-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Sigma 150mm Macro with 20mm spacer tube (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Nikon Kid
- Start date
Well I guess if you add a 20mm tube to your lens you'll end up at 170mm, and you'll decrease the minimum focusing distance too. But be warned the DOF at minimum focusing distance is very thin, if you increase the mag and decrease the MFD it will become even thinner. You will probably have to stop down a lot to get enough of the subject in focus.
Nikon Kid
Love them Sula Bassana
I have been shooting with flash at f13 @ 100 ISO with the 150mm, this is a shot that worked out well, albeit the slight glare of the flash on the body. Does that mean each mm of tube you add, adds a mm to the lens. I am going with the tube idea because I would not lose IQ the same way I would if I used a 1.4 TC.
Attachments
Overread
Hunting birds with a canon
This test here might help you decide - each shot as the lens/TC/tubes used in it listed at the title and each one opens up to fullsize if you want to see it fullsize.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24534478@N04/sets/72157613376911895/
As for image quality loss - remember tubes are still moving the lens assmebly away from their optimal point of hitting the sensor, so some image degradation might be present - but its the sort that will only affect highly controled test shots in a studio - in the field it will have little effect. I would also add that the same is mostly true of using teleconverters as well - image quality is still very high when using a 1.4. You also get the bonus that your minimum focusing distance remains the same as to does your infinity focus.
edit - oh and that is one beauty of a dragon shot there!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24534478@N04/sets/72157613376911895/
As for image quality loss - remember tubes are still moving the lens assmebly away from their optimal point of hitting the sensor, so some image degradation might be present - but its the sort that will only affect highly controled test shots in a studio - in the field it will have little effect. I would also add that the same is mostly true of using teleconverters as well - image quality is still very high when using a 1.4. You also get the bonus that your minimum focusing distance remains the same as to does your infinity focus.
edit - oh and that is one beauty of a dragon shot there!
Adey Baker
Member
Try it and see! As the Sigma lens is internal focussing, the actual focal length at 1:1 may be less than the nominal 150mm so it may not be possible to work it out without knowing what that true focal length is. Generally, the longer the focal length, the more extension you need to make a big difference. The 20mm will get you closer and thus a larger than life-size image but it may not be worth the effort if you're too close to the subject + the smaller DOF, etc.
Overread
Hunting birds with a canon
Honestly I don't think the glare is that bad! I know of only one sure fire way of removing flash glare totaly as a shooting risk - Cross-Polarization Flash
http://www.naturescapes.net/042004/wh0404.htm
I need soem polarizer material for my flash before I can try it out myself. Downside though is you need good lighting if your going to stop 2 whole stops with the polarizer (more of a focusing issue than a lighting issue)
http://www.naturescapes.net/042004/wh0404.htm
I need soem polarizer material for my flash before I can try it out myself. Downside though is you need good lighting if your going to stop 2 whole stops with the polarizer (more of a focusing issue than a lighting issue)
Nikon Kid
Love them Sula Bassana
This is my setup at the moment off centre with a sigma flash and softbox mounted on a bracket that I can move forward and back from the front of the lens, next time out I will shoot with the wide angle panel on the flash deployed, I have also got a small hama ball joint on its was to allow me to move the flash more to the side.
And of cause I am just near to getting my Cussons Carex bottle empty to use as a softbox, which is smaller than the Lumiquest Softbox.
EDIT BTW overread that double flash is not for me, I am a handheld man and one flash and bits is enough for me, || I will just have to hone my system.
And of cause I am just near to getting my Cussons Carex bottle empty to use as a softbox, which is smaller than the Lumiquest Softbox.
EDIT BTW overread that double flash is not for me, I am a handheld man and one flash and bits is enough for me, |
| I will just have to hone my system.Attachments
Last edited:
Overread
Hunting birds with a canon
True - though its not just the doubleflash - its the use of polarize with the flash and lens at the same time to cancel out the highlights. I think it might be possible with a single flash setup - but I really do need to test it properly.
Also good to see the rotational braket working well - how have you found it to work with and hold? Also you might try positioning the flash above the lens and angling it down a little (so that its pointed at where the subject will be) to give your lighting a little less of a onesided lean (I find it a pain when its like that and the main interest area of the subject lands in the shadowed section of hte shot
Also good to see the rotational braket working well - how have you found it to work with and hold? Also you might try positioning the flash above the lens and angling it down a little (so that its pointed at where the subject will be) to give your lighting a little less of a onesided lean (I find it a pain when its like that and the main interest area of the subject lands in the shadowed section of hte shot
Nikon Kid
Love them Sula Bassana
Its a bit heavy, but I can manage it for a couple of hours, I tried it on a Monopod but its not for me when you are out and about walking. The brackets OK, I thing they sell another bracket that has more movement and adjustment than the one I have got, but it will be heavier. By the time I am happy with it, winter will be here and I will be out birding again. BTW overread your help has been invaluable, Thanks
Cristian Mihai
Cristian Mihai
Very nice pic Terry.
I don't use an external flash for macro (because I don't have one!). Many of my macro shots are taken with the Zuiko Digital 70-300 mm F4-5.6. The minimum focusing ditance with AF it is around 1.2 meteres so I don't really need a extension tube. This is a pic taken with the buit-in flash of my E-520 camera. F13, ISO 400, 1/180, handheld.
I don't use an external flash for macro (because I don't have one!). Many of my macro shots are taken with the Zuiko Digital 70-300 mm F4-5.6. The minimum focusing ditance with AF it is around 1.2 meteres so I don't really need a extension tube. This is a pic taken with the buit-in flash of my E-520 camera. F13, ISO 400, 1/180, handheld.
Attachments
Last edited:
Markulous
Well-known member
I've used the full set of tubes (a cheapish clone set) with my Sigma 105mm and even added my Kenko 1.4x TC. Mixed results mainly "suffering" from shallow DOF (which I personally like!).
Not tried it with the Sigma 150mm as it's quite a bit heavier and I don't want to stress the bayonet fitting too much - and I'll use the 105mm when I add my 140 DG macro flash
Not tried it with the Sigma 150mm as it's quite a bit heavier and I don't want to stress the bayonet fitting too much - and I'll use the 105mm when I add my 140 DG macro flash
