Welcome to World Photography Forum! | |
Thank you for finding your way to World Photography Forum, a dedicated community for photographers and enthusiasts. There's a variety of forums, a wonderful gallery, and what's more, we are absolutely FREE. You are very welcome to join, take part in the discussion, and post your pictures!
|
|
Macro Photography Technique Discussions on Macro Photography |
|
Thread Tools |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
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. Last edited by Don Hoey; 01-01-06 at 23:06. |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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. 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 |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
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. |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#27
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
Christine Avatar by Tracker(tom) [COLOR="Blue http://www.haverigg.com http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/sho...00/ppuser/2356 |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
Christine Avatar by Tracker(tom) [COLOR="Blue http://www.haverigg.com http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/sho...00/ppuser/2356 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
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 Last edited by Dark Orange; 04-01-06 at 13:18. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|