mm Full frma Body, 70-200mm VR !! and with this equipnet riskining all by introducing a weak link in this expensive and heavy equipment ??
I would just by myself a 55mm 2.8 AI-s from ebay at the price of the Kenko Tubes , AF and VR are not important for Macro, IQ is... and you'll not find anything sharper at that price i think....

Very nice Pierre, I'll have to look into those Kenkos. I know Nikon made extension tubes at one point, but those are for Nikkors with aperture rings only.

NSXType-R said:
Are those Kenko tubes on a 105mm VR?

Yes I use it very often, VR-on when hand-helds but usually autofocus on manual to prevent unpredictable hunting.

Here is one I have posted a while back.

D700, Kenko tubes 36mm + 20 mm, 105mm f/2.8G VR ED at F5.6, 1/25", ISO 3200, VR-On, Hand-Held.

D700, Nikon 105mm 1:2.8G ED macro + 36mm & 12mm Kenko Extension tubes, f/5.0, 1/60", ISO 200, 5 frames focus-stacked, hand-held.

On this one, the tubes were on the 70-200, VR-off tripod:

I have posted many, dunno if a search would pick them...

I use Promaster tubes on the n70-200 and the n80-400. They work great, just plan on manually focusing them, the auto focus is very slow with tubes and low light.

Has anybody ever used the Kenko 3 tube set with a 80-200 2.8? The 80-200 2.8 is pretty terrible at close focus distances, by it's self. Very soft, until you get about 10 feet away from your subject. I'm wondering if these extension tubes work well with this amazing lens.

I also have a Nikkor 80-400 that would probably work well with these tubes, any experience with the 80-400, even though it's not very fast?

Pierre said:
I use my tubes on the N70-200 F2.8 VRII quite often and have done some of my best shots with it. In some situation, I prefer the result over the 105mm. I use the tubes on the 105mm as well to get very close to the subject.

Are those Kenko tubes on a 105mm VR?

I use my tubes on the N70-200 F2.8 VRII quite often and have done some of my best shots with it. In some situation, I prefer the result over the 105mm. I use the tubes on the 105mm as well to get very close to the subject.

This thread is a year old, and I wonder, has any one has any first hand experiance of using Kenko tubes or the Cannon 500D on the 70-200 (full frame )
normally for macro, I use an old Micro 55mm f 2.8 fully manual
but I have been tryin to photograph bees and could do with auto focus and a longer lens
the cost (in the UK) is the same £119

Kenko tubes are very well made with metal mounts etc.
You could buy these same Kenko tubes branded as Soligor or some other German company if you want to spend more money on the same thing.
Nikon tubes work on G type or any other lenses with AI diaphragm coupling by the way, the thing is D or distance information would be invalid, but that is the case with any extension tube (lens is actually focusing on much shorter distance then it is supposed to).
The other problem with extension tubes is that if you use around 40mm or above you are actually decreasing the light falling on the AF sensor by half so AF would not work, but that close you should focus manually anyway.

Nexus - I use even cheaper extension tubes (Delta) and there's no blending when my 70-200 is attached, it feels rock solid.. and to be honest, You don't have too many options, either Kenko or Delta if You want to use them "G" type lenses and have full AF support

Ya whats up with that? They need to update and resell their close up filters and extension tubes. So I guess I'm stuck with Kenkos...

From what I've read, I don't think the Nikon extension tubes work on type G lenses. Nikon ought to update their tubes...

After doing some more research I found out that the Kenkos build quality is kind of weak and made of cheap plastic. I've got a full frame heavy body with battery grip and a metal 70-200mm lens. There will surely be some bending of the tubes and a bit of distortion in the image. I was also looking into getting the Nikon 6T close up filter but I'm not sure if they make those anymore and in 77mm for that matter.

My question is for those who may know the answer, will the Nikon PK11A, PK12 and PK13 Extension tubes work on my camera/lens? Do they stack? and also are they more sturdier than the Kenkos?

Did you know that my favorite 70-200 accessory TC-17E teleconverter gives you near macro capability?
Closest focusing distance remain the same as you use TC-17E but the focal length increases giving you 1.7 enlargement of the object or near 1:2 image size at 1.5m distance, and on DX it is very usable even for insects especially butterflies.

Thanks mb. I was leaning towards the tubes.

Rebooting system ...
Tubes or close-up lens on 70-200 dilemma restarted.
For what is worth Kenko 3 tubes set will give you more flexibility and a slightly better image quality.
For the rest look above ...
And by the way Nikon 60mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Micro with extension tubes or bellows gives you everything Canon MP-E 65MM has to offer and more plus it can do AF.

I would love to get the 105mm micro but since I don't do a lot of macro shots I decided to go with either the canon close up lens (77mm) or the Kenko 3 tubes. What do you guys recommend? BTW I plan on using it on my 70-200mm.

I agree with mb on the usefullness of a 500D on a 70-300mm VR.When I am out and about with the 70-300mm and don't want to lug along my Sigma 150mm macro I carry a 72mm 500D with step up ring,just in case.I don't really think that you need to spend the extra 25 bucks for the 77mm as I have seen no vignetting at 72mm and I can also use it on my 18-200VR without the step up ring,although my 18-200mm is soft like most everyone elses...hope the new one is better.

I have never used tubes...and what I REALLY,REALLY,REEEEEALY want is a Nikon version of Canon's MP-E 65MM 1-5X macro lens.

Extension tubes and close-up filter lens like Canon 500D are both doing exactly the same thing; they allow you to focus closer then your lens was designed to do. If your lens closest focusing distance is 50cm for example they will allow you to focus on 25cm or less so the subject will appear larger on the image. They both have some pros and cons:
Macro filter lens:
- Pros
Easy to use (just screw it on, you do not have to remove your lens)
Generally cheap alternative to genuine macro lens (Canon 500D is about 150$)
- Cons
They add some glass in front of your lens so they alter and degrade optical characteristics (Canon 500D uses good quality glass so the degradation is a bit less visible but it is present)
You can not use it on wider lenses (Canon 500D will cause severe vignetting on anything wider than 70mm and visible vignetting on most lenses up to 105mm because of it thickness, you can however diminish this by using 77mm Canon 500D on 67mm lens with step up filter adapter)
You can use Canon 500D only on the lenses with same (or smaller with step up adapter) filter threads.
It is almost impossible to use any other filter with it.
Extension tubes:
- Pros
Does not alter optical characteristics (it is just an empty tube without any glass)
It is cheap (you could get 3 peace set for 150$ and it will give you 3 different focusing distances)
You could use them on any lens you have (same mount of course) no matter focal length.
You can use all your filters (except close-up of course, actually you could but it would break your heart)
- Cons
They are more difficult to use (you will have to remove the lens, mount an extension tube and then remount the lens on it)
They increase the distance from the lens to the sensor (or film) so they decrease the amount of light (close-up filter do so also but to a less degree) but TTL cameras will still meter correctly.
They are heavier and bigger then close-up filter.
I prefer extension tubes, especially on sharp and high contrast lenses like Nikon AF 50mm or 85mm f/1.8 D and I think they would be a better choice on high quality optics like 70-200 (subject distance is actually the same), though I do have close-up filter lens too (77mm Canon 500D is really good on Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR with 67-77 step up adapter attached) it is all about convenience really.

I have used the 70-200 2.8 on the D300 and D80 with the Kenko tubes. No problem.

I think the 500D filter sounds great and was recommended on a Dpreview link also

This post about Macro is really great to BookMark:

http://www.peterforsell.com/macro.html

Pete

I have a raynox.. it works great, however I do not have a 70-200 but I would think that the front element is too large for the raynox as i believe it can only fit into a 67mm filter. The 500D sounds like a great option.

What about raynox 250 ?

The Kenko extension tubes work with the 70-200, but the Canon 500D is probably a better choice for macro.

The extension tubes work best when your goal is to reduce the minimum focus distance - from the normal distance of 5 feet to as much as half of that distance. I use tubes to photograph large insects and flowers - like butterflies.

The Canon 500D provides greater magnification and is much better for macro.

Generally extension tubes work best with shorter lenses - 105mm and less. Magnification is proportional based on the amount of extension compared to the focal length of the original lens. With that comes the issue that your working distance gets smaller, to the point where too much extension with a short lens means you cannot achieve focus or may have a working distance of an inch or two. Close up diopters - like the Canon 250D and 500D - work best with longer lenses like the 70-200, 70-300, and 300 f/4.

There is one other thing to keep in mind with tubes. They reduce light (kind of like a teleconverter) so they work poorly when you are struggling with shutter speed or subject movement.

I like having both extension tubes and close up diopters in my kit. Each has value and appropriate uses. But for macro with the 70-200, the 500D would be your first choice.

I've tried the extensions tube on 70-200 and personally it's not my favorite set, as once You mount all of them You need to be really close to the subject. But as I've wrote in some other threads, I'm not a macro shooter.