Nikon Macro Tubes - Neglect?

[alex_p._schorsch]

I started out photography with Minoltas, then went to Nikon, then Pentax, then Canon and now I've decided to invest

in Nikon again. One thing gets me a little peeved with Nikon though. They seem to neglect their customers a bit by

not providing them with certain very important gear. Specifically I'm talking about Macro Tubes. Nikon has a pretty

good reputation for manufacturing quality macro (micro) lenses but it seems that they don't provide an up to date

version of macro tubes for them. For me, an extension tube is a vital part of my macro kit. Could someone explain to

me what the present state of affairs regarding Nikon and extension tubes is. I am specifically interested in buying a

25mm tube for the 105 Nikon AF macro. Thanks to any and all who can shed some light on this Nikon mystery..

[ellis_vener_photography]

I am using a Nikon PK-13 (27.5mm) tube with various Nikon lenses but there is no autofocus or electronic aperture connection.

[alex_p._schorsch]

Yeah, I forgot to say that I can live without Macro AF but electronic aperture and metering is very imortant.

[ronald_moravec1]

The new lens for micro are close focusing and no tubes are requiured.

 

Third party tubes or used ones or bellows or close up lenses

[stillbound]

the kenkos work fine...

there is no glass and the aperture and af works so why spend three times as much for nikon...this is one of the few times I'd say that

JC

[ellis_vener_photography]

I've been using that tube with a 105mm f/4 AI-S Micro-Nikkor on a D3, which can be programmed to use a manual

lens and recognizes , via the mechanical link, the aperture I am using. The D20, D300, D700 can do the same

thing, also I can use the AF system for focus confirmation. Even better for macro focusing is the Live view

feature in the D300, D700 and D3.

 

For what it is worth, having used both the newest version of the 105mm f/2.8G (with AF-S and VR features ) and

the 105mm f/4 AI-S Micro-Nikkor , at least with the samples I've I've tried, 105mm f/4 AI-S Micro-Nikkor has

better resolution of detail. Also as you get close to the 1: ratio the apparent focal length does not shorten the

way it does with all of the 105mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor. I know that is input about a lens you didn't ask about

but I thought it was worth sharing.

[eric_bowles]

While the new lenses allow close focus without them, tubes are still useful to reduce the minimum focus distance of

lenses like the 70-200. And sometimes you want to go beyond 1:1.

 

It does seem that Nikon is missing an opportunity. While I have the Kenko tubes and they work fine, I would readily

pay more to have the more robust build of Nikon tubes including metering and AF.

 

It's interesting that Nikon also discontinued close-up lenses. The 5T and 6T work wonderfully with the 105 lens, but

are no longer produced.

 

Eric

[joseph_smith3]

The Nikon tubes, while not electronic, do allow metering information to work automatically with most Nikon lenses and the higher priced camera bodies like the D 200, D 300 and up. While I would like Nikon to make electronic tubes, I see no need for AF in my macro work. And since you can buy Kenko tubes, which are electronic, I can see why Nikon might not see the need to make electronic metal tubes which I would prefer buying. You can always buy a Nikon 2x electronic tc and take out the glass and you have an electronic tube ! Joe Smith

[alex_p._schorsch]

So why can't Nikon take a "2x teleconvertor and take out the glass"?

[joseph_smith3]

If you want to take out the glass, this link tells you how to do it:

http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&p=1393018

 

This link tells you how to add electronics to the Nikon PN -11 tube:

http://damien.douxchamps.net/photo/pn11/

 

Why doesn't Nikon do it? Probably not enough demand to justify the effort. They can make more money making something else.

 

Joe Smith

[joseph_wisniewski]

Alex, take your pick...

 

Because it's more than taking out the glass, there are new chips to develop. Because the tube lengths of the Nikon teleconverters are awkward for either use with the macro lenses or the long lenses like the 70-200mm. Because the teleconverters without glass have narrow throats and will vignette.

 

First, you can't just "take out the glass", you have to make new circuit boards or program new chips for the existing circuit boards in the converters converted into tubes. The existing chips would tell an 105mm f2.8 AF-S lens at infinity to report itself to the camera as a 210mm f5.6 lens. As soon as you focused the lens away from infinity, and the aperture dropped, AF would totally flip out. Not to mention that the VR would keep trying to work, but with the wrong coverage angle, it wouldn't actually help with vibration. Similar problems with the 70-200mm AF-S VR, and a lot of other popular lenses, including a lot of AF-S "kit" lenses. So, there's the engineering project to design the new chip, and figure out how it should handle all these weird situations.

 

Then, the Nikon 2X converter is 55mm long, and that's kind of awkward for the only extension tube in your lineup. It's not "general purpose". Nikon had a tube about that size, the 52.5mm PN-11 was made specifically to take a 105mm macro from 1:2 up to 1:1. Now, a 55mm tube that acts like an "extension cord" and simply connects all the front contacts to the rear contacts, will end up with way too large an aperture being reported to the camera. When you focus the 105mm down to 1:1, the aperture drops to about f4. On the tube, it's effectively near f8, and again, AF is going to freak. So there's no choice, a long tube needs a custom chip, one with a lot of programming.

 

Even if you add in the 1.4x converter, that's a 25mm tube. Nikon had a set, the 11mm PK-11A, 14mm PK-12, and 27mm PK-13.

 

The Nikon 2x and 1.4x converters both have 34mm outer diameter optical capsules. If you dismount the optics, you have a 34mm "hole". The rear openings are within 1mm of the same size. That's a problem we run into constantly with the Kenko tubes. They are teleconverters without the lenses, and they have 34mm throats. The image diagonal of 35mm film is 43.3mm. So, the converted teleconverters vignette on film, and on full frame cameras, when using the longer macro lenses like the 105mm or the 200mm. They also tend to vignette when using the 70-200mm f2.8 or the 300mm f2.8.

 

People have listed two reasons to want tubes: to extend the macro lenses past 1:1, and to close focus the long lenses like the 70-200mm f2.8.

 

For close focusing the long lenses, 55mm is ridiculous for the 70-200 or the 300mm. Even 25mm is a bit long. I most frequently use the 12mm Kenko with those lenses.

 

The lengths you want to extend the macros are the "short" focal lengths of the macros, 70mm for the 105, and 40mm (if memory serves) for the 60mm. It's just like the Nikon PK-27.5 being the "mate" to the 55mm f3.5, and the 52.5mm PN-11 being specifically for the 105mm.

 

So, for extending the macro lenses in a friendly fashion, you need new tubes with friendly 50mm and 75mm lengths, the proper chips for those lenses, and wider throats.

 

For the regular lenses, you need some new "short" tubes, again with wider throats. But at least they can skip the new chips on the short tubes.

[homer_arment1]

More of an extension tube question so please forgive me if it is too far off topic. Do the Nikon extension tubes work at all with G type Nikkors?

 

HLA

[joseph_wisniewski]

Homer, the G Nikkors will stop down to their minimum aperture and stay there when mounted on Nikon tubes. You won't be able to see well enough to focus or compose, and when you extend the already too small aperture, diffraction will suck the sharpness out of the image.

 

Spring for the Kenko tubes, or go with Joseph Smith's links. I'm betting most people who read those instructions would opt for the Kenkos...

 

"You'll need a set of small Phillips screw drivers that includes #1,0 and 00 sizes; a small soldering iron; a small grinder, like a Dremel with a small conical grinder tip; channel lock pliers and a hose clamp."

 

It goes on to talk about heating the screws before removing them, parts that are spring loaded and shoot out when you dismantle the converter, etc...

[homer_arment1]

Thanks Joseph. I thought that might be the case but wasn't sure.

[joseph_smith3]

Homer, as far as I am concerned, G lenses and Nikon ext tubes and incompatible for the reasons already mentioned. And with kenko tubes you have to be concerned about vignetting. If you are looking at the Nikon 105 macro, get the older AF f 2,8 that is a D lens and not the newer VR G lens. Joe Smith

[alex_p._schorsch]

Now I'm even more mixed up then when I asked the question.

[joseph_smith3]

Alex, tell us the Nikon body you have now and any new body you might get in the future, which Nikon 105 macro lens you have and your intended purpose and then we can give you better advice and recommendations. Yes, it is very confusing! Joe Smith

[oskar_ojala]

If you want use tubes to go to magnifications beyond 1:2, go with MF Nikkor macros or Zeiss makros. If you want tubes to get a bit closer, get short Nikon tubes and live with the limitations (although you do get automatic exposure) or get a kenko tube. The other (good) alternative with tele lenses is a close-up lens.

 

There's no "one size fits all" solution to this, but at least there are plenty of reasonably priced alternatives...

[alex_p._schorsch]

I want to use the 105 AF (non VR) with the D300 and maybe, in the future D90 and full frame. I used to enjoy using a 25mm tube with my Canon film camera (long gone).