I have not had any issue with the cheap ($10 or so on Ebay) 10mm and 16mm Commlite tubes.
They allowed the Sony 50 1.8 OSS APSC lens to cover FF with around 16mm of extension
While they are very light and maybe not the most robust, I have used with some very heavy lenses (adapters added after the tubes).
I also have a set of better (but still cheap) A mount tubes I don't use now 13mm, 20mm and 36mm. I wouldn't mind a set in E mount (doesn't really say who makes them). Not really needed though.
For macro, I am happy enough using a lens like the 55 1.8 with tubes or using my Sigma 150 2.8 APO (EF mount). It works nicely as a manual focus lens on Sony (AF plays up with this lens on Sony) but also makes a decent M43 tele lens with fast AF.
I also still have a old Sigma 180 5.6 APO macro (goes to 1:2 so needed tubes for more) in A mount and liked it enough that I have kept it without being able to use it now (must get a LA-EA4 again).
I think this new 65 f2 will be far better than I need (still have lots of other gadgets like 2x and 3x macro converters and other stuff) but I would imagine it might stay at a fairly high price.
DavidBM wrote:
As far as I know they never have. Canon made them (my suspicion: made by Kenko) and so did Nikon and C/Y.
I guess they could, but if they were going to I'd guess they already would have. And they'd be as you say very pricey.
There's a way they could make it worth it, though, and that's with a set of e-to-e helicoid extension tubes that go from 10-20mm, 20-40mm, and 40-80mm, are well-baffled, and maintain electrical contact. If they could offer that kind of difference, then I don't think people would have a problem paying the OEM tax.
Well, at least not until Kenko rips off the design and offers it for a substantial discount.
DavidBM wrote:
As far as I know they never have. Canon made them (my suspicion: made by Kenko) and so did Nikon and C/Y.
I guess they could, but if they were going to I'd guess they already would have. And they'd be as you say very pricey.
I've long thought it odd that Sony doesn't offer any tubes. Seems like a no-brainer.
David, you suspect that Kenko makes them for Canon...really? That would surprise me since Canon tubes are no comparison in quality to Kenko. Many years ago, I ordered a Kenko set in Canon mount. Same flimsy quality that the Kenko Sony set is now. I returned them and bought an OEM Canon set; there's no comparison, literally. The build quality and perceived durability of the Canon set puts the Kenkos to shame, which is the reason why I'm disappointed in seeing that Kenko hasn't improved after all this time. I still have the Canon OEM set, which is 12mm and 25mm, making them a nice companion to the others in that they are different lengths.
freaklikeme wrote:
There's a way they could make it worth it, though, and that's with a set of e-to-e helicoid extension tubes that go from 10-20mm, 20-40mm, and 40-80mm, are well-baffled, and maintain electrical contact. If they could offer that kind of difference, then I don't think people would have a problem paying the OEM tax.
Well, at least not until Kenko rips off the design and offers it for a substantial discount.
Snap. I was actually looking online to see if there were some e to e helicoid. Ironically, for adapted lenses you can always find helicoid adapters (or go via T or M mount) but with native lenses it seems not. This would be a great thing for one of the high quality Chinese outfits like Yeenon to do. I'd like 5-10 as well, for very wide lenses...
If you make 40-80mm helicoid, you could just as well emulate the Olympus OM system from the 1980'ies and make a 65-116mm tube, rock solid with a tripod mount. Add below lenses with full auto aperture and focusing stages too. The Olympus below lenses did auto aperture with full light metering. Nikon Macro Nikkors were stopped down only. Sony could do auto aperture and lenses with focusing stages, and APO correction. If they were focus by wire, even focus stacking at high magnification would be a possibility without further add-ons. And no vibrations at high magnification with the A9 shutter.
bjornthun wrote:
If you make 40-80mm helicoid, you could just as well emulate the Olympus OM system from the 1980'ies and make a 65-116mm tube, rock solid with a tripod mount. Add below lenses with full auto aperture and focusing stages too. The Olympus below lenses did auto aperture with full light metering. Nikon Macro Nikkors were stopped down only. Sony could do auto aperture and lenses with focusing stages, and APO correction. If they were focus by wire, even focus stacking at high magnification would be a possibility without further add-ons. And no vibrations at high magnification with the A9 shutter.
Canon MP-E
Sigma MC-11
Sony body
and many of the benefits you describe are yours!
(MPE seems to be best at about 2x; it's very good at 1x but not as good as the sony 90mm)
DavidBM wrote:
Canon MP-E
Sigma MC-11
Sony body
and many of the benefits you describe are yours!
(MPE seems to be best at about 2x; it's very good at 1x but not as good as the sony 90mm)
bjornthun wrote:
Thanks a lot! This is useful to know, since I don't think this kind of a lens is on top of Sony's to-do list.
That's why I got it; Nikon never did it, back in the day Oly had those auto bellows lenses on the auto tube, but even that wasn't a variable magnification lens in the same way. Laowa has a cheaper alternative with a smaller range of magnification...
For about half the price of the MP-E 65, you can get an APO-Rodagon-N 50/2.8 and a Minolta Auto-Bellows III, where you'd get swing and shift on the front standard, or you can mount it in a helicoid and use it at infinity down to about 1:3. Plus, if the focal length isn't right, there are enlarging lenses 35-120 that can fill the need.
The 50's a great optic regardless of use...
From Rodenstock's Marketing PDF for their enlarging lenses
For those of us in the cheap seats, you can always just reverse a 50 (or many others too) ONTO a 2x macro converter and you get the same sort of deal as a MP-E.
If you start with a good lens and one of the better 2x converters (does 1:1 macro at one end and is a 2x converter at the other and variable inbetween) the results can be ok (make sure your sensor is clean).
freaklikeme wrote:
For about half the price of the MP-E 65, you can get an APO-Rodagon-N 50/2.8 and a Minolta Auto-Bellows III, where you'd get swing and shift on the front standard, or you can mount it in a helicoid and use it at infinity down to about 1:3. Plus, if the focal length isn't right, there are enlarging lenses 35-120 that can fill the need.
The 50's a great optic regardless of use...
Yep I sometimes use a Scheider Componon-S and Apo-componon reversed onto a helicoid, mainly to use my old enlarging lenses for something, though the results are good.
But the convenience of the MPE is considerable, though whether it's worth the extra cash is a personal question. But for me when I am using it it's usually on a motorised rail, and the barrier to picture talking of setting all that up is high enough that it's nice just to whack on the MPE and be done with it at the lens side. And it is very, very good.
freaklikeme wrote:
For about half the price of the MP-E 65, you can get an APO-Rodagon-N 50/2.8 and a Minolta Auto-Bellows III, where you'd get swing and shift on the front standard, or you can mount it in a helicoid and use it at infinity down to about 1:3. Plus, if the focal length isn't right, there are enlarging lenses 35-120 that can fill the need.
The 50's a great optic regardless of use...
PS
any idea what magnification that MTF is for?
I can't be infinity because
(a) why would you publish an enlarging lens MTF for infinity performance and
(b) it's worse at f5.6 than wide open, which suggests diffraction effects from effective very small aperture due to high magnification
any idea what magnification that MTF is for?
I can't be infinity because
(a) why would you publish an enlarging lens MTF for infinity performance and
(b) it's worse at f5.6 than wide open, which suggests diffraction effects from effective very small aperture due to high magnification
But what mag? Typical enlarging distances?
Could "Scale 10x" mean at 10x enlargement of the negative?
The way I read the graphs MTF is better at f/5.6, than at f/2.8. Am I missing something?
DavidBM wrote:
Yep I sometimes use a Scheider Componon-S and Apo-componon reversed onto a helicoid, mainly to use my old enlarging lenses for something, though the results are good.
But the convenience of the MPE is considerable, though whether it's worth the extra cash is a personal question. But for me when I am using it it's usually on a motorised rail, and the barrier to picture talking of setting all that up is high enough that it's nice just to whack on the MPE and be done with it at the lens side. And it is very, very good.
bjornthun wrote:
Could "Scale 10x" mean at 10x enlargement of the negative?
The way I read the graphs MTF is better at f/5.6, than at f/2.8. Am I missing something?
Your not missing anything. I misread the graph, but I have no idea how - I had the f5.6 graph shifted down 20% in my head. My mistake.
I wondered what the Scale 10x meant; I guess it could mean 10x enlargement of the negative, but there are two ways of thinking of what that means. On one way, it's 10% magnification (an image at the film plane of an object in the plane of the projected image thought of as the original - reversing the actual direction of the light while enlarging. On the other it's 10x magnification. The MTF doesn't ring true two stops down for 10x magnification, so if it's either of those I'm guessing 1:10....
Sorry, guys, I missed this part of the conversation when I replied last night. I believe you're right, though, David. It is a 10x enlargement of a 24x36 frame, so if you reversed the way the light flows through the lens and put your sensor where the negative would be, then you'd have a 1:10 reproduction ratio of a 240x360mm area.
I don't understand the buzz regarding this C/V macro: hefty, manual focus, 1:2. My contenders range from the Yashica 55/2.8 ML macro for 1:2, the CZ SP60/2.8 C/Y for 1:1, and the Sony 100 GM with attached Canon 500D for about 1:1.25 and STF/AF/OSS. Even the Sony 50/2.8 FE macro seems to be a nice option. The C/V fast aperture may help as a general-purpose prime but the weight doesn't. (Insert head-scratching emoji here.)
