10mm tubes that haven't been touched, but the rest of the sets see regular use and I've yet to have a problem. I tried a 10 and 16 out on the ZAFE 50 when I had it, and the only problem I ran into was, if I set the aperture via the lens, it got recorded as wide open, regardless of setting. It stopped the lens down with effect on, and shot at the correct aperture, but it wasn't communicated correctly to the camera. If I set the lens to allow the camera control of the aperture, it worked and recorded correctly to the EXIF.
No electronics have been harmed in my use of them, and I'm wondering how that happened, @DavidBM Was the mount on the tube too loose so it allowed you to push it too far in? Or were the contacts on the tube mis-mounted so they stuck out too far?
freaklikeme wrote:
I'll chime in. I have four sets of the Commlites. I use them to fill in on flange distance with my enlarging lenses and one on the back of my Minolta Auto-Bellows III so I can get to 1:1 with a 135. I started with them when I was using the a7 regularly because they were well-baffled and easy to flock. I've got two 10mm tubes that haven't been touched, but the rest of the sets see regular use and I've yet to have a problem. I tried a 10 and 16 out on the ZAFE 50 when I had it, and the only problem I ran into was, if I set the aperture via the lens, it got recorded as wide open, regardless of setting. It stopped the lens down with effect on, and shot at the correct aperture, but it wasn't communicated correctly to the camera. If I set the lens to allow the camera control of the aperture, it worked and recorded correctly to the EXIF.
No electronics have been harmed in my use of them, and I'm wondering how that happened, @DavidBM. Was the mount on the tube too loose so it allowed you to push it too far in? Or were the contacts on the tube mis-mounted so they stuck out too far?...Show more →
The contacts were mis-mounted so they stuck too far, and the were aligned just far enough at an angle so you could put the tubes on, but taking it off against the misalignment tore out the cameras contacts....
DavidBM wrote:
The contacts were mis-mounted so they stuck too far, and the were aligned just far enough at an angle so you could put the tubes on, but taking it off against the misalignment tore out the cameras contacts....
Thanks. I'll keep an eye out for that if I order any more.
It looks like we would need 32mm extension to go 1:1.
The 2-set extension combined (26mm) would provide 0.9x magnification. When using extension tubes and especially if combining them, there is the issue of mount asymmetry to worry about.
I may go ahead and get the Kenkos..
