bellows vs. extension tubes?

[NatureBoyOhio]

I am interested if anyone has experience with using bellows for macro photography? Specifically with E-mounts. Also any comments on extension tubes? I am looking to experiment with each and am curious as to functionality and image results.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I'd favour tubes, and ones that keep your metering intact. I had a play with both, and the bellows were a real pain. Tubes are great, but my word the DOF is miniscule!

 

[pointreyes]

I went for tubes even though I wish Sony would manufacturer one. For getting more magnification I went with the Laowa 25 macro lens. Less hassle to just have that lens over dealing with a bellows setup especially considering the price of a good bellows - https://www.adorama.com/nvbalnex.html

 

[Boojum]

I got the extension tubes, Vello, 10 mm and 16 mm. The lens stays coupled to the camera which is a good thing. I like keeping things as simple as possible, bless old Ockham. As the insurance companies say, "Expose yourself to as little risk as possible." I have other cameras which require a lot of my input. This is bad as I am not quite as bright as the average bear.

 

[J.Duffy]

When I was shooting with my apsc I was using a Raynox adaptor that attached to the front of my lens. I can still use it on my a7riii but it will cause vignetting unless I account for that while photography are switch the camera into apsc mode. I have a Laowa 100mm 2x macro lens now so I don't use the Raynox attachments as much.

 

[J.Duffy]

When I was shooting with my apsc I was using a Raynox adaptor that attached to the front of my lens. I can still use it on my a7riii but it will cause vignetting unless I account for that while photography are switch the camera into apsc mode. I have a Laowa 100mm 2x macro lens now so I don't use the Raynox attachments as much.

I should add that I did try extention tubes first, then read about the Raynox. I also liked how it attached to the front of my lens and if I saw something in the distance I could take it off then zoom in on the deer or rabbit of fox that showed up. Then afterwards put the Raynox back on and do macro. If I can think of it when I get home, I'll take a few pics with and without the Raynox and post them.

 

[J.Duffy]

Ok, so at least I thought about it…. Tried to take some macro pics of some hostas and a moth in our flowerbeds but it is 96*F with 61% humidity so my camera instantly flogged up......I can try Sunday as its supposed to cool down some, that is if your interested.....if not and you really don't want to go the route of Raynox adapters I won't bore you. Here's a chart to bore you with in the mean time that shows at what focal length you would need to achieve 1:1 macro.

 

[Boojum]

I should add that I did try extention tubes first, then read about the Raynox. I also liked how it attached to the front of my lens and if I saw something in the distance I could take it off then zoom in on the deer or rabbit of fox that showed up. Then afterwards put the Raynox back on and do macro. If I can think of it when I get home, I'll take a few pics with and without the Raynox and post them.

I am curious about this. But at the same time I am hesitant to give away from the really sweet 55.0 mm f/1.8 Zeiss/Sony. And I read that edge sharpness falls off. Has this been tested with the Zeiss?

 

[NatureBoyOhio]

Ok, so at least I thought about it…. Tried to take some macro pics of some hostas and a moth in our flowerbeds but it is 96*F with 61% humidity so my camera instantly flogged up......I can try Sunday as its supposed to cool down some, that is if your interested.....if not and you really don't want to go the route of Raynox adapters I won't bore you. Here's a chart to bore you with in the mean time that shows at what focal length you would need to achieve 1:1 macro.

I would be very interested in seeing the results. One of my concerns is attaching any glass on the front of my lens. I have found that even with the best filters I suffer loss of image sharpness.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I would be very interested in seeing the results. One of my concerns is attaching any glass on the front of my lens. I have found that even with the best filters I suffer loss of image sharpness.

The Raynox lenses definitely don't affect quality of images, unless you count improving them They are incredible, but need some careful use, to, as mentioned, combat vignetting.

 

[J.Duffy]

I love my Raynox. I don't use it as much now that I have the Sony 90mm and the Laowa 100 2x. It's still nice when I want go shoot birds but find an interesting insect and I want to only bring one lens. I'll use my Sigma 100-400 and the Raynox DCR-150 at 100mm, 200mm, 300mm and 400mm.

 

[pointreyes]

Sometimes I have been tempted to try the NiSi close-up lens.

https://www.adorama.com/iaclsup77.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwsNiIBhBdEiwAJK4khl1o3c-Lb-fEIQi0BHmQXaOQI9vToLki2qg8N9vy0rCFp18VTd8AhRoCPjsQAvD_BwE&gclid=CjwKCAjwsNiIBhBdEiwAJK4khl1o3c-Lb-fEIQi0BHmQXaOQI9vToLki2qg8N9vy0rCFp18VTd8AhRoCPjsQAvD_BwE&utm_source=adl-gbase-p

 

[J.Duffy]

Sometimes I have been tempted to try the NiSi close-up lens.

https://www.adorama.com/iaclsup77.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwsNiIBhBdEiwAJK4khl1o3c-Lb-fEIQi0BHmQXaOQI9vToLki2qg8N9vy0rCFp18VTd8AhRoCPjsQAvD_BwE&gclid=CjwKCAjwsNiIBhBdEiwAJK4khl1o3c-Lb-fEIQi0BHmQXaOQI9vToLki2qg8N9vy0rCFp18VTd8AhRoCPjsQAvD_BwE&utm_source=adl-gbase-p

I have that too. It adds a lot of weight.

 

[Boojum]

When I was shooting with my apsc I was using a Raynox adaptor that attached to the front of my lens. I can still use it on my a7riii but it will cause vignetting unless I account for that while photography are switch the camera into apsc mode. I have a Laowa 100mm 2x macro lens now so I don't use the Raynox attachments as much.

OK, how do you "account" for the flaws of the Raynox? Switchng to APSC (smaller image) to remove vignetted edges?

 

[Boojum]

I have that too. It adds a lot of weight.

I just checked the weight on Amazon and they say "Item Weight ‎6.4 ounces." The 73 weighs 1.43 pounds and my honking great 24 - 240 weighs in at 1.72 pounds. The replacement non-Sony battery is 2.9 ounces. So we are talking about the weight of a couple of batteries alongside the weight of a camera and lens which combine to roughly 3.25 pounds. Were I buying the NiSi weight would not be a problem, for me. YMMV

It does eliminate the vignetting problems of the Raynox and that is important. It also gives a good distance to work with.

 

[J.Duffy]

I just checked the weight on Amazon and they say "Item Weight ‎6.4 ounces." The 73 weighs 1.43 pounds and my honking great 24 - 240 weighs in at 1.72 pounds. The replacement non-Sony battery is 2.9 ounces. So we are talking about the weight of a couple of batteries alongside the weight of a camera and lens which combine to roughly 3.25 pounds. Were I buying the NiSi weight would not be a problem, for me. YMMV

It does eliminate the vignetting problems of the Raynox and that is important. It also gives a good distance to work with.

I was talking weight when I came to using my apsc and Sony 70-350mm lens. Not sure I would notice the weight on the full frame with the Sigma 100-400 but I definitely noticed a different when I went from my Raynox to the Nisi on the apsc. It made my set up more forward or lens heavy. My husband thinks my a7riii and Sigma 100-400 is heavy and he can't believe I bring it along 5-10 mile day hikes. I don't even notice it anymore...He'd probably die if he knew the weight of some of the big boy lenses! (and price)

 

[J.Duffy]

OK, how do you "account" for the flaws of the Raynox? Switchng to APSC (smaller image) to remove vignetted edges?

And yes no vignetting on my apsc. I plan on going to the wildlife refuge at sunrise tomorrow so I'll tote my Raynox with me. If the Nisi will screw on to my lens I'll bring it too. I can't remember right now what the filter size is of the Nisi and the Sigma.

 

[Boojum]

I was talking weight when I came to using my apsc and Sony 70-350mm lens. Not sure I would notice the weight on the full frame with the Sigma 100-400 but I definitely noticed a different when I went from my Raynox to the Nisi on the apsc. It made my set up more forward or lens heavy. My husband thinks my a7riii and Sigma 100-400 is heavy and he can't believe I bring it along 5-10 mile day hikes. I don't even notice it anymore...He'd probably die if he knew the weight of some of the big boy lenses! (and price)

Your secret is safe with me. My lips are sealed.

 

[Boojum]

And yes no vignetting on my apsc. I plan on going to the wildlife refuge at sunrise tomorrow so I'll tote my Raynox with me. If the Nisi will screw on to my lens I'll bring it too. I can't remember right now what the filter size is of the Nisi and the Sigma.

OK, we will all be waiting. Tape at 11:00. I am curious about the APSC option as it is giving up some real estate. But/and it makes it look more tele, too.

 

[J.Duffy]

OK well sunrise at the Wildlife didn't happen, but here's some padlocks.

The only editing I did in lightroom was auto to lighten them up. No sharpness, texture, vignetting or lens corrections were applied.

I took these outside on the porch, with a flash at 1/16th power and a diffuser. I tried to get as close as I could to the 100-400mm focal lengths and as you can see by the Metadata I was a little off.

I switched between full frame and Super 35 mode (Aps-c) mode.

I'm not surprised but with the Raynox DCR-150 used, the APS-C looks better to me.

If you want something more specific, feel free to ask. I'll give it a try. I'll warn you though, I'm just an amateur hobbyist, lol.

FULL FRAME 100MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 100.0 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

APS-C 100MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 105.1 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

FULL FRAME 200MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 196.8 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

APS-C 200MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 194.9 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

FULL FRAME 300MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 299.0 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

APS-C 300MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 297.4 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

FULL FRAME 400MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

APS-C 400MM

• ILCE-7RM3
• 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary 020
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/250 sec
• ISO 100

 

[Boojum]

Hey, thanks. I just gave them a peep and will come back and give them a better look. I am out the door for errands here thathave to be done. Thank you, again, for your demonstration.

 

[NatureBoyOhio]

I went with the extension tubes and here is one of my first images. I am looking forward to more experimenting!

• ILCE-6600
• FE 24-70mm F4 ZA OSS
• 70.0 mm
• ƒ/22
• 1/60 sec
• ISO 800