wessex wrote:
I have an "old" Nikkor-H 50mm (52 mm) I would like to try on my 20D - BUT where does one get a lens reversal adapter for an EOS? I want just a cheap basic adapter. Any suggestions? It's obviously possible, but I haven't found one yet.

Follow this link

http://cgi.ebay.com/58mm-macro-reverse-adapter-for-EOS-400d-350D-20d-5d-40d_W0QQitemZ140248708746QQihZ004QQcategoryZ30059QQcmdZViewItem

He also has 52mm which would be good for the nikon

Super - many thanks. I'll investigate.

This is great info. Thanks, Tom.

i love the flies ..
actually i love the spiders too ..
in fact the whole the whole lot are absolutely brilliant photography .

great post and great photos.

I have just been using my SIgma 150mm and extension tubes.

Now will have to out to B&H and find an old manual lens and a reversing ring and give it a try.

thanks for the examples and info.

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

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:

the spiders creep me out

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

a few more

and now some with a full set of tubes

again thanks Tom for the help

Doug

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!

^ Anybody?

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

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.

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 $ .

Thanks guys!

Here are some using a 44mm on a canon A510

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

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