Hi guys,
I've been playing with my P7800 and Nikon achromatic close-up filters.
In particular, I've used 52mm 3T and 4T filters. To mount them, I bought a 40.5 -> 52 mm ring (at Amazon UK for £3.23, i.e. about 5 US $).
I measured the framed area and the working distance with either close-up filter, and with the 3T+4T combo.
I show the results in the following table.
In the following, you can also see the set-up on my P7800, and two pictures taken with the 4T filter, and with both filters attached.
What is really impressive, is the working distance you can get by using the zoom at the long end. You can use the close-up filters similarly to a true 90-105 macro lens on a FX camera!
Last but not least: consider that each achromatic filter is rather heavy (two glued 52mm diam glass elements!); I suggest to attach the close-up filters to the zoom after the camera has been switched on, and the zoom is out. This way you avoid stresses to the zoom gears.
Framed areas with Nikon 3T & 4T close-up filters attached to P7800:
The Nikon close-up filters were discontinued long time ago and are difficult to find (and expensive too).
You can have similar performance with the 52mm Canon 250 D (4 diopters), which is currently available.
All the best!
Nicely done and very interesting. I was going to pick on your voodoo magnification math, because applying the same logic to DX for example would mean that lifesize macro lenses are effectively 1.5X lifesize. But the more I think about it, the more I conclude that this is actually the case. So I'm going to cut you some slack on this one.
This combination turns out to be a really nice macro rig. Stacking a 3T and 4T on DX netted soft corners and excessive curvature for me. Looks like the smaller sensor stays in the flat center of the two and the sharpness at the corners is good. The extra DOF is a major bonus! Nice to see people still experimenting with unintended setups and getting unexpected results.
Elan II wrote:
I was going to pick on your voodoo magnification math, because applying the same logic to DX for example would mean that lifesize macro lenses are effectively 1.5X lifesize. But the more I think about it, the more I conclude that this is actually the case. So I'm going to cut you some slack on this one.
Hi,
the magnification values I gave in my previous Table are NOT the actual magnifications. They represent the magnification one needs in order to obtain similar framing when using a full-frame (FX) camera ('similar' not 'same' due to different aspect ratios, i.e. 3:2 vs 4:3).
If you like to know the correct math, the following table gives the proper numbers (in the third column):
Yes, Ricardo, I know the real magnification. The 1X is actually 0.2142857X
My point was that it's okay to use the equivalent full frame value since in the end it's what is captured in the frame that counts. You go out there with this tiny, inexpensive rig and get as much magnification, good image quality and 5X the DOF as an FX body with a lifesize macro lens. I think that's a setup that is seriously worth considering.
Today I've found early spring flowering plants (Anemone apennina), so I decided to try the P7800 with Nikon close-up filters in the field. Here are my initial thoughts.
The camera works fine with Nikon 4T, even at large apertures (see attached pictures). I was rather surprised to see how good was the subject isolation when I used an aperture in the f/4-f/5.6 range (which is enough to have sufficient DoF with the tiny sensor of a compact camera). The rather good subject isolation is due to the working distance, which determines the perspective.
Thanks zephyres.
Consider that a Canon 250D close-up filter (52mm diam) does work similarly.
The Canon filter is currently available (the Nikon ones are discontinued and difficult to find in the second hand market).
The main advantage of this set-up is the much larger working distance compared to the WD of the macro mode of the P7800 (a mere 2 cm ...).
Best,
You're having very good results. I've used the Nikon 3T, 4T, 5T & 6T on my P7700. I prefer using an adaptor that mounts the dioptors to the ring at the base of the lens. this transfer the weight off the extending lens to the body of the camera. This my not be a big issue with the 3T & 4T but the heavier weight of the 5&6T may be too much. Also I've tested the Raynox DCR-250 for even greater magnification ant it works as well as the Nikon Ts.
Thanks Snapshott.
Could you please tell us which adapter that mounts the filters to the base of the lens did you use? Any link to B&H or other websites? I would like to test it
Sure, here is the link to B&H for the adaptor the attaches to the body. It accepts a 58mm thread so you'll also need a 58mm to 52mm step down ring for the T3 & T4.
If you're interested in the Raynox it has a 43mm rear thread. So if you want to mount it directly on the camera lens you'll need a 43mm to 40.5mm step up ring. I got that on Amazon. It also has a spring loaded adaptor to it could also be mounted directly the body adaptor above.
