TC or Diopter with a 100mm?

[azorean 0]

Hi all,

 

I am using a 100mm 2.8 on a FF (5d) in a Aquatica housing. Want to get more than 1:1 macro, never tried Diopters, extension rings or TC´s. What woul/did you chose?

 

 

All the best, Nuno.

[bmemike 0]

I am using a 100mm 2.8 on a FF (5d) in a Aquatica housing. Want to get more than 1:1 macro, never tried Diopters, extension rings or TC´s. What woul/did you chose?

 

Topside I shoot with diopters and tubes on the 100mm macro. What I choose depends on what I'm shooting and how flexible I need to be.

 

Underwater, I have a wet diopter and don't want to muck around with tubes. I'm shooting with Ikelite, so I naturally went with the dedicated port for the 100 macro. I didn't want to have to deal with multiple port extensions for different degrees of tubes. Also, I like having the flexibility of being able to remove the diopter underwater. There's a lanyard on it so I can put it over a handle or my wrist when I don't want to shoot at >=1:1... but when I get a good subject and want to get some more punch, I like having the wet diopter to really dial in.

[craig 0]

Tubes and diopters work via different means but they accomplish the same thing: closer focusing distances. Tubes have the downside of requiring port (and possibly focus) changes, lowered focusing light, and reduced focusing range (compared to diopters). Some believe that tubes offer better image quality but that appears dependent on the lens. Wet diopters are changeable underwater but you can also use dry ones. The problem with both tubes and diopters is that there's a limit to how close you can get to a subject. Because of that, eventually you will have to go to a TC. There's no reason not to use a TC and a diopter together. My feeling is that once you do to the longer focal length that a TC provides, you won't need the far focusing distance anyway. I usually add a dry diopter at that point.

 

You could also consider the Sigma 150 if you find you really like the 100 + 1.4x combination and use it a lot. The downside is traveling with the extra lens and port and the increased need for a diopter due to the longer minimum focus. The upside is the brighter viewfinder and potentially better IQ. I would rather personally use the 150 than a 100+1.4x and also rather use a 150+1.4x than a 100+2x. The longer option is useful on the 5D.

[Tom_Kline 137]

Hi all,

 

I am using a 100mm 2.8 on a FF (5d) in a Aquatica housing. Want to get more than 1:1 macro, never tried Diopters, extension rings or TC´s. What woul/did you chose?

 

 

All the best, Nuno.

 

OK, a different system and format but yesterday I used my D2X and Nikkor 105VR with 5T diopter to shoot salmon eggs in a very shallow stream. The water level was low due to winter, water was 2C (I measured it) and just a few inches deep (the parts of the stream not ice-covered). I had been at the same location the previous weekend with the 60mm. From this earlier experience I ascertained that I needed a working distance and slightly greater than 1:1 capability that was matched with the combo I used yesterday. BTW I also had available the earlier 105, 1.4 TC, and MF gears. I chose the VR since it is a simpler set up and would need less extension (and thus less weight) for the shot - I held most of the housing weight out of the water, only the port was submerged for most shots. I did some dry shooting on a ruler before venturing out to see if that set up would work. I had AF shut off (using lever next to lens mount), the lens was set at the minimum focus distance (with MF gear). The lesson here is that the problem needs to be defined, with a minimal of knowing the subject size and working distance.

Hope this helps

Tom

[MaLe 0]

Hi Nuno

 

I also used the 5D in combination with the 100mm Macro USM. I also tried it for a couple of dives with a Kenko 2x TC + the 100mm USM nevertheless this combination is a bit a pain to focus. The AF is really not reliable. Therefore a 150mm is I guess a far more reliable with AF.

 

Nevertheless if you like to go beyond 1:1 then a 150mm (1:1) and a 100mm (1:1) make no different. But the 150mm will increasing the working distance so more shy gritters night feel still comfortable and do not try to escape due to you approaching it.

 

Therefore you really feel the need of more than 1:1 because the tiny Nudi branch of 10mm length is hard to find on your 36mmx24mm Sensor at (1:1) then you really need a diopter or TC.

 

The 2x TC is in therms of image quality really only a compromise but several people proved that it is possible to grate great pictures with it.

 

Best regards,

Matthias

[craig 0]

Yes, the 150 and 100 will be the same until you combine it with a diopter. When I use a supermacro setup I rarely have use for focusing beyond two feet. A dry +2 diopter will make the 150mm stronger than the same diopter on a 100mm with little downside.

[azorean 0]

O.k., so the Sigma 150mm with a diopter would be the best choice, but not the cheapest one . The lens is going for about 600$, and the Kenko 1.4 TC for about 199$ (220$ for the 2x).

 

Matthias, have you tried the AF with a 1.4 TC, any better? That would be a good and cheap choice 100mm with the 1.4 TC and a +2 or +4 Diopter?

 

And how about the dry diopters? I hear good thing about the Canon 500D. But Tiffen has a one element +1, +2 and +4 Kit for about 27$, and the 500D goes to around 85$. I am against cheap glass in front of a good lens, but I have heard allot of people being satisfied with the Tiffen kit, and how you can use several of them at once (ex: +1 with +2).

 

What do you think?

 

Thanks, Nuno

[Tom_Kline 137]

And how about the dry diopters? I hear good thing about the Canon 500D. But Tiffen has a one element +1, +2 and +4 Kit for about 27$, and the 500D goes to around 85$. I am against cheap glass in front of a good lens, but I have heard allot of people being satisfied with the Tiffen kit, and how you can use several of them at once (ex: +1 with +2).

 

What do you think?

 

Thanks, Nuno

 

I think you will get better results with achromat diopters such as the Canon 500D and 250D or Nikon T series.

Tom

[Bent C 18]

Matthias, have you tried the AF with a 1.4 TC, any better? That would be a good and cheap choice 100mm with the 1.4 TC and a +2 or +4 Diopter?

 

I use a 5D with a EF 100/2,8 and a 1,4 TC. When approaching supermacro I find that the AF is pretty useless with that combination, and I would guess that adding the diopter would be even worse. I have the AF set separate from shutter and use MF extensively doing supermacro.

 

/Bent

[azorean 0]

O.k. Thanks to all. Now my only decision will be between shoosing the 1.4 or 2x TC. Think I´ll go for the 500D diopter.

 

Just ordered a Aqua viewfinder so seems like the right oportunitie to trie more than 1.1.

 

Any thoughts on how hard MF is with a 2x TC on the 100mm?

 

I´m guessing it will be easier with the 1.4.

 

Thanks, Nuno.

[meister 1]

Just ordered a Aqua viewfinder

 

One of the best investments I've made...

 

Also, you might want to get a good focus light also if you don't already have one.

Edited March 23, 2009 by meister

[hoovermd 0]

Canon 500D for me.

[stever 0]

The Canon 1.4x will probably not noticeably degrade resolution UW, but must be used with a 12.5 extension tube for the 100M so it won't focus at infinity (can't remember what the. The Kenko 1.4x is not quite as good as the Canon but will allow focusing at infinity. The 500D works very well on the 100M. AF doesn't work that well on the 100M to begin with and won't be degraded by the 500D, but will be with a 1.4x.

 

I'd avoid 2x, but if you really need the magnification use the Canon and the 12.5 tube, not a 3rd party.

 

The wet diopter provides infinity focus if you need it. The extender provides more working distance (which isn't too bad with the 100M to begin with) with magnification. The 500D will not degrade autofocus.

 

Max focus with 500D about 2 ft. With the Canon 1.4x and 12.5 tube - 3 ft. Add the 500D and it's 1 ft.

[Steve Williams 0]

The 500D works very well on the 100M. AF doesn't work that well on the 100M to begin

 

Hi Stever, Thanks for the great info. Are you using a focus light with your 100mm? My snaps right in, what situations do you notice issues with the AF? Maybe I just haven't been there yet.

 

Steve

[stever 0]

i've just added a FIX LED48 and probably haven't given it a fair test yet. the real problem is at night and the only diving i've done at night with the focus light was a bit murky. i'm wondering if putting the light on at least a short arm rather than center of the housing would reduce the lens trying to focus on backscatter and getting confused.

 

i also think i'd be better off making more of an effort to get close with manual focus as once the lens get's "confused" in low light it has a difficult time finding focus (i find this true topside as well)

[Steve Williams 0]

i'm wondering if putting the light on at least a short arm rather than center of the housing would reduce the lens trying to focus on backscatter and getting confused.

 

Stever,

I've got my FIX mounted on a short arm and center mounted so I can lift it up over the top of my big dome for CFWA shots. I just leave it on for macro. I've never had a problem with AF. Sounds like it would be worth a try.

 

Steve