Question about extension tubes

[james_tigerwoods]

Sorry for the idiot question but I'm toying with the idea of some extension tubes - assuming I've read that right, they'll work with my D3100.

However are extension tubes ONLY for Macro use? Would it extend the reach of my 55-200 for example for those rare occasions that I want something a little longer than 200mm?

Or should I park the whole idea and save for the 70-300 that I really, really want?

Thanks

JTW

[TooLateForAName]

Yes only for macro.

You are increasing the distance from the lens to the sensor which means that to have the focus on the sensor then the distance to the subject is much smaller.

Its the same effect that some manual lenses with adapters will no longer focus at infinity.

[Xerstead]

They (greatly) reduce the distance at which a lens can focus, so only for macro use.
When using the tubes I can only focus on things ~1cm in front of the lens to about 2ft. The actual range depends on what focal length, and the length of the tubes, you are using. You can get much closer with shorter focal lengths but it's too close for live subjects.

[ssray]

On my rb67 mamiya I could use one ext tube with a 127mm lens to give a shallower depth of field on portraits, there were 3 in the full set so using just one did not give full macro

[james_tigerwoods]

Thanks 70-300 it is then

[SamHH]

james_tigerwoods said:

Thanks 70-300 it is then

If you want to focus more closely than your current lens allows, you still need an extension tube (or something else that does the same job). It's not a case of either extension tubes or a longer focal length. They each achieve different things.

[james_tigerwoods]

Guess I was looking for a cheap way to extend the reach of my 55-200 and this isnt it...

[Simpo Two]

A 'teleconverter' is what you're looking for (looks like an extension tube but with lenses inside) - but it will reduce max aperture.

[james_tigerwoods]

Simpo Two said:

A 'teleconverter' is what you're looking for (looks like an extension tube but with lenses inside) - but it will reduce max aperture.

I think it's this that I was thinking of. Thanks Simpo

Saying that - for what they cost, I think I'll be saving for the 70-300. My complement of lenses (35, 18-70 and 55-200) are doing me well for now

Edited by james_tigerwoods on Monday 3rd June 06:59

[Simpo Two]

A ray of light through the murk

I'd agree with the 70-300; it will be far more usable than a 55-200 with TC. And you can always crop a bit for extra 'magnification'.

[james_tigerwoods]

Simpo Two said:

A ray of light through the murk

I'd agree with the 70-300; it will be far more usable than a 55-200 with TC. And you can always crop a bit for extra 'magnification'.

Ok - the 55-200 is doing me well at the moment, but it's just not long enough. And the 55-300 is a whole world of st...