rev 50 revisited.

Moderated by: Tom Hicks

FM Forums \| Macro World \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 … 6 7 8 9 end

rev 50 revisited.

Tom Hicks
Offline
Dedicated FM
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #1 · rev 50 revisited.

Ted Sherman wrote:
I've got both a 50D and a 1ds2; I just ordered two rev mounts for the 50D (one for a 49mm lens and the other for a 52mm). I'd also like to be able to use the two manual lenses (a 50mm 1.8 and a 28mm 1.8) on my 1ds2--does anyone know of what kind of adapter (not reverse, but as regular lenses) I would need for them to mount on the ds2? They are Pentax K mount (I believe; they've got the three threads/bayonets that screw on). I read about one K to EF mount that it won't work because the aperature pin will hit the mirror.

Ted I use the PK to EOS on my crop cameras , but not sure on the big gun I know that the 5D's usually have to have the mirror shaved for a lot of the alternate lens's used.
Might make a post in the Alternate gear forum.

Jan 08, 2010 at 05:08 PM

Ted Sherman
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #2 · rev 50 revisited.

Thanks, Tom. I will.

I tried the trick of just holding the lens (a Sigma manual 28mm) up to the body last night (a 50D) and took a few shots. Fabulous! Thanks for the tip.

Jan 08, 2010 at 07:29 PM

sky1174
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #3 · rev 50 revisited.

I have 2 Question :
1. Which is better Rev.Lens or CloseUp Filter ?
2. Can I use Rev Lens other than 50-55mm ? such as 100mm/135mm ?

Thanks

Feb 17, 2010 at 03:37 AM

bwhealon
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #4 · rev 50 revisited.

Recently started getting into aquascaping so of course I have photographed some of my tiny creatures.

This is one of my Harlequin Rasboras.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

And here are some shrimpies as well.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

These pond snails are reproducing like crazy.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Taken with a Canon 50mm f/1.4 as Reverse Macro at f/8. You can hold the depth of field preview button at higher f/stops to stop down the lens aperture electronically while simultaneously removing the lens. The aperture stays small and depth of field is much improved. Neat trick and cheap macro. The only way to focus is by moving your body closer or farther away from the subject. It is just about right for smaller flowers or detail shots.

-Peace

Mar 26, 2010 at 03:28 PM

bwhealon
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #5 · rev 50 revisited.

sky1174,

1. Which is better Rev.Lens or CloseUp Filter ?

If you are a photo enthusist you might want to start with Close up filters. Macro photography and working with very small depth of field is hard enough to learn without putting your equipment at risk.

a. The great advantage to close up filters is your camera stays sealed and you can still focus to some degree with your lens. You dont have to get down and dirty to get perfect focus you can resume normal photo taking.

b. Reverse lens combinations ( even older FD optics or third party lenses ) can provide very crisp images when used correctly. I would say they have a much higher learning curve than using Close up filters and might make someone more frustrated at having to move your tripod or body to the exact perfect spot to yield the photo you wanted while not spooking the subject. I prefer using this technique indoors in a non windy environment. Great for Ring Photos or animals alike

With my particular camera lens combination there is ONE spot that is in focus 6 inches from the lens. You would need to move your body to the perfect spot where the lens is 6 inches from your subject where with close up filters you could be a few feet away in some cases and still be able to focus. With the very powerful filters you would only be able to focus in a few inches space.

Close up filters allow you add diopter filters to the front of your lens to change the minimum focusing distance and increasing magnification. The quality of the filters you put in front of your lens always effects the photos you produce. Poor quality filters often introduce halo's, flare, loss of sharpness and contrast, among other aberrations. Good quality filters will make the above less noticeable.

2. Can I use Rev Lens other than 50-55mm ? such as 100mm/135mm ?

There are only a few lens types that work well to gather usable light in reverse. Lenses from 28-75 mm will work best. Outside of that range the quality and sharpness just arent there or the focal length of the reversed lens is almost inside your lens. Not very helpful

28 will feel tighter and 75 will feel wider I believe. 50mm works dandy for me.

Anyone else have thoughts?
Thanks

Mar 26, 2010 at 08:11 PM

xjetjock
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #6 · rev 50 revisited.

After going through this topic, I dug out Dad's old Minolta SLR equipment and tried a few test shots with his 58 mm and 35 mm Rokkor lenses reversed on a 1Ds II. I just held them in position by hand for the test. They worked great, especially the 35 mm. I ordered the EOS adapter and step up rings today. Pretty cool and cheap too! Now I need to learn more about stacked focusing. Thanks.

Mar 29, 2010 at 01:11 AM

buggz2k
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #7 · rev 50 revisited.

And this does NOT hurt either the cam, nor the lens I hope.
Seems many are doing this, I'm just somewhat hesitant to try this on my new 5DMkII.
Good thing I did not sell the $0D, I will try it on that first...

Tom Harpstead wrote:
George,

You mount the lens in normal fashion and set the aperture, depress the DOF button and while the aperture is stopped down take off the lens. The aperture will stay stopped down and you will be able to reverse mount it.

Thomas

Apr 08, 2010 at 06:02 PM

bwhealon
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #8 · rev 50 revisited.

No it does not hurt the camera. Removing the lens with the DOF preview button depressed prevents the sending of the signal that re-opens the aperture when the DOF preview button is released ( because the lens has already been removed ).

I have done this on Rebels, 30D's, 5d's, and 1dmkII's with no problems. When the lens is remounted the aperture returns to normal. You will hear a *shhhhhkk* sound as the aperture reopens just as if you depressed or released the DOF preview button with the lens attached.

Apr 08, 2010 at 06:25 PM

hildrethjoe
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #9 · rev 50 revisited.

Another stupid question... if I had both 58mm and 52mm lenses that I would like to use, am I correct in thinking that it would be better to get the reversing ring in the 52mm size. Seems to me that getting the 58mm then using a 52 to 58 step up ring would cause vignetting. So would it be better to get the 52mm then use a 58 to 52 step down ring? What are your thoughts?

Apr 11, 2010 at 10:59 PM

hildrethjoe
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #10 · rev 50 revisited.

Apr 13, 2010 at 09:23 PM

jan_haidn
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #11 · rev 50 revisited.

Hildrethjoe you must get the 58mm reversing ring and an 58 to 52mm step down ring. You will not likely find a ring to use 52 mm filter on 58mm lens.

Apr 14, 2010 at 06:07 AM

Ferry P.
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #12 · rev 50 revisited.

Truly awesome pictures

Jul 13, 2010 at 12:26 PM

Top Quark
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #13 · rev 50 revisited.

Tom these are spectacular.

Jul 23, 2010 at 02:09 AM

dledwards
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #14 · rev 50 revisited.

First post here. Thanks to Tom and everyone for the ideas and inspiration in this thread.

I have a Nikon D5000 DSLR, so I dug out my old Pentax 35mm film equipment which includes a 50mm and a 24mm lens. I did a few test shots by hand-holding the reversed lens, which gave encouraging results. The working distance on the 24mm is very short, so I have been mostly using the 50mm.

My reversing ring arrived and a made some decent shots around the backyard. One issue that I've noticed - If I set the aperture small, say f14 to f22, I get a hot spot in the center of the image. Is this common? It's not really a problem to avoid those apertures, but I'm curious.

Another question - with a reversed lens, I can't tell much difference looking through the viewfinder regardless of where the focus is set. Does it matter, or is there any theoretical difference?

I have also ordered a coupler ring so I can attach the reversed lens to my AF lenses. I'm hoping the 24mm may be more useful then. Will I be able to focus normally or use autofocus in that configuration? It does increase the working distance, correct?

TIA,

DE

Aug 26, 2010 at 08:13 PM

bwhealon
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #15 · rev 50 revisited.

In regard to your aperture question I believe using a reversed lens changes a number of ways the light passes through to the sensor.

At smaller apertures it might start to infringe on the image circle that is being projected into your camera. A reversed lens may change the distance between the sensor and aperture plane making the effect more pronounced especially when using rings / extenders combined with small apertures. It may be that the smallest apertures are causing darker corners and auto exposure is trying to compensate?

You may also be able to change this distance by rotating the focus ring and playing with it to find the most ideal settings. In the reversed position is the rear element close to protruding? The coatings on that element might be more prone to flare.

I hope you find some answers

Aug 26, 2010 at 08:37 PM

dledwards
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #16 · rev 50 revisited.

Here are a few samples with the 50mm rev -

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Aug 27, 2010 at 01:18 AM

1stGenRex
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.7 #17 · rev 50 revisited.

I have an FD mount 50, and 28...I need to bust these out more. This was my first time trying the reverse macro technique

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Aug 28, 2010 at 06:30 AM

glee719
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #18 · rev 50 revisited.

Hi Tom, I read through this whole thread but still have some theoretical questions if you can help me with.

I have a 105mm micro and a 200mm micro (for Nikon). Both offer 1:1 and are great lenses. Now I also read somewhere else that attaching another lens in reverse of a normal lens will give the setup greater magnification and the formula is the mm for lens mounted on camera divided by the mm for the reverse-mounted lens. So a 50mm in front of the 105mm will give approximately 2x lifesize, and 4x on the 200mm, etc. I tried this which seems to be true and the difference is working distance.

From a theoretical quality perspective, what's the magnification for reverse-mounting a 50mm directly on the camera body? Also, let's say if I want 4x lifesize, what's the difference between mounting a 50mm on a 200mm versus a 24mm on a 105mm? I did some tests and they seemed inconclusive, and given the shallow DOF I fear any difference I see was because of my skills and not the optical path.

Also, what's the difference between reverse-mounting a 24mm, 50mm, 100mm, etc.? Magnification factor too?

Thanks.

Aug 28, 2010 at 05:20 PM

Tom Hicks
Offline
Dedicated FM
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #19 · rev 50 revisited.

glee719 wrote:
Hi Tom, I read through this whole thread but still have some theoretical questions if you can help me with.

I have a 105mm micro and a 200mm micro (for Nikon). Both offer 1:1 and are great lenses. Now I also read somewhere else that attaching another lens in reverse of a normal lens will give the setup greater magnification and the formula is the mm for lens mounted on camera divided by the mm for the reverse-mounted lens. So a 50mm in front of the 105mm will give approximately 2x lifesize, and 4x on the 200mm, etc. I tried this which seems to be true and the difference is working distance.

From a theoretical quality perspective, what's the magnification for reverse-mounting a 50mm directly on the camera body? Also, let's say if I want 4x lifesize, what's the difference between mounting a 50mm on a 200mm versus a 24mm on a 105mm? I did some tests and they seemed inconclusive, and given the shallow DOF I fear any difference I see was because of my skills and not the optical path.

Also, what's the difference between reverse-mounting a 24mm, 50mm, 100mm, etc.? Magnification factor too?

Thanks.

Glee , welcome and glad you took the time to follow this thread . Here it is in a nut shell and without all the tech stuff and not paying to much attention to the exactness of magnification and exact working distances . If you look at the link below and look at the mag differences of different 50 you will see that they vary a lot .

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/619903/0?keyword=rev,lens,s#5473004

So you can see that it will depend on what you have . I will say that generally a 50 rev direct can give you close to or above 1to1 a 28mm 2.5 to1 , 24mm 3 to1 and back to say a 35mm 2 to1. In regards to a 50 on a 200 or a 24 on a 105 the working distance should be close to the same . and the DOF will be the same if the mag is the same , at least that is how it should work .

hope this helps .

Aug 28, 2010 at 08:27 PM

glee719
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.7 #20 · rev 50 revisited.

Wow so even 50mm from different lines differ in magnification? Strange. I guess it's just what works best by trial. Thanks! Perhaps I can do some tests with the Nikon combinations and post results soon too. Thanks!

I forgot one key question. In single reversed lens setup (directly to camera body) you set the focus to infinity. But if you attach a reversed lens to another normally mounted lens, you can still control aperture (of the normally mounted lens) via camera body but do you still leave the reversed lens in wide open and infinity? There is also a slight play in adjusting focus on the normally mounted lens but is it also best to set to infinity and move the camera instead?

Aug 29, 2010 at 03:10 AM

1 2 3 … 6 7 8 9 end
FM Forums \| Macro World \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 6 7 8 9 end