View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
uberprutser
Joined: 01 Dec 2012 Posts: 19
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:36 pm Post subject: Good MF lens for reverse macro photography |
|
|
uberprutser wrote:
I'm thinking about trying out reverse lens macro photography with my four thirds DSLR camera.
Obviously the four thirds lenses won't be of much use because they can't be stopped down manually.
Any recommendations for the best lens for this purpose? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
patrickh
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 Posts: 8551 Location: Oregon
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
patrickh wrote:
Reversing a lens onto the camera typically requires a special adapter. with a screw thread the same as the filter thread on the lens at one end and the camera mount on the other. Have you considered a) a manual focus macro lens, or b) a bellows with a specialist lens of some sort mounted on it (personally I use enlarging lenses for this.
patrickh _________________ DSLR: Nikon D300 Nikon D200 Nex 5N
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 300/4.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Arsat 50/1.4, Kiron 28/2, Vivitar 28/2.5, Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Vivitar 28/2.5, Tamron 28/2.5, Formula5 28/2.8, Mamiya 28/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Flektogon 35/2.4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Takumar 35/3.5, Curtagon 35/4, Takumar 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro, Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Takumar 50/2, Industar 50/3.5, Sears 55/1.4, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Takumar 105/2.8, Steinheil macro 105/4.5, Tamron 135/2.5, Jupiter 135/4, CZ 135/4, Steinheil Culminar 135/4,5, Jupiter 135/3.5, Takumar 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, CZ 135/2.8, Taika 135/3.5, Takumar 150/4, Jupiter 200/4, Takumar 200/4
Exakta: Topcon 100/2.8(M42), 35/2.8, 58/1.8, 135/2.8, 135/2.8 (M42), Kyoei Acall 135/3.5
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, Distagon 25/2.8
Hexanon: 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 52/1.8, 135/3.2, 135/3.5, 35-70/3.5, 200/3.5
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Biometar 80/2.8, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Minolta SR: 28/2.8, 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 45/2, 50/2, 58/1.4, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, 200/3.5
RF: Industar 53/2.8, Jupiter 8 50/2
Enlarg: Rodagon 50/5,6, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, Vario 44-52/4, 150/5.6 180/5.6 El Nikkor 50/2,8,63/2.8,75/4, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, 135/5.6 Schneider 60/5.6, 80/5.6, 80/4S,100/5.6S,105/5.6,135/5.6, 135/5.6S, 150/5.6S, Leica 95/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
clockwork247
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 79
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:41 am Post subject: Re: Good MF lens for reverse macro photography |
|
|
clockwork247 wrote:
uberprutser wrote: |
I'm thinking about trying out reverse lens macro photography with my four thirds DSLR camera.
Obviously the four thirds lenses won't be of much use because they can't be stopped down manually.
Any recommendations for the best lens for this purpose? |
people recommend the 50, because they're fast and cheap. but I would say get a 28 or 35, because it gives you more magnifications.
but a 50 revered will get you 1:1 macro from what I heard. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uberprutser
Joined: 01 Dec 2012 Posts: 19
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
uberprutser wrote:
I'm looking for at least a 1:2 magnification.
And I guess front end of the lens needs to be build solid.
Also, how about resolution, will a reversed lens be able to out resolve a 12 mega pixel four thirds sensor? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57849 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Pancolar 50mm I saw fly eyes in 1:1 almost that is stunning. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
clockwork247
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 79
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
clockwork247 wrote:
uberprutser wrote: |
I'm looking for at least a 1:2 magnification.
And I guess front end of the lens needs to be build solid.
Also, how about resolution, will a reversed lens be able to out resolve a 12 mega pixel four thirds sensor? |
well, 50 reverse is 1:1 on a FF.
on your crop sensor it should be 1:2 (or 2:1 however you put it), because your sensor is only 1/2 of the FF.
I think that's how it works, I've tested it out before, but it's been a while and I don't remember too clearly the exact math. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Himself
Joined: 01 Mar 2007 Posts: 3216 Location: Montreal
Expire: 2013-05-30
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Himself wrote:
uberprutser wrote: |
I'm looking for at least a 1:2 magnification. |
There are a lot of macro lenses that will give you a 1:2 ratio. Without reversing them.
Maybe you're looking for 2:1 ratio? _________________ Moderator Himself |
|
Back to top |
|
|
elliott
Joined: 16 May 2011 Posts: 180
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
elliott wrote:
clockwork247 wrote: |
well, 50 reverse is 1:1 on a FF.
on your crop sensor it should be 1:2 (or 2:1 however you put it), because your sensor is only 1/2 of the FF.
I think that's how it works, I've tested it out before, but it's been a while and I don't remember too clearly the exact math. |
There is no crop factor for macro, 1:1 is 1:1, no matter what the sensor size. Also, 2:1 is double life size, 1:2 is half life size. Most dedicated macro lenses either do 1:1 or 1:2, I can't think of any that go beyond 1:1. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
clockwork247
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 79
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
clockwork247 wrote:
elliott wrote: |
clockwork247 wrote: |
well, 50 reverse is 1:1 on a FF.
on your crop sensor it should be 1:2 (or 2:1 however you put it), because your sensor is only 1/2 of the FF.
I think that's how it works, I've tested it out before, but it's been a while and I don't remember too clearly the exact math. |
There is no crop factor for macro, 1:1 is 1:1, no matter what the sensor size. Also, 2:1 is double life size, 1:2 is half life size. Most dedicated macro lenses either do 1:1 or 1:2, I can't think of any that go beyond 1:1. |
you're right my mistake. crop sensor will only crop it, no change to the magnification. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uberprutser
Joined: 01 Dec 2012 Posts: 19
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
uberprutser wrote:
Quote: |
Maybe you're looking for 2:1 ratio? |
You are right.
1:1 I can do with my AF lens, and I want more magnification. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pich900
Joined: 10 Jun 2007 Posts: 1745 Location: The Netherlands/Zwolle
Expire: 2012-12-27
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
pich900 wrote:
I guess almost "cheap" 50mm will do the job....I used sometimes a konika hexanon 1.8/52mm reversed and/or with macro rings on my D700 with satisfied results I think....here some samples if it can helps!:
http://forum.mflenses.com/hexanon-1-8-52mmand-macro-rings-on-d700-andpict-20-06-t50366,highlight,%2Bhexanon.html
here with reversed helios 44:
http://forum.mflenses.com/reversed-helios-h44and-extension-rings-macro-sample-on-nex-t50471,highlight,%2Breversed.html
and here with reversed voigtlander SL 2/40 (nikon mount):
http://forum.mflenses.com/first-macro-with-reversed-voigtlander-sl-2-40mm-on-d700-t50151,highlight,%2Breversed.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/macros-from-today-reversed-voigtlander-2-40-on-d700-t50181,highlight,%2Breversed.html
_________________ All my lenses are for sale, nikkor, Angenieux, Zeiss etc.....
Regards,
Pascal
-------------------------------------------------------
Nikon D700 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
takumargriet
Joined: 09 Apr 2012 Posts: 33 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
takumargriet wrote:
Do you specifically want to use only one lens reversed directly on the mount of your camera? Or you could think about reversing a lens on top of some other lens (aka stacking lenses).. The adapters for both shouldn't be all that expensive... for example:
http://www.ebay.nl/itm/55mm-55-MM-Reverse-macro-adapter-for-Olympus-Four-Thirds-4-3-mount-/400062260959?pt=UK_Photography_CameraLenses_Lens_caps_hoods_adaptors_ET&hash=item5d2591a6df
Just google or search on ebay "macro reverse adapter or ring"
I have some experience with stacking lenses, using pentax aps-c with manual panagor 90mm macro lens and a takumar 50mm 1.4 reversed on top... gives around 2:1 magnification. To get DOF as big as possible stop down fully and I use flash. I guess when one uses just the one lens reversed directly on the body the use of flash is not necessary and I don't know how it works with DOF and aperture (but am curious to hear).
Ephemeroptera spec by margreetz, on Flickr
IMGP7418 by margreetz, on Flickr _________________ Pentax K5 and mostly manual lenses
pics at flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pich900
Joined: 10 Jun 2007 Posts: 1745 Location: The Netherlands/Zwolle
Expire: 2012-12-27
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pich900 wrote:
takumargriet, that's quite amazing macro's ......and I have took a look on your flick, I can only say WOW...... _________________ All my lenses are for sale, nikkor, Angenieux, Zeiss etc.....
Regards,
Pascal
-------------------------------------------------------
Nikon D700 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
Second macro is really stunning!
Once I've added a Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 in retro position to my Minolta MD Macro Rokkor 100mm F4 and got a good ~2:1 to ~5:1 macro lens.
For direct use of reversed lenses I also prefer 28 or 35mm lenses _________________ I'm not a collector, I'm a tester
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, Nikon 200/2 ED
My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57849 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
pich900 wrote: |
takumargriet, that's quite amazing macro's ......and I have took a look on your flick, I can only say WOW...... |
+10 my maximum respect is yours, fantastic work! _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57849 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
ForenSeil wrote: |
Second macro is really stunning!
Once I've added a Konica Hexanon 40mm F1.8 in retro position to my Minolta MD Macro Rokkor 100mm F4 and got a good ~2:1 to ~5:1 macro lens.
For direct use of reversed lenses I also prefer 28 or 35mm lenses |
NIce one as well, thank you for setup picture! _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3437 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
I like the Pancolar reversed.
But I was surprised by results with a cheap standard zoom: http://www.npss.org.sg/main/images/pdf/reverse%20lens%20-%20back%20to%20the%20old%20way.pdf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
takumargriet
Joined: 09 Apr 2012 Posts: 33 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
takumargriet wrote:
I still want to try this out with different lenses, zoom lenses for example The only warning I want to give is that the first lens should be of decent build quality, I wouldn't stack a metal build takumar on the end of my plastic fantastic/quick shift focus modern DFA pentax lens for example.
pich900 wrote: |
takumargriet, that's quite amazing macro's ......and I have took a look on your flick, I can only say WOW...... |
Attila wrote: |
pich900 wrote: |
takumargriet, that's quite amazing macro's ......and I have took a look on your flick, I can only say WOW...... |
+10 my maximum respect is yours, fantastic work! |
Thanks! I am a little bit addicted to macro work... hope to get Uberprutser addicted too _________________ Pentax K5 and mostly manual lenses
pics at flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uberprutser
Joined: 01 Dec 2012 Posts: 19
|
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uberprutser wrote:
I'm going to buy a 52mm reversal adapter for an old 28mm Tokina with OM mount. (Hopefully I can get the aperture working again)
Stacking lenses isn't a good option for me. They are way to long and will cast a shadow when using a flash.
And the weight of two stacked lenses will also put much strain on the lens mount.
Thanks all for the advise and examples. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
twinquartz
Joined: 11 Jun 2012 Posts: 316 Location: Sweden
Expire: 2013-10-29
|
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
twinquartz wrote:
uberprutser wrote: |
They are way to long and will cast a shadow when using a flash. |
Well, that depends on where you locate your flash/flashes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
1:1, 1:2 and 2:1 etc are confusing me, not the numbers but the magnification in the final image.
If you take a picture with a 1:1 magnification, the image is said to lifesize. Is that lifesize on the sensor/film?
Surely that's rather unimportant because you will be enlarging the image when you print it to whatever size you choose.
And you can increase the magnification even more if you crop and print to the same size.
What am I missing? Someone put me straight please. _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy
Joined: 18 Dec 2010 Posts: 1258 Location: Down East, Canada, eh?
Expire: 2013-11-30
|
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
1:1, 1:2 and 2:1 etc are confusing me, not the numbers but the magnification in the final image.
If you take a picture with a 1:1 magnification, the image is said to lifesize. Is that lifesize on the sensor/film?
Surely that's rather unimportant because you will be enlarging the image when you print it to whatever size you choose.
And you can increase the magnification even more if you crop and print to the same size.
What am I missing? Someone put me straight please. |
This article explains the ratios - http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6519974919/macro-photography-understanding-magnification
As far as cropping/blowing up etc. that's true, but having a lens taking a 1:1 picture should yield better results then blowing up a shot taken with less magnification.
One time I hooked the camera/macro bellows up to the TV and did some macro live view stuff with the kids, that was serious magnification _________________ I welcome C&C, editing my pics and reposting them on the forum is fine.
NEX-F3
~~~~~~~~~
CZJ Sonnar 135/4, Biotar 58/2, Pancolar 50/2, Tessar 50/2.8, Flek 35/2.8, Flek 25/4
Super Takumar 135/2.5, 135/3.5, 100/4 bellows, 50/1.4, 28/3.5
Helios 58/2, 3M-5A 500/8, Mir 20M
Vivitar Series 1 70-210 - - - - - - - - Nikkor 200/4
Rikenon 28/2.8 - - - - - - - - Zeiss 50/1.7 Planar
PB 50/2.4, 135/2.8
Yashica 50/1.9, 28/2.8, 135/2.8
Hexanon 28/3.5, 50/1.4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
killwilly
Joined: 16 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
killwilly wrote:
uberprutser wrote: |
Stacking lenses isn't a good option for me. They are way to long and will cast a shadow when using a flash.
And the weight of two stacked lenses will also put much strain on the lens mount.
|
I wouldn't totally agree with that comment. The two stacked lenses used in my photograph of the pen (link below) are about the same length as my Canon 15-85, but considerably lighter.
http://forum.mflenses.com/helios-55mm-reversed-mounted-on-helios-135mm-t50493.html#1238895 _________________ Alan. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|