I have no experience with macro but given how cheap tubes are, and the fact that you'd have to stop down to get any decent dof, I assumed ebay macro tubes are the simplest solution. Are macro lenses sharper than other primes at, say, f3.5-4.5?
I don't find that macros are any sharper. Maybe expensive ones but that has more to do with the quality of the lens itself. What I havefoundisthe macros I have used have had busier bokeh.
Thanks for all the replies guys. I think I'll start looking at some old nifty fifty primes and see how it goes from there. Looking on here there's a lot of love for the Rokkor(?) lenses.
fIn terms of shallow DoF, generally
* The longer the focal length (narrow field of view), the shallower the DoF;
* The bigger the sensor, the shallower the DoF with the same lens. NEX is with 1.5x crop factor;
* The more open the aperture, the shallower DoF is. I agree 50mm f/1.4 is a good starting point;
* The closer you focus to your subject, the shallower the DoF is. That's why macro lens, even though generally slower at f/2.8 or more, can often give very good bokeh.
Hi the part above I have found very useful so far few more questions here
-How I can make it more specific for my lenses? For example my 135 at f 2.8 has indeed very shallow DoF. How it cann be compared to the shallow DoF of a 50. Would the 50 give you roughly the same Dof at f 2.8, 2, 1.7?
-Do the same hold for zoom lenses as well?
-How DoF relates to bokeh?
Just find an online DoF calculator, input parameters, and see what comes out. The focus distance is also an important parameter, so you cannot compare the DoF of 135mm with 50mm, even at the same aperture.
DoF is an objective quantity, bokeh is the subjective quality of the out-of-focus rendering. They are loosely related because DoF determines what is in and out of focus, and bokeh appears in the out-of-focus area by definition.
Lot of the times, it is best to read a little bit, try/practice a little bit, and repeat. This approach will be much more helpful in understanding.