> I suspect they're too long for the 21mm lenses too. You might be able to
> squeak by with a 12mm or 14mm tube on a 24mm or 28mm lens, but you'll be
> very, very close to the subject at infinity focus on the lens. This was
> one of the first things learned when trying a tube with the short lenses
> (18mm, 24mm and 35mm). It's very easy to bang the front element into the
> subject material trying to move in close enough to focus. (Fortunately
with
> flowers it doesn't damage the lens.)
Yes, after having seen the shot you sent in for TOPE 6, I too had "a shot"
(pun intended) at it, and mounted my 24/2.8 on the Hama 13mm extension tube
(IOW: I mounted my shortest lens on my shortest extension tube), and the
result can be seen on my TOPE 6 runners up page (
http://www.millennics.com/olympus/tope/tope6/tope6_ojgextra.html - picture
nr. 13). Indeed, as John mentioned in his message, I was VERY close to the
flower.
Cheers!
Olafo
Nice rose shot! I found the radical perspective in a macro made using a
tube on a wide angle lens gives a 3-D quality to the image not found when
using longer lenses. If you keep doing shots like this, I'll bet you
eventually end up with a 21/2 or an 18/3.5 and a 7mm auto-tube in the arsenal.
The rose that Olaf has shot certainly has an amazing 3D rendition. I think
that with a tripod it may have been even more dramatic. I finally decided I
had to try this so I mounted my 21mm f2 with 7mm extension tube. I
organised a small 'still life' with my OM4Ti mounted on a tripod. I shot by
window light and with aperture set to f16 the exposure was several minutes.
The lens was as you would imagine very close to the subject material. There
was certainly an amazing perspective effect in the viewfinder. I can't wait
to see what it has turned out like. If its any good I'll try and get it
scanned for display.
Oben
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|