how close? extension tubes and teleconverters
 

I experimented a bit today. I use a Canon 100mm macro to shoot insects but I find I often can't get close enough to some of the smaller gnats and leafhoppers and things like that. I purchased a 12mm extension tube and I already had a 1.4x TC so I took some comparison shots of the various setups, here are the results for those that are interested.

The first one is the 100mm macro only. Each of these photos are focused as close as they can be.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...uk/macro01.jpg

The second is the 100mm macro PLUS 12mm extension tube

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...uk/macro02.jpg

This final image is taken with 12mm extension tube PLUS 1.4xTC.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...uk/macro03.jpg

This gave me the closest focus by far. These results are pretty much as I expected them to be but it is nice to see te results isde by side.

Cheers,

Russ

Thanks for that Russ, I have a full set of tubes to partner my Canon 100mm and Sigma 180mm, so it's nice to see a different set-up + results.

Harry

Hi Russ,

Firstly let me say i've just visited your site ........ superb images. :cool:

I'm definately going to have to get some digital camera system brochures to know product line up and compatability issues.

In 35mm film I have used bellows. You are talking extensions of up to nearly 100mm there. Huge magnification, massive light loss at maximum extension, and as you rack the bellows out depth of field drops significantly. Lens to subject distance is also significantly reduced.

My problem here is I do not know if there is such a unit that is compatible with your camera.

If you have access to a dealer stocking used gear you may be able to see for yourself. Unfortunately I am Nikon D100 and don't know if mine will fit ( will have a look though ). D100 does not accept some old Nikon kit.

Just scrolled down and seen wolfies post and as he is a Canon man he should be able to confirm the total magnification available as he has a full set of tubes.

Don

Bellows in Macro Photography
 

Well I dug out some old kit for a try.

I had to attatch a 12mm tube to clear the prism housing to allow the bellows to fit. The lens used is a manual focus Nikkor 105mm f2.5 lens. Not a macro lens though as I traded my Micro Nikkor 55mm for this one years ago.

The biggest problem with working at these extensions is focusing. You really need a micro focusing rail. I used my model lath as the suject and my milling table to achieve the function of a micro focusing rail.

At these magnifications imperfections of the subject become critical. A grain of dust can look like a boulder in the image.

Due to the number of images I will spread this over two posts.

The images here are to show lens to subject distance with a 105mm lens at both ends of the extension, and the effect of magnification on undesirables.

Link to an image from Harry's gallery that is high magnification but clear of any such undesirables http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...500&ppuser=150


The next post will show the degees of magnification.

Don

The degrees of magnification available.
 

This post follows the previous one and is to show the effect of magnification through the use of bellows. Tubes work the same but are of fixed lengths.

The images are FULL FRAME

All exposures were at f16

PS You will need to see my next post for the scaled subject ..........doooooooooh !!!

Don

I forgot to attatch the subject
 

Sorry guys I forgot this, without which comparison is a bit difficult.

I am definately cracking up !!!!!!!!!

Attatched scaled image.

Don

Thanks Don this is going to be a big help I have recently got hold of macro tubes and bellows I didn't realise I could combine them. The bellows I got dirt cheap with 49mm threads I had an old 2.8 ziess tessar 50mm lens which I am trying. I havn't had much success yet except with dead flies. I look forward to reading how to use them to there full potential.

That's the spirit! Making use of the materials to hand. Nice to see you don't feel that there's nothing around to take a picture of.

Thanks to Don for this tutorial, could be very useful.

Duncan.

These are examples of what I have done so far. The first of the icicles were taken just with the three extension tubes and zeiss 50m lens. The one of the dead wasp was was taken with just the bellows and the zeiss lens

Lighting becomes a major problem with close-up work as you need to be using an aperture of at least f16 to try and cope with shallow depth of field.

I will try to do a bit on that as I find flash invaluable.

What I really like here is you are not spending shed loads of cash on your kit in order to have a go. I promise that with practice you will achieve results that will be the envy of others on the forum. Duncan is quite right about practicing on everyday objects. :)

The single piece of other kit that will help you the most at these magnifications is a micro focusing rail. I will do a search and see if I can find a pic that I can link you to.

Keep posting pics and whatever details you can of distance from subject and particularly f stop used.

Don

Don I have just taken a photo of the bellows and extension tubes so you can see what I have. On the icicle shot I didn't use flash but I did use flash for the wasp, Only the flip up flash on the 350d I do have a slave flash I can use.

So how BIG do you want to go ?
 

I had a rummage after my last picture posts and found another tube. Soooo ........

Pic attatched of part of a GB penny - 20.34mm in dia.

Same as before Nikkor 105mm lens but now 181.5mm of extension. Direct ( undiffused ) key flash and slave triggered diffused fill flash.

Due to light loss at this magnification, with an aperture of f16 the key light was 24 inches to the left of the coin. Needless to say focusing and exposure were manual.

This can be done with compatible seconhand kit. The lens, bellows and tubes are from the 1980's.

The key here is having fun. A good thing to play with when the weather is really rubbish.

Don

Forgot to mention I only paid £15 for the bellows being very old to fit pentax screw, they are in mint condition and £7 for the tubes so wasn't expensive at all just to give true macro a go. I just don't understand how to relate the settings on the scale to the magnification.

Just been to DP Review as I am not familiar with most of the new kit.

Your flip up flash is fine for triggering a remote but just does not have the power for this sort of thing at such small apertures.

As you are quite happy rummaging around for used kit you need to look for a flash with a Guide Number of at least 24 at ISO100. The higher that number the better as you can never have too much power. You will also need a triggering device ( slave ). Good deals can be had on old flash guns as most people want the latest in multi metering TTL systems.

VERY IMPORTANT NEVER EVER connect a non system flash directly to your camera as the trigger voltage could cause serious damage to the camera electronics. :eek:

I will set to on a flash with bellows / tubes in the Flash thread. In the mean time restrict yourself to the lower magnification end of your set up as you will not need such small light consuming apertures. You now need to look at the flash thread to understand where I am coming from.

Don

Macro
 

Have not had much time, so the following are 4 images of a screen 25mm x 15 mm.

Will probably have more time on Sunday to produce better results
The images are in sequence.

01 = Canon 100mm @ 1-1
02 = + 13mm tube
03 = +13mm + 21mm tube
04 = + 13mm + 21mm + 31mm tube

Harry

Don I have just checked my flashgun. it has a guide number of 102 feet on full power down to 25ft on 1/16th power. Its the Vivitar digital Flash DF200, hope this will do the flip flash triggers it.

That will be a G/N of 30 in metres then. As your flip up triggers it you are on your way. If you read the flash thread you will see reference to power ( your flip up will be around G/N 12 ) and diffusion. Post your next question there as it is guaranteed to be about flash.

Don

My first efforts. The first two are without flash.I couldn't get the lighting right with the penny so did this without flash. I used the bellow which I can fine tune with the rail, all done on f16 had to play around with angle's diffusion, and bounce.

Hi Christine,

So a good mornings play.

The coin has come out well and just needs a touch of sharpening. I have had a go and attach it. Amazing what you got from an old 2.8 ziess tessar 50mm lens !!
The corn I gave a touch of contrast and sharpened. If you look at it you can see the zone of sharpness front to back. In close up work as you increase magnification the zone of sharpness falls away very quickly.
You can also see it here http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...3&d=1135954693 the face of the in focus gear is 5mm from the out of focus back.

As a result of this you have to be selective about the angle at which you take your subject.

I attach a graphic to explain. In your case for the elipse imagine it as a fly. Head on you could not get all of it sharp, where as sideways on you could. You can see the effect easily by typing a bit of text on your smallest font using M and X ie MXMXMXMXMXMX . Set the camera at a sharpish angle and focus dead on centre of an X. You will now be able to easily see your zone of sharpness at various bellows extension. Sometimes to get all of your subject sharp you will have to use carefull selection of angle and less magnification.

I hope you find this is helpful.

Well done today. :)

Don

I can recommend " John Shaw`s Closeups in Nature" as an excellent book on this subject. He covers all combinations of lenses, tubes, bellows and lighting.
This is a very difficult and frustrating part of photography but the results can be outstanding. As was said in one of the posts practice, practice, and keep on practising and open up a world not normally seen.

This is now the closest I can get.
 

Had a rummage in the old kit bag today in search of the answer to how close can you get.

I found a reversing ring that I used to carry all the time for those ' close up ' oportunities before I got a true macro lens.

So I gave it ago using the bellows and tubes as in post #12. Picture attatched.

Three snags. 1) Depth of field almost non existant. I later tried the tip of a ballpen and that just did not work. So DOF probably 0.5mm. 2) After focusing you have to remember to manually stop the lens down. 3) Lighting becomes a problem due to lens to subject distance being limited.

After all my playing around today I would have to say that the greater working distance of a 100mm lens gives huge advantages over using a 50mm with tubes or bellows.

I even tried reversing a 28mm but the lens to subject was a few thicknesses of paper.

The 50mm I used was a f1.4 and anyone giving this a go would find an f1.8 or f2 a better proposition.

I used the same one penny piece as in post#12 so a comparison could be made.

The coin and ruler images are full frame.

Don

PS Just looked at this and maybe I should explain the markings on the ruler. Full markings are 1mm and smaller are 1/2mm. The coin was replaced by the ruler for the shot so is an accurate reflection of the coin size.

Don I went through all this a few years ago with my Minolta D7i.
I used an old 50mm minolta lens reversed onto the fixed zoom lens of my camera.

Same as you I found the lens to subject distance to be 1-2mm and DOF to be virtually non-existent, with of course the almost impossible task of illumination.

On the attached image I arrange two flash guns with the light bounced of several A4 sheets of white paper strategically placed.

Now with my 180mm macro lense this as become childs play, I've not checked the lens to subject distance with this lens, but with the canon I get a working distance of approx 62mm.

Harry

Wolfie, I have had some success using stacked lenses, my set up is as follows. Canon A1 with 69mm of extension tubes, a 135 f3.5 lense with a 100mm short mount lens reversed on it. The short mount lens is a Minolta and is designed for use with a bellows, it has no focussing mechanism and is about 40mm overall length. The lack of a focussing mechanism means that the lens to subject distance is increased. With this set up the lens to subject distance is approx 70mm and gives a magnification somewhere between 1.35 and 1.5 to 1. In my gallery there is a portrait of a wasp taken using this set up plus a small flashgun. The image is full frame no cropping.
Rod

The head detail is superb. You see details in an image like this that you never would otherwise.

Sometimes I have a lunatic day like today and just do something really silly. Hence my post.

Your 180 is probably a really good option as distance will be increased. Nikon do a superb one but megga bucks. I don't do this enough to justify.

If this forum keeps going like it is I will never get time to work on the models.

Whats that sell up and turn the workshop into a photograhic studio.:rolleyes:

Too long ago now, but I remember doing in an experimental way what Rod M has done. Experimental as if I remember, I joined the lenses with carboard tube. One hell of a magnification though. Trouble with it all is that the zone of sharpness just dissapears as magnification goes up. I did not post the ball pen shot as too much mag and no DOF. Spent ages trying to focus at a point on a shiny object with a lead lamp in hand. Better taken at lower mag and cropped.

Don

Canon A1, This is my all time favourite camera but I had to go autofocus due to eye problems.
As you say extreme close up is relatively easy when using an SLR type camera.

When I first went digital 5 -6years ago DSLRs where out of reach of us mere mortals, so I obtained one of the first Minolta dimage cameras to reach these shores.
This had a 28-200mm "fixed" lens so such as tubes and bellows where out of the question, hence the reversed 50mm lens. unfortunately as I discribed above subject distance was zero.

Now with my 100 & 180mm macro lenses + tubes subject distance is no longer a problem.

Members shooting macro may find this link invaluable http://azone.clubsnap.org/insectguide/page01.html

I've been using this method for the past two years with excellent results.

Harry

Can I drop in here with a simple question ,please?.When shooting in Macro,ie using a specific Macro lens(Canon 100mm) is it better to use the actual auto Macro prog on the camera,or use one of the progs where one has to put in ones own settings.In my case P mode,I only ever change the iso.I find it is not very viable to be using a tripod for Butterflies etc,as they flit from plant to plant,and I am unable to actually get low down to the ground,so camera shake can be a prob,but occasionally I have managed a decent shot.But just wondered is the cameras own Macro prog the best setting to use to use.

I can't say I've ever used the macro mode on my 300D. I tend to stay in AV mode almost all the time so I can control the DoF and let the camera worry about the shutter speed. With subjects such as butterflies you can probably use around f/8 or f/11 to keep the subject sharp against a nicely blurred background whilst using a decent shutter speed.

If you start shooting at 1:1 or closer then the amount of DoF really drops and f/16 or smaller is needed which in turn means some kind of support is essential.

Thanks,PX,I have just received a similar reply from Andy,re my question using converters.He says AV mode is the best one,I have never used this setting,only P mode.But obviously a fast shutter speed seems to be what is needed.
Thanks for reply.

I have had a quick skim through the thread and nobody has mentioned that the order of the multiplier and the extension tube are placed between the lens and camera make a big difference to the final image.

A quick and dirty example.


First up, a Canon 50mm F1.4 lens: http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b6...ms/05_50mm.jpg


Next up we have a 2x multiplier and the 50mm lens: http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b6...ms/04_2x50.jpg


Then a 25mm extension tube and the 50mm lens: http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b6.../03_ET50mm.jpg


Now we add the 2x multiplier between the extension tube and the 50mm lens: (makes very little difference except for subject distance) http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b6...1_ET2x50mm.jpg


And finally, simply swapping the multiplier and the extension tube (Multiplier, Extension Tube, Lens) produces this result: http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b6...2_2xET50mm.jpg

Cheers

Ideally you want a shutter speed that is at least as fast as the focal length of the lens - so if you're using a 100mm lens a shutter speed of 1/125s or faster is needed to prevent camera shake when shooting handheld. But this is only a rule of thumb and with some practice you might find you can get away with a slower speed. It is very easy to get excited when, after hours of waiting and stalking, your subject is finally in the viewfinder. Keeping calm and relaxed will make a big difference.

Of course there are times when the subject needs a faster shutter speed - insects in flight for example.

And of course there are times when you cannot get close, as with this water lilly
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...php?photo=1445.

Canon 10D + Sigma 50-500mm, focal length 313mm.

Harry

I have had a go at taking macro shots of a wasp, had to be quick as it was waking up, it was in the logs for the fire. What I noticed when taking the photo's just with straight flash of the camera. The wider the aperture, less depth of field better sharpness, fully closed down to f22 image started to become soft even though it has better depth is this because its an old lens and doesn't have the quality. The example are below.

Edit. this wasp was nearly 1" probably a queen overwintering

Christine

As you stop a lens down an effect know as diffraction starts to kick in which affects the lens sharpness. This typically starts to be seen from f16 onwards. So lens that stop down to f32 maybe have great DOF at the cost of image sharpness.

Rob, I don't think this is a problem with the better modern lenses, most of my indoor controlled macros are taken at f/32. Canon 100mm macro

Example of rose shot f/32


Harry

Looks like Christine with have to find smaller wasps or fork out for a better lens ;)

Harry it would be interesting to see at which f stop this lens is sharpest at.

Changing the subject slightly but can the experts tell me the difference between the 'focusing distance' and the 'working distance' when using an extention tube.
As an example I have seen a table that uses a 12mm tube and an 50mm 1.8 lens that gives a focusing distance of 249-324mm and a working distance of 156-239mm- how are these figures arraived at.

Christine,

Faced with a wasp 1" long I would be very quick. I think you've done remarkably well in the circumstances. I have just compared the image of dead wasp in post #9 with this. The use of flash has certainly lifted the subject.
How come you did not post this here http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...=500&ppuser=57

Fancy pants. :)
As Brucie used to say ......... Didn't you do well.

The kit used is shown in post #11 and the cost in #13. My guess that the lens is a Domiplan from Meyer Optic. As this is a vintage East German lens its performance cannot be compared to modern day lenses.

If you were looking for a low cost upgrade then Pentax Takumar lenses would give improved performance. An old 135mm would give greater lens to supject distance.

Don

Don. Glad you like the one I posted of the head shot in the macro section, you are a good teacher thank you. I was just hoping it didn't take off towards me while I was so close with the macro. The wasp was lethargic but waking up very fast, it was flexing its wings.

Christine

Hi Roy,

I thought this may be easy. 12mm tube and 50mm and tape measure I have so.........

With lens set at nearest focus 0.45m end of lens to in focus point ( lens to subject distance ) 125mm.
With lens set to infinity end of lens to point in focus ( lens to subject distance ) 190mm.

At the start of the tape focus 0.45mm to infinity ( focusing distance ? ) 65mm.

I now don't understand the numbers in the quote. :confused:

Don