# canon 100L+tubes+2x converter ?



## simonbratt99 (Mar 18, 2013)

HI
Anyone tried Canon 100L + Kenko tubes + canon2x converter MkIII?

Any examples? or a big no no


Also what exactly is the magnification with all the tubes? please tell me its more than 2:1
If it is 2:1 will the 2x converter make it 4:1 (albeit quality degraded a bit)


----------



## Kernuak (Mar 19, 2013)

I would say the addition of the extender would be counter-productive, as tubes work better on shorter focal lengths. You'll probably get more magnification with just the 68mm of the Kenko extension tubes with the 100mm macro, as it's getting towards twice life size. The extender would reduce image quality.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

I played with various combinations of TC's and a tube last week for another thread here. They were with a 100L and my 5D MK III.

The short answer is that quality suffers with the 1.4X and suffers a lot with the 2X.

Autofocus is also lost.

Using just a short tube and the 100L works well.


----------



## wopbv4 (Mar 20, 2013)

I have tried :
1DX, 100L, combined with kenko 12 and 20 and 36 and 2XIII.
The only way that I could work with this combo was on a tripod and using Helicon software for the focussing and image stacking.
Focussing by hand is next to impossible with such a limited DOF.
I will post some images later, comparing the 100L as is and with the combo.

Hope this helps

Ben


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 20, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I played with various combinations of TC's and a tube last week for another thread here. They were with a 100L and my 5D MK III.
> 
> The short answer is that quality suffers with the 1.4X and suffers a lot with the 2X.
> 
> ...


----------



## kirispupis (Mar 20, 2013)

I have actually done this. The extension tube is necessary in order to fit the 2x onto the 100L. However, I did not do this because I needed > 1x magnification. If I wanted that I would just use my MP-E 65.

It just happens that this lens + a 2x III makes a decent tube lens for microscope objectives. The objectives I use require a 200mm lens and my 70-200/2.8 II has too much vignetting. Some day I'll probably pick up the 200/2.8 which does this natively.

I use this with a Nikon 10x and a Mitutoyo 20x. Here's a shot with the Nikon. Someday I'll have enough patience to hook my Stackshot up to it and do stacking.




Denim Aliens by CalevPhoto, on Flickr


----------



## wopbv4 (Mar 20, 2013)

wopbv4 said:


> I have tried :
> 1DX, 100L, combined with kenko 12 and 20 and 36 and 2XIII.
> The only way that I could work with this combo was on a tripod and using Helicon software for the focussing and image stacking.
> Focussing by hand is next to impossible with such a limited DOF.
> ...



And the pics. The shell is approximately 8*3 mm in size


----------



## simonbratt99 (Mar 20, 2013)

thanks for the examples.

Does anyone know the magnification with the tubes on a 100L lens 2:1 ? or more?


----------



## wopbv4 (Mar 21, 2013)

On your question:
Does anyone know the magnification with the tubes on a 100L lens 2:1 ? or more?

The magnification factors depend on the focal length of the lens and the length of the tube, it is explained on this site:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-25mm-Extension-Tube-II-Review.aspx


----------



## simonbratt99 (Mar 22, 2013)

OK well the 100mm L canon lens is... 100mm
So that makes it, with all three kenko tubes (36mm, 20mm, 12mm), 1.68:1 
Wow i wont be bothering.

To basically the longer the lens ie the 180mm L canon will get even less benefit from the same tubes.
Well thats that plan out the window then


----------



## kirispupis (Mar 23, 2013)

If you use the 2x, then you have to do 2x + extension + 100L.

So with the extension tubes you have 1.68x, and with the 2x you have 3.36x - though the quality will suck and your minimum focus distance will be nil.

If you want to go above 1x then the MP-E 65 is your best bet.


----------

