rev 50 revisited. - FM Forums

Moderated by: Tom Hicks

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Macro World Resource

FM Forums | Macro World | Join Image Upload

3 4 5 end

rev 50 revisited.

CDalessandro
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #1 · rev 50 revisited.

Outstanding work!!!...wow, I am shopping right now for a reversing ring...Thanks Tom for all your priceless information. Thank you!!!

Aug 19, 2008 at 02:00 AM

David Frette
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #2 · rev 50 revisited.

Tom, good challenge. How ya been?

You don't _need_ rings guys. You can hold a lens up to the camera. In fact, I've taken some with a 20-35mm O77 lens hand held to the camera. I have a 35-80mm lens that doesn't have a ring, can flip it around, and can hand hold it up to my camera.

example:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Edited on Aug 20, 2008 at 04:32 PM

Aug 20, 2008 at 01:21 PM

digitalbug30d
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #3 · rev 50 revisited.

the spiders creep me out

Aug 21, 2008 at 03:32 AM

spankys1
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #4 · rev 50 revisited.

I just got my reversing ring in the mail today been waiting awhile and did some real fast tests some with just the ring and my kit lens 18-55mm and some with a full set of tubes ,ring and the 18-55mm lens

I'll try to get them posted in proper order

thanks Tom for this helpful advise

Doug

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi
Date	2008:08:23 17:56:41
Original date	2008:08:23 16:47:03
Exposure time	6/10 sec
Focal length	0mm
Focal number	f/0.0
ISO speed	200 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi
Date	2008:08:23 17:55:41
Original date	2008:08:23 16:48:04
Exposure time	5/10 sec
Focal length	0mm
Focal number	f/0.0
ISO speed	200 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Exif information
Model	Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi
Date	2008:08:23 17:55:41
Original date	2008:08:23 16:48:04
Exposure time	5/10 sec
Focal length	0mm
Focal number	f/0.0
ISO speed	200 ISO
Exposure compensation	0.0

Edited on Aug 23, 2008 at 11:10 PM

Aug 23, 2008 at 11:08 PM

spankys1
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #5 · rev 50 revisited.

a few more

Aug 23, 2008 at 11:12 PM

spankys1
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #6 · rev 50 revisited.

and now some with a full set of tubes

again thanks Tom for the help

Doug

Aug 23, 2008 at 11:15 PM

mananetwork
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #7 · rev 50 revisited.

Hi Tom, thanks for sharing your secrets. I'm looking at getting into macro photography and I have a couple questions;

1. What is the benefit of having an actual macro lens compared to this?
2. What are the limitations to the reverse lens?

Thank you!

Aug 26, 2008 at 04:59 AM

mananetwork
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #8 · rev 50 revisited.

^ Anybody?

Aug 28, 2008 at 07:04 PM

who me
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #9 · rev 50 revisited.

How come it seems like no local camera shops carry a reversing ring? I called most of th ecamera shops in my area and no one has one. It is not like they take up much storage space to keep 1 or 2 in stock.. I really didn't want to buy it online. Oh well

Aug 28, 2008 at 08:16 PM

who me
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #10 · rev 50 revisited.

mananetwork wrote:
Hi Tom, thanks for sharing your secrets. I'm looking at getting into macro photography and I have a couple questions;

1. What is the benefit of having an actual macro lens compared to this?
2. What are the limitations to the reverse lens?

Thank you!

I would think that a Macro lens is much more versatile. You can use it for normal photography as well as it communicates to the camera so the aperture works automatically as well as all exposure info is there so you can use automatic modes (Full auto, Av, Tv...). Not to mention, you have a MUCH larger subject to lens working distance and focus range.
With the reversed lens, you lose most of the conveniences above.
Of course, the Macro lens costs a lot more than a $10 reversing ring.

Aug 28, 2008 at 08:20 PM

Tom Hicks
Offline
Moderator
Image Upload: On

p.2 #11 · rev 50 revisited.

Mananetwork , who me is right. the true macro lens is always the most covenant way to go. 'there are many ,many ways to do macro and the rev. to camera is just one of those. Like I have said , not everyone can afford a true macro lens , but they can get excellent results with the other methods that are well within most peoples grasp monetarily. a rev setup can be had for cheap under 25 $ .

Aug 28, 2008 at 11:26 PM

mananetwork
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #12 · rev 50 revisited.

Thanks guys!

Aug 28, 2008 at 11:58 PM

Techuser
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #13 · rev 50 revisited.

Here are some using a 44mm on a canon A510

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Aug 31, 2008 at 06:12 PM

mananetwork
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #14 · rev 50 revisited.

How do you reverse a lens on a point and shoot, don't they already have a lens on it?

Aug 31, 2008 at 07:06 PM

Enrico Gregora
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #15 · rev 50 revisited.

Wow! Wow! Wow! Tom you are a genius!
Me on the other hand ... well ... I've just forked $600 on a macro lens!

Ciao
Enrico

Sep 10, 2008 at 11:24 PM

who me
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #16 · rev 50 revisited.

Anyone that uses a reversed Canon FD 50mm out there, I have a question. Do you have any method for holding the sprung lever in the position that allows the aperture ring to work manually. I used a paperclip as a temporary solution for about 5 minutes but I want a more viable solution.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks

Sep 12, 2008 at 01:42 AM

Tom Harpstead
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #17 · rev 50 revisited.

Who Me

I cut a hole in the rear cover. When the cover is attached it does a nice job of keeping the spring leaver in the aperture control mode. Also it does offer some some protection of the rear element, and possibly some form of shade.

Thomas

Sep 12, 2008 at 12:29 PM

who me
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #18 · rev 50 revisited.

Thomas, I was thinking about getting a rear lens cover and doing just that to see if it will work. Thank you for confirming that it will work. How large of a hole did you cut out. I would assume larger than the rear element size but not the full diameter of the rear cap.

Sep 14, 2008 at 06:00 AM

Tom Hicks
Offline
Moderator
Image Upload: On

p.2 #19 · rev 50 revisited.

who me wrote:
Thomas, I was thinking about getting a rear lens cover and doing just that to see if it will work. Thank you for confirming that it will work. How large of a hole did you cut out. I would assume larger than the rear element size but not the full diameter of the rear cap.

Here is a shot of a Canon factory cap it wil lgive you an idea of how large a hole you might want to make.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Edited on Sep 14, 2008 at 09:20 PM · View previous versions

Sep 14, 2008 at 03:38 PM

adamfilip
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #20 · rev 50 revisited.

I have been using a 70-200 2.8 non is with a canon 500D closeup filter
and ive been getting good results

I do have a 50 1.4 and I just tried to hold it against the body of my camera

I took two crappy shots to see how close it gets compared to the 70-200 setup
and im surprised see below my two crappy shots

70-200 2.8 with 500D closeup - max

This image is copyrighted by the owner

50 1.4 rev on 40D

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Working distance on the 70-200 is much better (12") compared to the 50 rev (3")

Sep 14, 2008 at 05:09 PM

who me
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #21 · rev 50 revisited.

Tom, thanks for the shot of the hole in the cover. I am going out tomorrow to get another lens cover that I can hack up. I don't want to use my current one. And your Canon lens looks a little older than mine.

Sep 15, 2008 at 03:56 AM

Tom Hicks
Offline
Moderator
Image Upload: On

p.2 #22 · rev 50 revisited.

who me wrote:
Tom, thanks for the shot of the hole in the cover. I am going out tomorrow to get another lens cover that I can hack up. I don't want to use my current one. And your Canon lens looks a little older than mine.

You are right this is an older FL lens , the FD's work best with the little hood attached for ease of f stop control.

Sep 15, 2008 at 09:56 PM

Alf Beharie
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #23 · rev 50 revisited.

Jim Barnaby wrote:
Lauriek

Can you ( or anyone ) suggest where to get a 4/3s reversing adapter? I have been looking but the closest I can find is a Om reversing adapter that I would have to mount onto my OM-4/3s adapter.

I'm hoping to use it on my 50mm 1.8 or 28mm f 2.8.

Thanks
Jim

Use an M42 reversing ring with a filter thread to match your lens and then you can mount your reversed lens via an M42-4/3rds adapter and use cheapo M42 extension rings as well if you wish.

Sep 17, 2008 at 06:54 PM

who me
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #24 · rev 50 revisited.

Ok, I finally have been having some fun with my Rev. 50mm with motivation from this thread and the fine advice from many.
Here is a nice garden spider. The best of about 30 shots hand held.
Shot with my 20D and FD 50mm lens reversed.
Spider is about 1" long
f16
1/40th
on camera pop up flash
hand held
converted from RAW to JPEG, resized and minor tweaks

Sep 19, 2008 at 02:53 PM

Techuser
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #25 · rev 50 revisited.

mananetwork wrote:
How do you reverse a lens on a point and shoot, don't they already have a lens on it?
They do, I just hold the 44mm unattached in front of the camera lens

Sep 21, 2008 at 04:49 AM


FM Forums \| Macro World \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 4 5 end