Posted by Dale Williams on February 23, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Has anyone tried using a reverse lense mount adapter on a 50mm lense for close-up or macro? I'm wondering about trying this on my 50mm. Would close-up filters be better? How does either of those options compare to using extension tubes?
I'm currently using a Sigma 17-70mm macro lense which is fairly adequate for the floral shots I do but until I can spring for a 105mm or 180mm, I am looking for a couple of other options to play with.
I would appreciate any experience you can share or thoughts.
Posted by Will Webster on February 23, 2007 at 4:34 PM
I've seen a lot of discussion of this method in the macro forum on fredmiranda.com
A photog I frequently work with uses the technique, but not just with the 50mm. She also uses a 100mm (or maybe 135mm?) and a 200mm. As I recall she also has some system for stacking two lenses via a reversing ring of a different sortfor even more magnification. How much magnification? She's well beyond 4x, to the point that she photographs flower stamens that clearly show individual loose pollen granuals.
Sorry I can remember all the details about her setup, but I wanted to point out that you need not limit your thinking to simply using a 50mm. You should also be aware that all this comes at a tremendous cost in light and DOF, however.
Posted by Dale Williams on February 23, 2007 at 10:21 PM
Thanks Will and Hank for your responses. Hank, would you say the cost in light is a couple of stops as with a GD filter or would it be even more. I've just added a SB-600 as a wireless strobe to my D80 rig to get some extra light on the subjects and my next project is to build a light box to do some macro shots. I'm wondering if that strobe is enough to help counter the lost light when using the reverse mount.
I'm not sure about the reversed 50, etc, but when she's stacking two lenses (a 200 with a 50 reversed on the end, I think, but don't quote me) she loses around 6 stops as I recall. Could be even more, because I know she's messing with very long exposures in order to get any kind of DOF at all. And "lots" is measured in milimeters.
She HATES strobe, to the point that she passes on to us any contract work calling for strobes or in a worst case scenario, contracts me to do all the lighting for her. On the other hand, my wife and I are completely comfortable with stobe and would do like you. At the close ranges we're talking here, you can make up for a lot of light loss with a strobe. Of course, if you didn't have enough power for the situation you can opt for a very slow shutter speed and do a couple of pops with the strobe while the shutter was open. That's a standard stunt I use with LF and strobes, and it works just as well with 35mm.
Posted by Rod Barbee on February 24, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Pick up a copy of John Shaw's Close Ups in Nature. He covers all of these techniques is some detail. Plus it's just a good read.
I've used a reversed 50mm lens and it works fine. If you want to get an idea of what it can do, simply hold it up against the camera body and take a look. The reversing rings are inexpensive too, so why not get one and experiment.
I've also done the lens stacking thing. For me it was a 24 stacked on a 105. Damn, but you can get close with that. I don't recall if I lost much light with that combo though. It's sort of like screwing in a diopter. Stacking rings are also inexpensive.
Again, it's easy to experiment with this by simply holding up one lens to the other. (Lenses mount face to face)
A tip: control aperture with the lens that's mounted to the camera. Leave the stacked lens wide open otherwise you'll get more light loss and probably have vignetting problems.
Posted by Dale Williams on February 24, 2007 at 2:50 PM
Thanks for the information Rod. You're right, the reversing rings are so inexpensive it makes sense to experiment. Really hadn't thought about stacking until I read your's and Hank's replies. Great ideas!
Discussion
6 repliesI'm currently using a Sigma 17-70mm macro lense which is fairly adequate for the floral shots I do but until I can spring for a 105mm or 180mm, I am looking for a couple of other options to play with.
I would appreciate any experience you can share or thoughts.
Sorry I can remember all the details about her setup, but I wanted to point out that you need not limit your thinking to simply using a 50mm. You should also be aware that all this comes at a tremendous cost in light and DOF, however.
She HATES strobe, to the point that she passes on to us any contract work calling for strobes or in a worst case scenario, contracts me to do all the lighting for her. On the other hand, my wife and I are completely comfortable with stobe and would do like you. At the close ranges we're talking here, you can make up for a lot of light loss with a strobe. Of course, if you didn't have enough power for the situation you can opt for a very slow shutter speed and do a couple of pops with the strobe while the shutter was open. That's a standard stunt I use with LF and strobes, and it works just as well with 35mm.
I've used a reversed 50mm lens and it works fine. If you want to get an idea of what it can do, simply hold it up against the camera body and take a look. The reversing rings are inexpensive too, so why not get one and experiment.
I've also done the lens stacking thing. For me it was a 24 stacked on a 105. Damn, but you can get close with that. I don't recall if I lost much light with that combo though. It's sort of like screwing in a diopter. Stacking rings are also inexpensive.
Again, it's easy to experiment with this by simply holding up one lens to the other. (Lenses mount face to face)
A tip: control aperture with the lens that's mounted to the camera. Leave the stacked lens wide open otherwise you'll get more light loss and probably have vignetting problems.
Thanks again everyone!