No 'properties' option for me with right click or I would have done this. I have looked before on photos on here. Why can some get it and not others?
Browser perhaps?

They are all nice photos, especially the 2nd one.

You should be able to get them a bit sharper with the A 50mm 1.7. Without the exif information it's difficult to tell, but I suspect a combination of a dull day with lowish shutter speed and moving subject might have just blurred things up a little.

If you could post the exif information that would help. You can find this if you click on the 'properties' tag of the photo (usually comes up with right mouse click). Things like shutter speed, aperture, ISO etc.

Don't see why - that's really helpful. Shows just how hard it is to focus even when playing with a generous 1.07mm as I was yesterday!

Thanks

Thank you all. I think I'm beginning to understand - it's obviously not as straightforward as simply adding a set number of tubes.

It sounds like the best bet is simply to play around with different combinations of tubes and lenses which is hardly a chore.....

I just have one tube at the moment. It's a genuine Pentax 50mm auto tube which was a bargain on Ebay. I've been looking for more Pentax ones, but can't find any more, apart from a set in the US for £120, so will probably go with Vivitar or similar. I know the Pentax ones probably aren't any better, but they do go well with the M 50mm lens!

Sadly I'm not in a position to get a dedicated macro lens at present. The only way would be selling my Pentax 18-250mm which I'd be reluctant to do.

Are there any particular macro teleconverters anyone would recommend? There is a 3X Clubman one for sale on the forum, but I'm not sure I need 3X. Presumably a smaller magnification would be better for image quality as with normal teleconverters?

Thanks again for taking the time and trouble to help. It's much appreciated.

So, in really simple terms that even I can understand, because I'm still struggling.

I've tried the 50mm tube with the 135mm lens and, whilst it allowed closer focussing and some magnification, it was nowhere near as much magnification as the 50mm lens with the 50mm tube.

What length of tubes would I need to put on a 135mm lens that would give me the same magnification as the 50mm tube with the 50mm lens or is it not as simple as that.

What I'd like is the same magnification and potential quality as I got from the 50mm lens and tube, but from a little further away so I don't poke the subject in the eye......or is this simply not possible on a budget? Is this what a macro teleconverter is for?

All the help appreciated - apologies if I'm being thick.

So a 135mm lens with 135mm of tubes will give the same size image as my 50mm lens with 50mm of tubes, but from further away?

Is that right or am I being too simplistic?

Too late

Thanks for the link.

Heck, I've only just learnt to cope with one lens. Wouldn't know where to start with two so no danger there, but thanks for the warning should I ever progress that far.

Thanks David, that does help.

It seems I could do with something a bit longer than the 50mm then, that focusses closer than my existing 135mm.

Any suggestions for a manual lens of between say 90mm and 200mm that produces an excellent image and focusses closely!

My somewhat limited understanding is that to produce 1:1 the length of the tubes needs to be the same as the lens. Does this mean I'd need 135mm of tubes with my 135mm lens to get the same magnification as the 50mm plus 50mm tube? Would I be able to use the 135mm from further away? Minimum focus with my 135mm is quite long - about 1.5 metres, but that lens is a bit of an oddity, bought for it's superb bokeh.

I tried the 135mm with the 50mm tube and the results were nice, but nowhere near the magnification of the 50mm.

I'll keep an eye out on Ebay for the two lenses you mention. If you can suggest anything else that would be great.

I'll probably need some more tubes - I just have the Pentax 50mm at present.

The irony is that if the cat hadn't been ill, I wouldn't have had to sell my two FA 50mm's to help pay for the operation. I only bought the M 50mm as a poor man's alternative and I've had far more fun with it than the FA's it replaced.