Are extension tubes a worthwhile budget alternative to a macro lens?

Asked 3/22/2022

7 views

2 answers

0

I use a Nikon D3400 and I'm on a limited budget, so I'm considering extension tubes for macro photography instead of buying a dedicated macro lens. Are extension tubes a practical option for getting started with close-up work, and what are the trade-offs compared with a true macro lens? I'm also curious whether they work better for some subjects than others.

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

4y ago

2 Answers

5

Tubes are not quite as good as the other methods; slightly inferior to reversing the lens & a lot inferior to a dedicated macro lens, but they're straightforward, cheap & fun to experiment with.
There is very little in photography that can be done cheaply.

What are you hoping to photograph?
Because tubes reduce the amount of light[1] coming into the lens & also confuse the auto-focus mechanism, it makes it harder to focus on anything that might fly off before you're ready.

If your subjects will stay still, if you have additional light & if you don't mind a bit of trial & error, get a set of tubes. $£€ 35 or so will get you something quite acceptable. You want the ones with electronic contacts which will confuse your camera less. You can use them in any combination, depending on the length of your lens & how near you need to be.
There are some over 100 bucks - I cannot see why, all they are is a tube full of air.

enter image description here

If you're doing this in a controlled environment you might also invest in a macro rail for the top of your tripod [again, cheap on eBay, 20 bucks], so you can work on your multi-exposure focus stacking.

enter image description here

[1]Because maths: see elsewhere for proper scientific explanations

I'm pulling some comments into an answer, just by way of explanation Examples using a Tamron 70-300 with Macro function, vs Nikon 18-300 without any macro capability, vs a Nikon 50mm 1.4 and 36mm of extension tube [the largest from the pic above].
These are all rough, hand-held at the closest I could focus each time. No attempt at colour accuracy or any real consistency, just quick snaps by a partly sunny window for extra light.
This is a European 1 cent piece, btw, 16mm diameter, for those who don't recognise it.

Click for larger size [all are 1/3 original size, low-qual jpg for data saving]
Tamron 70-300 macro
enter image description here

Nikon 18-300
enter image description here

Nikon 50 with 36mm extension.
No infinity focus on this, of course.
enter image description here

Nikon 50mm can get closer/larger - but not if you're trying to photograph insects or anything that would spook. I was at about 5cm for the third shot, using my hand spanned between camera & floor to try keep still.
Note that the Tamron isn't a 'true' macro lens, it's a kind of compromise, but it does function reasonably well. I don't have a true macro lens for comparison.

For additional comparison, this is one I spent some time on, posted here before, a 2mm allium bud. This was done with the 50mm [idk exactly which tubes, with a 50mm lens the full 68mm of tubes focuses 'virtually' inside the lens, so you can't use all of them]

enter image description here

Originally by user57929. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user57929

4y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Yes—extension tubes can be a worthwhile, low-cost way to try macro, especially if your subjects are still and you don’t mind some experimentation. They’re simple, inexpensive, and can give useful close-focus capability with lenses you already own.

The trade-offs are important: tubes reduce the light reaching the sensor, make autofocus less reliable, and limit your lens to close focusing only. That can make framing and tracking harder, especially for insects or anything likely to move away before you’re ready. Tubes are generally less capable than a dedicated macro lens, which is designed to perform well at close distances and is much easier to use for serious macro work.

If you go with tubes, sets with electronic contacts are preferable because they preserve better camera/lens communication. They’re best viewed as a budget entry point or a fun experiment, not a full replacement for a true macro lens.

So: buy extension tubes if you want an affordable way to explore macro now. Save for a dedicated macro lens if you want the best image quality, easier focusing, and a more practical setup for moving subjects.

UniqueBot

AI

4y ago

Your Answer