Extension Tubes - Which One To Get: EF 12mm II or EF 25mm II

[AndyMilnePhotog]

Hi guys,

I love macro photography, but I would like to get closer to my subject without spending too much money. I researched that extension tubes are the best option to get started in terms of image quality. I can't decide whether to get the EF 12mm II or the EF 25mm II extension tube. The camera that I have is a Canon Rebel T6i. Also, I have 3 lenses which are the 18-55 IS STM, 50mm f/1.8 STM & 55-250 IS STM. Feel free to share your suggestions on which one to get along with the pros, cons & alternatives. Thank you.

Andrew 

[Waddizzle · Accepted solution]

The general rule that I once read is use an extension tube that is roughly 25% of the focal length of the lens you are using. go with no more than 50% of the focal length.

It is possible to stack 1-3 extensions tubes to get a longer effective length.  However, the problem with stacking is that assembly can become a little shaky and unsteady.

One drawback with extension tubes is that you gain a shorter MFD, but you lose the ability to focus at infinity.  But, that is a “don’t care condition” when your goal is to photograph at short distances.

[ebiggs1 · Accepted solution]

"... but I would like to get closer to my subject without spending too much money."

This is always the case, isn't it?  It (low cost) and photography usually don't play well together.  However in your case a true macro lens is a better direction to go.  I have seen the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens in the refurb store for less than $300. I think extension tubes are in the $80 dollar range.  But a Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens will be far more useful because you can use it in 'normal' situations too.  Pretty nice to have a constant f2.8 lens that is super sharp.

An extension tube has one limited usefulness for $80 bucks!

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"... but I would like to get closer to my subject without spending too much money."

This is always the case, isn't it?  It (low cost) and photography usually don't play well together.  However in your case a true macro lens is a better direction to go.  I have seen the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens in the refurb store for less than $300. I think extension tubes are in the $80 dollar range.  But a Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens will be far more useful because you can use it in 'normal' situations too.  Pretty nice to have a constant f2.8 lens that is super sharp.

An extension tube has one limited usefulness for $80 bucks!

---

I'll second Ernie's recommendation. My wife has the 60mm macro, and it has served her well on three successive cameras (XTi, T2i, 7D2).

[AndyMilnePhotog]

Thanks Ernie & Robert for the suggestion. In fact, I saw on Amazon that a used copy of the 60mm macro goes for around $275-$300.
I think this lens used is probably a better choice for a first prime lens than a new 50mm f/1.8 that I got a year ago since I love shooting insects and flowers. Also, I heard macro lenses can still be decent as a portrait lens. Thanks again for helping me out.

Andrew

[ebiggs1]

" I heard macro lenses can still be decent as a portrait lens."

This is true.  It is simply a prime lens, not too much different that the ef 50mm f1.8, except it is optimized for close focus.

It can be used as any normal prime lens in the 60mm range would.  Some might say it is too sharp for portraits but it will do a nice job never-the-less.