I've done the same for head shots with my 67 165.4 and the #1 tube. (I can get head and shoulders without a tube.) That's why I asked I certainly wouldn't want anything sharper.
Bruce Dayton wrote: > > All I can say is that I have shot some close up wedding rings and head > shots with tube #1 and my 165/2.8 that look better than my 35mm FA > 100/2.8. Granted we are talking 67 here, but what I have seen has > been tremendous with just the tube. > > Brother Bruce > > Saturday, September 21, 2002, 7:56:06 PM, you wrote: > > JCOC> Because In my experience, PENTAX Non-IF tele lenses do not > JCOC> perform as well when used at close up ranges less > JCOC> than the designed-in minimum focus distance. If you use > JCOC> a high quality closeup lens you are actually changing > JCOC> the optical design. This results in better optical performance > JCOC> than simple ext. tube can deliver. In fact, some of pentax's > JCOC> early zooms came with matched high quality closeup lenses for > JCOC> closeup use rather than just extending the helicoid further. > JCOC> BUT, of course, you need to use a very high quality closeup > JCOC> lens for best results. > JCOC> JCO > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >> Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 5:29 PM > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: Re: SMCT 135/2.5 UPDATE/source for closeup lenses???? > >> > >> > >> Why not use the short extension tube? That should give you good portrait > >> focusing distance. > >> Paul > >> > >> Dan Scott wrote: > >> > > >> > On Saturday, September 21, 2002, at 05:51 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Anyone know of a webstore that sells high > >> > > quality closeup lenses at good prices? > >> > > What are the best brands? Are they all single > >> > > element designs or are some doublets? > >> > > I want to buy a 67mm size +1 closeup lens for > >> > > my 200mm F4 SMCT for P6X7 to use for portraits. > >> > > > >> > > JCO > >> > > > >> > > >> > JCO, > >>
