I have a EF100mm F/2.8 macro. I also have 1.4x and 2x extenders and a 300mm f/2.8.
I understand the benefits of tubes to both lens' however for the 100mm only, will I get better/closer images with a tube and 1.4x extender on my camera or with a Canon 500D (+2 diopter) Close up lens on the macro?
The tubes have the advantage of not introducing any more elements between the lens and film/sensor so theoretically will produce higher image quality than the extenders and/or close-up lenses. The question is whether the film/sensor's resolution is high enough to show that difference.
I don`t have the same lens as you, but I do use the 50/2.5 Compact Macro with a 12mm tube and 1.4x II (yes, it works but I don`t recommend it as a permanent solution). My experience is that I have to stop down about 1.5 stops when sharpness matters. Your 100mm lens may be different but I suspect that not much better. (the 50/2.5 is actually made to work with a TC - it`s dedicated life-size converter).
Performance looks fine around f/8-11 to me (haven`t done any tests though)
I suggest getting an extension tube an trying it.
Tubes will be useful with your 300/2.8 as well while close-up diopters work only on lenses with front filter threads.
Discussion
2 repliesI have a EF100mm F/2.8 macro. I also have 1.4x and 2x extenders and a 300mm f/2.8.
I understand the benefits of tubes to both lens' however for the 100mm only, will I get better/closer images with a tube and 1.4x extender on my camera or with a Canon 500D (+2 diopter) Close up lens on the macro?
Thankyou.
Guy
Performance looks fine around f/8-11 to me (haven`t done any tests though)
I suggest getting an extension tube an trying it.
Tubes will be useful with your 300/2.8 as well while close-up diopters work only on lenses with front filter threads.