Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Digital Rebel goes 5x life size Cheap!

Tags:
Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 6:01:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Using lenses you may already have, You can get about 5x life size with
little effort and great quality. If you did not have any of the equipment,
it shouldn't cost over $150 to purchase.

The picture links below are from the millimeter hash marks on a stainless
steel rule! You are seeing the sampled down full frame in the first shot. It
looks a bit soft on the right due to a slight tilt while hand holding:

http://home.att.net/~jriegle/macro1.jpg

This shot is a 1:1 crop. Notice the color mottling. This is not from a
digital camera artifact. This is from the diffraction of light of the finely
brushed surface of the metal. I can see the same effect with a microscope.

http://home.att.net/~jriegle/macro2.jpg

This picture is is the lens setup:

http://home.att.net/~jriegle/macro3.jpg

I used the Canon EF 80-200mm II. It costs about $100 and delivers a very
good image (see Canons own MTF charts and compare with their other
inexpensive telezooms). It has a filter thread dia. of 52mm. The lens that
is reversed and attached to the front is the excellent Pentax 50mm f/1.7 M.
It has a 49mm thread.

I had to join the two together. I had 52mm and 49mm UV filters sitting
around. I tend to accumulated them off of used lenses I buy. The slight
difference in size allows one to slip inside of the other with the threads
facing out. Perfect fit to epoxy them together. Removing the retaining clip,
I removed the glass and used 2 part epoxy to cement the rings together for a
strong bond (be sure not to get epoxy on the threads). After curing for a
couple hours it was ready for a test run.

Since I had everything needed, I spent only $3 on the epoxy. Notice that
there is no vignetting, and is sharp corner to corner. I hope to get some
more interesting shots later. If you try this for yourself, the prime lens
should have a focal length of no less than about 70mm or so on cameras with
the sensor the size of the dRebel. 35mm film or full frame digital needs a
minimum of 100mm or more. The reversed lens should be a sharp fast lens.
Stopping it down a stop or two may improve sharpness. In the test above the
50mm was set to 2.8 and the zoom was set wide open (f/5.6) at 200mm.

John
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 6:01:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <8MWce.167166$cg1.86699@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"JohnR66" <nospam@att.net> wrote:

> Using lenses you may already have, You can get about 5x life size with
> little effort and great quality. If you did not have any of the equipment,
> it shouldn't cost over $150 to purchase.
>
> The picture links below are from the millimeter hash marks on a stainless
> steel rule! You are seeing the sampled down full frame in the first shot. It
> looks a bit soft on the right due to a slight tilt while hand holding:
>
> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/macro1.jpg
>
> This shot is a 1:1 crop. Notice the color mottling. This is not from a
> digital camera artifact. This is from the diffraction of light of the finely
> brushed surface of the metal. I can see the same effect with a microscope.
>
> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/macro2.jpg
>
> This picture is is the lens setup:
>
> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/macro3.jpg
>
> I used the Canon EF 80-200mm II. It costs about $100 and delivers a very
> good image (see Canons own MTF charts and compare with their other
> inexpensive telezooms). It has a filter thread dia. of 52mm. The lens that
> is reversed and attached to the front is the excellent Pentax 50mm f/1.7 M.
> It has a 49mm thread.
>
> I had to join the two together. I had 52mm and 49mm UV filters sitting
> around. I tend to accumulated them off of used lenses I buy. The slight
> difference in size allows one to slip inside of the other with the threads
> facing out. Perfect fit to epoxy them together. Removing the retaining clip,
> I removed the glass and used 2 part epoxy to cement the rings together for a
> strong bond (be sure not to get epoxy on the threads). After curing for a
> couple hours it was ready for a test run.
>
> Since I had everything needed, I spent only $3 on the epoxy. Notice that
> there is no vignetting, and is sharp corner to corner. I hope to get some
> more interesting shots later. If you try this for yourself, the prime lens
> should have a focal length of no less than about 70mm or so on cameras with
> the sensor the size of the dRebel. 35mm film or full frame digital needs a
> minimum of 100mm or more. The reversed lens should be a sharp fast lens.
> Stopping it down a stop or two may improve sharpness. In the test above the
> 50mm was set to 2.8 and the zoom was set wide open (f/5.6) at 200mm.
>
> John

How do the ratio of focal distances work out? I have a 10-22, 24-85,
and 70-300 now. The 50mm f/1.4 would likely be my next lens.

I tried putting a 4x closeup filter on the 70-300mm DO IS. What a mess
that was!
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 6:01:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

How far from the ruler did you have to get? Was wondering how much
room you had for lighting.

Raymond
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 12:29:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 01 May 2005 04:11:33 +0100, paul wrote:

> Hmm, I guess it doesn't work with an auto-aperture lense. I just tried
> with a Nikon 'G' on the end & it seems to stop down all the way when
> sleeping so the image was incredibly dark.

To operate the aperture of the reversed lens you may need a special
manual adaptor. I don't know about Nikon but for Canon FD lenses a manual
adapter to operate the aperture ring and a Macrohood to open up the
aperture were available.

--

Gautam Majumdar

Please send e-mails to gmajumdar@freeuk.com
May 1, 2005 12:52:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gautam Majumdar wrote:

> On Sun, 01 May 2005 04:11:33 +0100, paul wrote:
>
>
>>Hmm, I guess it doesn't work with an auto-aperture lense. I just tried
>>with a Nikon 'G' on the end & it seems to stop down all the way when
>>sleeping so the image was incredibly dark.
>
>
> To operate the aperture of the reversed lens you may need a special
> manual adaptor. I don't know about Nikon but for Canon FD lenses a manual
> adapter to operate the aperture ring and a Macrohood to open up the
> aperture were available.


I got it working by taping back a little lever to open the aperture.
Nikon 28-200 at 200mm closest focus on the front of a 70-200 f/2.8 with
2x teleconverter focused to infinity. Almost 2-foot long rig & it
focuses at about 1/2 inch. The date on a penny fills the frame width.
It's a real struggle to get an actual image though, I'll have to clamp
it to a vise or something <grin>.
May 1, 2005 2:54:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

paul wrote:
>
> I got it working by taping back a little lever to open the aperture.
> Nikon 28-200 at 200mm closest focus on the front of a 70-200 f/2.8 with
> 2x teleconverter focused to infinity. Almost 2-foot long rig & it
> focuses at about 1/2 inch. The date on a penny fills the frame width.
> It's a real struggle to get an actual image though, I'll have to clamp
> it to a vise or something <grin>.


Here's the results:
<http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=Misc/misc-phot...;
Not great but really really close-up! About 4x.
May 1, 2005 3:23:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"JohnR66" <nospam@att.net> wrote:

>Using lenses you may already have, You can get about 5x life size with
>little effort and great quality. If you did not have any of the equipment,
>it shouldn't cost over $150 to purchase

[snip]

Didn't they used to make a double threaded ring you could buy to screw
two lenses front to front? I was googling a bit and couldn't find
any.

Wes
--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Alpha Charlie Echo Golf Romeo Oscar Paul dot Charlie Charlie
Lycos address is a spam trap.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:54:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Silicon Sam" <SiliconSam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114922518.599320.126950@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> How far from the ruler did you have to get? Was wondering how much
> room you had for lighting.
>
> Raymond
>
I'm getting around 1.5 inches (just shy of 4 cm). The shape of the rear end
of the 50mm lens allows more light in as compared to typical macros (another
fringe benefit).
To answer the previous poster's question, The ratio depends on many factors.
How recessed the front element are relative to the filter ring will make a
difference. Setting both lenses for close focusing will increase
magnification a bit. In my test, I could have gone a bit higher
magnification. In my case, I'm getting around 5x at 200mm or about 1.25x at
50mm. Keep in mind, you want to be at least 70mm on the main lens to avoid
vignetting. Using a zoom lens is another benefit as you can change the
magnification, but you have to move the camera since the front of the lens
extends, but so does Canon's 5x macro.

John
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 6:03:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gautam Majumdar" <gmajumdar@XSPAMfreeuk.com> wrote in message
news:wr0de.7273$qK3.161@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> On Sun, 01 May 2005 04:11:33 +0100, paul wrote:
>
>> Hmm, I guess it doesn't work with an auto-aperture lense. I just tried
>> with a Nikon 'G' on the end & it seems to stop down all the way when
>> sleeping so the image was incredibly dark.
>
> To operate the aperture of the reversed lens you may need a special
> manual adaptor. I don't know about Nikon but for Canon FD lenses a manual
> adapter to operate the aperture ring and a Macrohood to open up the
> aperture were available.
>
> --
>
> Gautam Majumdar
>
> Please send e-mails to gmajumdar@freeuk.com

I know Pentax and Nikon manual focus lenses and AF models with the aperture
ring will set the blades with the lens off camera. For this reason it is
best to go find a used Pentax 50mm f/1.7 or Nikon 50mm f/1.8 to use. They
are typically in the $15-40 range.
John
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 10:32:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gautam Majumdar <gmajumdar@XSPAMfreeuk.com> writes:
>To operate the aperture of the reversed lens you may need a special
>manual adaptor. I don't know about Nikon but for Canon FD lenses a manual
>adapter to operate the aperture ring and a Macrohood to open up the
>aperture were available.

Get an old manual-focus lens. Nikon, Minolta, and Ricoh (probably other
manufacturers too) manual lenses have a spring that stops down the lens
to the manually-set aperture, while the camera uses a lever to open it
wide for viewing. When these lenses are not mounted on a camera, they
automatically revert to ordinary manual aperture control.

Pentax screw-mount lenses should be even cheaper used. These typically
have an A/M lever on them. In M you have full manual control of
aperture, while in A the lens sits wide open all the time. (When on a
camera, the camera pushes a pin to stop the lens down).

Either way, no special adapter is needed to open the lens up for
reversed macro use. In fact, I've never encountered a manual-focus SLR
lens that needed a special adapter to operate the aperture when off the
camera (but I haven't used Canon gear).

There are lots of inexpensive used 40, 45, and 50 mm manual-focus SLR
lenses still around.

Dave
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 10:37:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

clutch@lycos.com writes:

>Didn't they used to make a double threaded ring you could buy to screw
>two lenses front to front? I was googling a bit and couldn't find
>any.

They still exist. A Google search for "macro adapter reversing ring"
got 32000 hits. All of the links on the first page seemed to be for the
device in question.

That's certainly easier than epoxying two filter rings together. It's
also more likely to keep the two lens optical axes parallel; unless the
gluing is done carefully it's easy for a little tilt to creep in.

Dave
May 1, 2005 10:37:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dave Martindale wrote:

> clutch@lycos.com writes:
>
>
>>Didn't they used to make a double threaded ring you could buy to screw
>>two lenses front to front? I was googling a bit and couldn't find
>>any.
>
>
> They still exist. A Google search for "macro adapter reversing ring"
> got 32000 hits. All of the links on the first page seemed to be for the
> device in question.
>
> That's certainly easier than epoxying two filter rings together. It's
> also more likely to keep the two lens optical axes parallel; unless the
> gluing is done carefully it's easy for a little tilt to creep in.


The normal way to do it is mount the reversed lens directly on the
camera rather than on the end of another lens.
May 1, 2005 10:37:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

davem@cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) wrote:

>They still exist. A Google search for "macro adapter reversing ring"
>got 32000 hits. All of the links on the first page seemed to be for the
>device in question.

Thank you. I wasn't able to figure out the magic query. I once was
looking for info on running a pc w/o a monitor and until I used 'no
headed', I was getting useless returns.

Wes

--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Alpha Charlie Echo Golf Romeo Oscar Paul dot Charlie Charlie
Lycos address is a spam trap.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 10:37:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

clutch@lycos.com writes:
> Thank you. I wasn't able to figure out the magic query. I once was
> looking for info on running a pc w/o a monitor and until I used 'no
> headed', I was getting useless returns.

http://www.camerafilters.com/pages/macrorings.aspx

has some low priced ones with very reasonable shipping charges. They
also have low cost adapters, lens caps, and similar gizmos.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 6:40:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <1179t5kjn7iulbb@news.supernews.com>,
clutch@lycos.com wrote:

>Didn't they used to make a double threaded ring you could buy to screw
>two lenses front to front? I was googling a bit and couldn't find
>any.

B&H caries them in a variety of sizes. They cost about $6, IIRC.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 6:40:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

JPS@no.komm writes:
> B&H caries them in a variety of sizes. They cost about $6, IIRC.

Argh, yes, search for "macro couplers" on bhphoto.com.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 8:01:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>Dave Martindale wrote:
>> That's certainly easier than epoxying two filter rings together. It's
>> also more likely to keep the two lens optical axes parallel; unless the
>> gluing is done carefully it's easy for a little tilt to creep in.

paul <paul@not.net> writes:
>The normal way to do it is mount the reversed lens directly on the
>camera rather than on the end of another lens.

Well, a ring to mount two lenses front-to-front was exactly what he was
asking for.

Besides, when would you mount a reversed lens directly on a camera?

Do you mean using a DSLR camera with just one lens mounted reversed?
That doesn't make sense.

Or are you referring to the fact that P&S cameras often don't have
filter threads on the lens, and instead mount filters via an adapter
tube. In that case, the reversed lens is mechanically attached to the
camera body, not the main lens - but you still need a double male
threaded adapter ring for this.

Anyway, he was asking about a DSLR, where the reversed lens does indeed
mount to the end of the main lens.

Dave
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 8:01:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

davem@cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) writes:
> Besides, when would you mount a reversed lens directly on a camera?

That's a very normal close-up technique and there are reversing rings
for it.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 10:01:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 01 May 2005 11:23:34 -0400, clutch@lycos.com wrote:

>Didn't they used to make a double threaded ring you could buy to screw
>two lenses front to front? I was googling a bit and couldn't find
>any.

They sell them at B&H and Adorama. I bought one from one of them a few
years ago. You can also make your own by attaching two Cokin adaptor
rings of the required sizes together.



Gary J Sibio
garysibio@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/

There are 10 types of people: those who understand binary numbers and those who don't.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 9:41:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
> How do the ratio of focal distances work out? I have a 10-22, 24-85,
> and 70-300 now. The 50mm f/1.4 would likely be my next lens.
>
> I tried putting a 4x closeup filter on the 70-300mm DO IS. What a mess
> that was!

What was wrong with that combination? Does the DO design not get along with
add-on lenses??? At 300mm, you should see a fairly high magnification.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
May 3, 2005 6:51:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:

>JPS@no.komm writes:
>> B&H caries them in a variety of sizes. They cost about $6, IIRC.
>
>Argh, yes, search for "macro couplers" on bhphoto.com.

Mine is on the way. Searching for stuff can be hard at time. Last
night I needed to search for info on a Watts lubricator. Searching
for Watts on internet? Not an ez search.

Thanks,

Wes

--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Alpha Charlie Echo Golf Romeo Oscar Paul dot Charlie Charlie
Lycos address is a spam trap.
!