BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: Camera Lenses

Leonid Strizhevskiy		TeleLens I have Canon 10D and Canon 28-135mm (45-210) lens. What would be an effective way to extend my tele capability: extention tubes, teleconventor or 75-300mm lens? What are the pros and cons of each approach? To love this question, log in above February 10, 2004

Dan Throckmorton		I am a 10D user too. You did not state what series lens you are using. If you are using L series 2.8 lens or the equlivent then cost is a big factor. You could go with a 1.4 or a 2x tele converter to extend your lens for much less money than the cost of another lens. The 1.4 will cost you 1 f stop nd the 2x will drop you two f stops. You can pick up an f3.5-5.6 75-300 canon usm on ebay for around $150 or less. Of course the 10D does extend the effective focal lengh of your lens by a factor of 1.6 making the 75-300 the equlivent of a 120-480. Extention tubes will not extend your tele capabilities but they allow you to focus much closer for macro shooting. I hope this helps. To love this comment, log in above February 11, 2004

Leonid Strizhevskiy		Thanks Dan, It is helpful. I am not using the L series, due to an obvious reason. What are pros and cons teleconvertor vs 75-300mm? Many thanks, To love this comment, log in above February 12, 2004

Andy		The Canon Extender only works on a handful of L series lenses only. Auto focus capability is limited or even impossible on those lenses. I have a 75-300mm lens also. Go to the Canon site and see what lenses are compatible with the extender. Hope this helps. To love this comment, log in above February 12, 2004

Leonid Strizhevskiy		Many thanks Andy, And one more: what will be the cons and pros of extention tubes vs macro lens? To love this comment, log in above February 12, 2004

Andy		Macro Lens: Pros - 1) True life size magnification (though the 50mm macro must use a life size converter to achieve this) 2) Sharper from center to edge (arguable) 3) Auto focus (still manual focus recommended) Cons - 1) More expensive compare to extension tube or close up lens 2) One more lens to carry 3) Weight Extension Tube: Pros - 1) Economical 2) Lighter 3) Can use on most lenses (although Canon recommended the EF12 to be used on wide angle lenses and the EF25 for normal or telephoto lenses, it may not work on zoom lenses) Cons - 1) Almost no auto focus in most cases 2) Even with EF25, no lens will come up with life size magnification; mostly not even half the life size Another alternative is to use the close up lens. I used a Tiffen 4x close up lens on my EF28-135mm f3.5-5.6 before I acquired the EF100mm f2.8 Macro. With the 4x close up lens, it came up to about 0.76x magnification, which is not bad. Hope this helps. To love this comment, log in above February 12, 2004

Robert Bridges		Macro vs extension tubes. Camera balance is a consideration. Ext tubes will make your camera front loaded and unstable - meaning more shake, more blur and less sharpness. I can't say if canon makes a tripod collar for the lens you use. Best guess is I doubt it. Secondly, with boÝh the extension tube and the close up filters at some point within your focusing capabilities you are going to be stuck having to literally move the camera back and forth to focus. This becomes a pain in the.......! A macro lens is good for more then just macro whereas an extension tube is not. And yes, the lens on a dedicated macro is ground as a flat field lens so no question it is sharper from edge to edge.....at least the Nikon/Tamron's are. Check into the Tamron 90 or new 180 macro. To love this comment, log in above February 17, 2004

This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here Report this Thread