Seeking Mirror Lens for Macro Work- Crazy?!

[Kram]

I am considering getting a mirror lens for macro work. I've never owned one and realize this may not be a good idea.

Just to investigate... I like to hand-hold so the shorter the better, and perhaps faster (maybe 5.6-ish) is better.

Also considering the minimum focus distance, perhaps I need one with the ability to add extension tubes?

Maybe this is a colossally bad idea?

Thoughts?

[Attila]

In short of bad .. shortest mirror lens is 250mm what I know, not really a macro focal length. Minimal focusing distance is long. May better idea to shoot plane background with mirror lens some green and compose images.
You will get circles and quality macro shoot together.

[kds315*]

What you are looking for is usually called a "Long Distance Microscope", the LDM-1 being one for instance:
http://www.macrolenses.de/ml_detail_sl.php?ObjektiveNr=315
Questar made similar ones, all usually quite expensive ($$$$) since made for scientific or military use.
http://www.company7.com/questar/microscope.html

I recently found some simpler ones, made for 16mm format only, delivers "artsy" results when used out of calibration, pretty nice...

[hoanpham]

Interesting.
I have the tamron mirror 500/8 55bb, mfd is less than 170cm. I never try it with the tc 2x 01f or the 200f on it, but that would be an awesome working distance for macro shots.

Edit:
Can't help to mount and try
Same mfd, but got 1:1.5 macro with the tc.
Without is 1:3

[Attila]

Tamron has F8 aperture +2x =F11 plus working distance means no flash just natural light + 500mm lens ... require fast speed. It will be no fun at all with weak results

[kds315*]

Mark has mentioned and required to use it "handheld", that will be a bit difficult to find and use. The one I shot my orchid with is a f1.1/90mm catoptric lens, the only one I ever found or heard of with that short focal length and high speed

[Kram]

Thanks everyone! Probably a crazy/bad idea.

[Kram]

Klaus, nice image!

[kds315*]

Thanks Mark. Not really a bad idea. Are you looking for:
- long working distance
- high magnification
- doughnut shaped bokeh
- rel. lightweight
or why do you require a mirror lens?

Another one...



DOF is razor thin



but the doughnuts are cute

[Pontus]

The Rokkor 250/5.6 is very sharp with high contrast. It could work well with extension tubes.

[hoanpham]

Very nice Klaus

No, it's not a bad idea at all.
I will try more in daylight.

[Olivier]

Mark,
With the 5D MkII I like using the Tamron SP 500 F8, handheld for macro.
It feels strange to do macro at min 1,70m distance.
If speed is not enough, set higher isos.
With the doubler 01F you need a tripod.



4-


5-


I find it easy to use as mine has a soft focusing ring, and it is the first model with the hood included.

Some links wich I believe show proxiphoto results with this lens :
http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-sp-500mm-f8-t49322,highlight,%2Btamron+%2Bsp+%2B500.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/various-pics-with-tamron-sp-500-f8-t40788,highlight,%2Btamron+%2Bsp+%2B500.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/macroglossum-stellatarum-tamron-sp-500-f8-t40401,highlight,%2Btamron+%2Bsp+%2B500.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/aglais-urticae-butterfly-tamron-sp-500-f8-t40938,highlight,%2Btamron+%2Bsp+%2B500.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/some-more-pictures-with-tamron-sp-500-mirror-lens-t41042,highlight,%2Btamron+%2Bsp+%2B500.html

Results with Pen E-p2 (equivalent 1000mm f8...)
http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-sp-500mm-f8-on-pen-e-p2-t46862,highlight,%2Btamron+%2Bsp+%2B500.html

Mark, if you wish, I can try it with extension tubes...

[Kram]

[Kram]

Olivier, this is where I really need FF. On a 60D a 500mm would be 800mm! Insanity to hand hold for macros I think!
It looks superb though! Nice work!

[IAZA]

its not bad idea. great idea Mark. I had Rubinar 500/8 macro. (its written macro on the lens) I never made good macro with it though
here's my sample, handheld with NEX5 (more difficult than using 60D I guess). I dont remember the MFD, but this is at MFD

[kds315*]

[Olivier]

[danfromm]

Mark, I don't use it as a macro lens but I have shot my 700/8 Questar against my 55/2.8 and 105/2.8 AIS MicroNikkors. Kodachrome 25, electronic flash, all lenses at f/8, 1:4 (the Q700's close focusing distance), all shots from tripod. Same subject, same framing, of course.

The slides couldn't be told apart under a 12x magnifier.

Practical considerations: getting more magnification with the Q700 isn't easy, tripod needed to control camera/lens motion and because the Q700 is big and heavy. I wouldn't try to use the lens handheld with available darkness. Now that K25 is gone, flash can't always be used out-of-doors at f/8 (probably T/11).

[Olivier]

and I added a topic about Extension tubes and Doubler comparison.

http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1237667.html#1237667


I would say it's too hard to obtain very good macro results, and you don't really get close enough for real macro even with 62mm of extension tubes...

[Kram]

[Olivier]

and above there's a topic with Aps-C 40D

[Nordentro]

[danfromm]

Mark, why do you want a long macro lens? Subjects you can't get close to? Just because?

I ask because my three short little MicroNikkors (55/2.8, 105/2.8, 200/4, all AIS) have been all that I needed in most situations.

The big exception was on my '76 trip to Costa Rica, when my only macro lens was a 55/3.5.

The new road from Siquirres to Limon had opened three weeks before I arrived. I drove around it, collected fish in the streams it crossed. I found several streams under triple canopy with wet leaves on their very gently sloping banks and Rivulus isthmensis out of the water on those wet leaves. They wouldn't let me get closer than around ten feet (3 m), it was dark under the trees, I didn't have a flash with me, and the longest lens I had, a 200, wasn't long enough anyway. So I couldn't document fish out of water. I took a few lousy shots anyway; they proved nothing.

Went back in '79 with a Celestron C-90 (horrible lens, as it turned out, but all I could afford. Close focusing limit 10 feet, did 1:4 at that distance.) and a big flash to document the fish out of water. The trees were down, everything was very dry, there were no Rivulus out of water or, for that matter, in the water. Worked every stream in the area (~ 30 km of road) and collected just one. I wasn't very happy that day.

[Kram]

[Olivier]

Mark, I tried to obtain donuts bokeh with the Tamron SP 500 F8 equipped with 62mm tubes in my garden, and I failed.
With these tubes, min focusing distance is approx 1m instead of 1.70m without tubes.

Maybe the Tamron SP 350 F5.6 should be another interesting trail :
http://www.adaptall-2.org/lenses/06B.html
It has 1.1m min focusing distance and 1:2.5 reproducing ratio (1:1.25 with doubler).
I believe it should be very nice to operate.

SP 500 F8 has 1:3 reproducing ratio (1:1.5 with doubler)
http://www.adaptall-2.org/lenses/55B.html