Printable View
I was wondering if anyone here has used the 17-40 Lfor macro workwith a 25mmextension tube. What are your thoughts? How does image quality compare to the 100mm f/2.8 macro? I imagine it would have some distortion and be very difficult to have a blurred background, etc. Thanks!
This will take time to load - keep refreshing it. No tube but not too bad real close up.
http://derkacs.com/kate/KATE-6291.jpg
Bryan'sreview of the 25mm II extension tube does say that it should only be used with lenses of 50mm+. I wonder if it would work at all with a 17-40 or if it would vignette too badly.
To Daniel:
Thats a great picture, thanks.
To HiFiGuy1:
I thought of that too, but he also mentioned the magnification with the 25mm tube on the 17-40 review (1.02x).
If I recall correctly, Canon recommended that the 25 not be used on lenses wider than 50mm and Canon provided the 17-40 + 25mm ET spec. That would be a good test to run some day.