extension tubes

[ronidog]

I am looking for a set of extensions to use with my M5 mark 3. Is there anything in particular I should look out?

Any specific recommendations would be really helpful..

Thanks
Dave

[Graham_of_Rainham]

I use Kenko tubes and they work well

[ronidog]

Thanks Graham. I have looked through some of the photos on the site and most people us the Kenko ones. An on order has been placed with SRS.

[AMc]

Too late but I bought a set of FOTGA tubes with contacts - they worked well with my E-PL5, E-M10i and E-M10ii

https://flic.kr/s/aHskypyDQ2

I discovered I have little patience for macro so it was a good investment over a much more expensive dedicated lens to leave in a drawer

Hope the Kenko ones work out for you!

[ronidog]

Thanks for posting. I hope the Kenkos work

[drmarkf]

The Kenkos are very robust and well-made and I’m happy hanging the 300 off the front. I’m not sure I’d do the same with any of the cheaper alternatives; it’s really useful for shooting insects since you’re able to keep well away from them.

[peak4]

There is an advantage to using Pixco ones, as they allow the teleconverters to be used with lenses other than the 300mm & 40-150mm
e.g. you can use the 2x converter with the 60mm macro to get a longer EFL.

If you have a Facebook account, check out some of Ethan Beckler's work, where he photographs grains of garnet, balanced on grains of sand.

[Phill D]

I've seen some of Ethan's images they are pretty spectacular.

[ronidog]

That sounds amazing I will have to lokk at that site

[Lepus20]

Will the Kenco set allow use of teleconverters? I bought a set of Meike tubes and they do not physically fit as the central aperture is too small, so back to Amazon they went.

[Phill D]

I think the answer to this is no from what I've read. You need the Pixco ones for that. But they are a mix of metal and plastic so wont be as strong as all metal tubes.

[blu-by-u]

I have a set of Meike. They worked fine till one day, the thinner decided not to work for no apparent reason. I have cleaned the contacts and they will only work when they feel like it.

[alfbranch]

If you want to put a 300mm or 40-150 lens on tubes I suggest the kenko ones as they are the only ones I would expect to be strong enough as most are plastic with metal mounts.

[Lepus20]

Thanks for that, I’ll give the Pixco tubes a try as I only want them for the 60mm

[Phill D]

Do a bit of google work first to check my recolection is correct as I don't have any myself to be completely sure. I did the digging some time ago but never got round to getting any.

[Lepus20]

Ordered a set today so will let you know!

[Phill D]

That would be great thanks. I'll cross my fingers for you.

[blu-by-u]

Following. I need to get a replacement set and I would like it to work with the extenders.

[Wildwood]

The Kenco ones are definitely the best quality. However I've got some plastic bodied ones and they're fine with the 300/f4. Just be sure to support by the lens rather than the body. For a light lens like the 60mm Macro or the future 100mm Macro extension tube body material is a non-issue.

[peak4]

Following. I need to get a replacement set and I would like it to work with the extenders.

Essentially as follows, and I've only played about in the house, rather than real life "in the field" photography
As you will know, the protrusion from the front of the converters fouls on the rear element of most lenses, which is why you need the tubes in the first place.
Also the diameter, of about 26mm, precludes you spacing the converter from the lens with most extension tubes.

Re. the Pixco ones;
The hole through the 10mm one is about 26.5mm, so gives clearance for the front element of the converter to pass through.
Unfortunately the 16mm tube is only about 25.5mm, through hole at its narrowest point (the rear unfortunately), so doesn't give clearance.

N.B. used on its own, whilst the 10mm Pixco tube fits OK on the teleconverter(s), it still doesn't leave enough space in front to fit the 60mm.
However, if you add the Pixco 10mm to the converter, the 16mm now fits OK onto that and the combination does allow the 60mm lens to be fitted, but it must be in the order of;
Camera body-converter-10mm tube-16mm tube-60mm lens. i.e. 26mm of extension total.

I do have another set of cheap tubes, again 10mm +16mm (branded "Kernel"), that I bought before the teleconverters.
The Kernel 10mm will stack on the Pixco 10mm, giving a total of 20mm tubes, rather than the 26mm using just the Pixco set.

I see no immediate reason why the other tubes, i.e. the 16mm Pixco and both the Kernel ones, couldn't be bored out just a touch to provide the necessary clearance. indeed, on the 16mm tubes, the hole, whilst a shade too small at the rear, is actually tapered, and plenty wide enough at the front end, so there wouldn't be much to remove. I assume it's tapered so it releases from the manufacturing mould easier. This could then give a 16mm , thus allowing 16mm, 20mm, 26mm etc.

I can't see any way to achieve anything less than 16mm, due to the length of the tele-converter protrusion

Unlike the 4/3s system MFT doesn't seem to have the limitation of a single lens accessory.
on 4/3s for instance you couldn't use both the 25mm tube and a converter, or 2x25mm tubes (well not without some bypass wiring anyway), as the lens then wasn't recognised and thus the aperture wouldn't stop down, nor would electronic focusing be permitted.

With MFT, you can play with all sorts of other combinations if you pair up with 4/3s lenses and an MMF-1 adaptor. The MFT converters fit inside the MMF-1 adaptor OK, but not the MMF-3; I don't have an MMF-2 or a Panasonic DMW-MA1 adaptor to try.
e.g. you can stack converters on an MFT body.
I did try EM-1 ~ MC1.4 ~ MMF-1 ~ EC-2.0 ~ 300mm F2.8 just out of interest. A tad hard to hold still and AF hunted a bit (well rather a lot really), but that's probably because I kept moving the target as I buckled under the weight myself.
I've no idea what it did to image quality, as it was already getting a bit dark by then, so I couldn't get ISO low enough, or shutter speed high enough, but everything else seemed to work OK.

Just tried EM-1 ~ MC1.4 ~ MMF-1 ~ Sigma 150mm F2.8
Broadly speaking, it does seem to work OK, Distant AF seems fine, but I've not tried a tripod setup etc.
These odd combinations do misreport aperture, this combo still shows F2.8 wide open, even with the MC-1.4 converter fitted.
The more conventional EM-1 ~ MMF-1 ~ EC1.4 ~Sigma 150mm F2.8 does report F4 correctly as the max aperture.
You don't appear to be able to stack 4/3s tubes+converters though.

[Phill D]

Excellent bit of experimenting Bill, many thanks for that.

[IainMacD]

Inspired by Bills post above I managed to fit the 10mm Pixco tube between my 1.4x and 2x converters and then attach the 300mm f4! I tried a quick test out the back door and the camera autofocussed (sort of) on this house that is 2 miles away through yesterday's misty heat haze. I will try again when I have more time and the atmosphere is a bit clearer.
The first image of this modest abode is a jpeg from an unprocessed RAW file

This is the processed file with quite a lot of dehaze :-)

I think it is worth testing on the tripod and using different settings on a less humid day
p.s. I just noticed the guy tucking into a giant haggis - LOL

[wanderer]

That aint no Haggis. He's breeding Monsters