135-f4.0 Macro--Tubes or Close-up Lenses

[mike_evans3]

I am the owner of a new 67II and a 135 macro; I did not realize how limited the close-up capabilities of this lens are. I am very experienced in using bellows, extension tubes, etc on 35mm.

 

<p>

 

I am interested in your experience in getting a little closer with my new 135 macro--at least to 0.5 or a little greater magnification. Are the Pentax tubes worth the cost? How about third party close-up lenses?

 

<p>

 

Thanks in advance.

[william_hahn1]

Mike,

 

<p>

 

I've used both the Pentax extension tubes and the macro bellows

with my old 1981 Pentax 6x7. You can get good results, but you're

not going to get much depth-of-field. (With both, you should

use stopped down metering.) If you're going to get either, I would

suggest the extension tubes - you can use them in the field. (But

the cost is damnable. Look for used sets on www.keh.com.)

 

<p>

 

For example, I have a stunning close-up of a damselfly, with

a turqoise-colored head, but you can see the grass stalk on which

it was perched slowly dissolving into the unfocussed background.

Depth-of-field was probably 1/4 of an inch.

 

<p>

 

I'm not familiar with any third party close-up lenses for this

camera.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps, feel free to email further questions...

 

<p>

 

--Bill Hahn

[steve_rasmussen]

You might consider the Helicoid ext tube on the 135. It will give

variable magnification from .5x to .7x. The Helicoid also works well

on the 105, 200 and 150mm. The 135 could really use an f/64 stop. SR

[scott_whitford]

Mike,

 

<p>

 

I have the #2 and #3 auto extension tubes and the helicoid extension

tube for my 135mm lens. With all three, I get true macro...i.e. 1:1.

As someone else mentioned, d.o.f. really gets to be a problem, quite

a bit worse than you're used to with your 35mm gear. Also, the light

fall-off can make focusing a challenge. Having said that, I wouldn't

give up on your 135mm lens just yet; mine's incredibly sharp, all the

way down to f/32. For landscapes or environmental portraits,

however, you'll find that its out-of-focus behaviour (bokeh?) is

pretty ugly. It's pretty much a specialty lens.

[geoff_bryant]

I realise this reply is late, but I've only just noticed this thread

and as I seem to be one of the few who prefers to use a close-up lens

rather than tubes with the 135, I thought I'd comment.

 

<p>

 

I had the three tube set but after years of using auto-metering tubes

in 35mm I couldn't stand having to use stop-down metering with the 67

tubes.

 

<p>

 

I liked the lens, though, and seeking closer focus I tried using a

macro adapter from an Olympus IS series camera - Olympus IS/L B-macro

HQ converter F=40cm. It appears to be a two element achromat and

works really well, it's light and takes up very little room. Also,

using a close-up lens means no light loss through extra extension.

 

<p>

 

The adapter has a 55mm filter thread, so a 67-55 step-down ring is

needed. There's little or no vignetting, except for a faint hint of

corner darkening at the closest focus. The magnification range is

0.44 to 0.88.

[norman_roberts]

How about slapping on a 5T and/or 6T Nikon closeup lens (62mm filter

size so would need step down ring). I've use these on my 35mm and

they work great.