Reversed 50mm for macro's

[Copy_Kot]

A current thread by Bev got me thinking about this... I didn't want to hijack hers, so I'm starting a new thread.

If you have a 50mm lens and a telephoto, you can couple them together to get outstanding macro's. It's done by using a reversing ring that has male threads on both sides. Your telephoto lens is attached to your camera, and then the 50mm is attached 'backwards' to your telephoto lens.

Here is a link to see how it's done... http://www.insecta.co.za/ZArticles/revers/revers.htm

This is probably the way I will go for macro's in the future (using a Sigma 150mm macro lens with a Canon 50mm attached).

One drawback to doing this is a very shallow DOF.

And... B&H Photo has the reversing rings for about $8 USD

[HowLowCanYaGo]

Interesting...

Could you post a link to the $8 reversing rings? Cheapest I could find were $30

[Bevb]

Yes very interesting Copy, the whole website is very good, thanks for posting link, its amazing what you can do without spending fortunes on lenses.

[Copy_Kot]

Interesting...

Could you post a link to the $8 reversing rings? Cheapest I could find were $30

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...arch&Q=*&bhs=t

[Lava Lamp]

I don't want to pooh-pooh on anyone's ideas or techniques or equipment. My personal attempts at macro photography, however, have been best served with a dedicated macro lens.

I first tried diopters -- the kind that are sold in sets of three that screw on to the front of your lens for $40. Got poor results. Then I tried reversing a 50mm screwed on to my zoom. Much better results; difficult to focus and control depth of field. Then I tried the better diopters like the Nikon 6T or Canon 500D (I think) -- less magnification than the 50mm, but still hard to control and cost $100.

Next, I tried extension tubes. Same problems as above, but nice results and impressive magnification when all the tunbes are used.

Then voila, Tamron 90mm macro lens -- Omigosh I've gone to heaven. Easy to knock out great results. Far sharper than anything else I had tried.

Added tube to Tamron, didn't like it. Added 1.4x TC and loved it. Never took it off. Took lost of good pics. Starting wanting more mag and got Nikon 200mm - still figuring that one out.

If I was to go through all of this again, I would buy a macro lens first -- probably the Tamron. I hear the Vivitar 100mm is good for the budget at just $130 or so and gets good results.

[Loupey]

That author sure seems like an interesting "tinkerer" (which is a good thing ) Some of his ideas are fun just for the sake of finding out if they work. But I have reservations that good resolution can be achieved with some of his ideas - especially in the corners of the frame.

I've never tried a reversed lens arrangement. I hear that for high magnifications (1x to 3x), it is "better" than using tubes, TC's, bellows, diopters, and the like - except for high mag macro lenses.

I'm sure there is an application when this may come in handy. Cheap enough to find out

[SmartWombat]

I tinkered once, with my Zenit-E after discovering tubes.

Took a kitchen foil roll cardboard tube.
Painted it black inside.
Stuffed my 50mm f/2 lens on one end, using 36mm tube inside the cardboard roll.
Stuffed the other two tubes up the other end, mounted on the body.

Result? Huge magnification and an f/ number of over a hundred as I recall.
Exposure was four or five flashes from various angles.
Now I've got to go find the slide, and get the scanner linked to something so I can show the result.


If you try anything like this I'd be interested to see results.


There were reverse adaptors for the Zenit-E that put the 50mm lens on backwards. Since it was manual focus, manual exposure you lost nothing doing it that way But that involved spending money, rather than tinkering with household objects ...

[Copy_Kot]

I bought the Canon 50mm f/1.8 because I just had to try this

Here's a shot from today. It was taken with 68mm of Kenko tubes, my Sigma 150mm macro lens, and of course the Canon 50mm lens. The little red mite is about the size of a dot made by a sharpened pencil (couldn't think of anything else to compare it too, lol). The image has not been cropped.

[SmartWombat]

Excellent.
How do you get the plane of focus on a diagonal like that?

[Copy_Kot]

How do you get the plane of focus on a diagonal like that?

It was just pure luck getting the mite in focus. I had my camera on a tripod which was as close as I could get to the raised flower bed that the mite was on, the mite was to my left.

It is very hard to focus on things like insects with the set-up, the focal length is about 3 inches and it doesn't take too much to scare your subject away.

[Orgnoi1]

Well you have pretty darn good pure luck!! I have shot those mites with a 12mm tube and a 100 Macro and not gotten such a good result! Those are MUCH smaller then most people would realize!!

[Copy_Kot]

Thank you Orgnoi1, yes they are incredibly small... smaller than a grain of sand (a better comparison, lol).

[Loupey]

Copy, thanks for following through on your original post! Great demonstration.

My daughter and I were just talking about these mites today (before seeing your post) as I had one on my water bottle straw this afternoon. I had one mite actually get between the LCD and the clear outer screen of my 10D last summer. Kept trying to brush it off. They are tiny.

[big baldo]

Incredible Copy!! I also have seen these(on a pet iguana) and they are incredibly small. I'm going to start calling you the "human electron microscope". Try for a dust mite next!!!

[Copy_Kot]

LOL, Loupey and Big Baldo.

Loupey, I could easily imagen one of them getting into a camera body... what a pain it would be to get it out.

B/B, I might have to try that with my 2X TC (lol), with this much magnification, it will be hard to find subjects to shoot.

[Copy_Kot]

I might have to try that with my 2X TC (lol),

Just for fun... the T and Y in the word LIBERTY on a penny. The DOF is bad because I took the image with my aperture at f/5... and yup, I still need to clean my sensor