rev 50 revisited.
/forum/topic/663112/8

1       2       3              8      
9
       10       11       end

Alex53
Registered: Sep 07, 2004
Total Posts: 1583
Country: Gibraltar

Tom Hicks wrote:
The 50 rev, straight to camera body will give you approx 1to1 or more depending on the 50mm lens used . The 50 on the 100 will give you 2 to1 , you get that by dividing 50 into 100 if you use a 24mm you get 4to1 . When using the lens straight to cam you have to set the lens at the f stop you intend to use and you will be looking thru that f stop the image can be dark depending on the light. attached to to 100 you would set the rev lens to the widest opening or f stop and the 100 would control the f stop used . the image you see thru the came will be brighter. That in a nut shell is the only difference.


Thanks, that makes sense. Can I expect a lot of vignetting?



Tom Hicks
Registered: Feb 16, 2003
Total Posts: 23147
Country: United States

Alex53 wrote:
Tom Hicks wrote:
The 50 rev, straight to camera body will give you approx 1to1 or more depending on the 50mm lens used . The 50 on the 100 will give you 2 to1 , you get that by dividing 50 into 100 if you use a 24mm you get 4to1 . When using the lens straight to cam you have to set the lens at the f stop you intend to use and you will be looking thru that f stop the image can be dark depending on the light. attached to to 100 you would set the rev lens to the widest opening or f stop and the 100 would control the f stop used . the image you see thru the came will be brighter. That in a nut shell is the only difference.


Thanks, that makes sense. Can I expect a lot of vignetting?


Sometimes, it depends on the lens , you may have to put a tube between the camera body and the 100 ,12mm tube will usually fix the vignetting.



Alex53
Registered: Sep 07, 2004
Total Posts: 1583
Country: Gibraltar

Tom Hicks wrote:
Alex53 wrote:
Tom Hicks wrote:
The 50 rev, straight to camera body will give you approx 1to1 or more depending on the 50mm lens used . The 50 on the 100 will give you 2 to1 , you get that by dividing 50 into 100 if you use a 24mm you get 4to1 . When using the lens straight to cam you have to set the lens at the f stop you intend to use and you will be looking thru that f stop the image can be dark depending on the light. attached to to 100 you would set the rev lens to the widest opening or f stop and the 100 would control the f stop used . the image you see thru the came will be brighter. That in a nut shell is the only difference.


Thanks, that makes sense. Can I expect a lot of vignetting?


Sometimes, it depends on the lens , you may have to put a tube between the camera body and the 100 ,12mm tube will usually fix the vignetting.



Thanks. That's good, I have a set of 3 tubes.



Srdjule
Registered: Jul 28, 2009
Total Posts: 28
Country: Serbia & Montenegro

I experimented with Helios 44-2 reversed on Nikon 18-55, and this is what i got:





I have also tried to put it on Sigma 70-300, and magnification is ridiculously high so as dof.
Monitor pixels showing white color:



JJuLLiAAn
Registered: Jun 27, 2011
Total Posts: 701
Country: United States

How do you reverse a lens?



Nijay
Registered: Jan 05, 2011
Total Posts: 406
Country: United States

JJuLLiAAn wrote:
How do you reverse a lens?


http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Filter-Thread-Reverse-Adapter/dp/B001G4NBSC



OutOfBreath
Registered: Aug 28, 2011
Total Posts: 6
Country: Australia

Hi there,

long time lurker first time poster here :-)

I've just ordered a reversing ring so I can get into some reversed macro shots.

I currently have a 50mm lens that I plan to reverse straight onto the camera body. I also have some tubes.

What is the difference between using a reversed 50mm attached to some tubes or using a shorter focal length without tubes (eg 28mm).... Am I able to get similar magnifications using a reversed 50 and some tubes compared to a straight reversed 28mm?

Thanks.
Paul



TucsonTom
Registered: Nov 14, 2009
Total Posts: 120
Country: United States

Well, it all depends ...

For a given focal length, the farther the lens is from the focal plane, the more magnification.
For a given distance (extension) the shorter focal length lens gives more magnification.

One of the thing it depends on is lens construction. The "optical center" of a lens that you
want to measure to depends on lens construction.

As a concrete example, I am working with an older (FD mount) 50mm/f3.5 canon macro lens.
Built into the lens (as is the case with many macro lenses) is a fairly substantial "hood", and
when the lens is reversed, this actually places the optical elements at a fair bit of extension
from the camera -- sort of like a built in extension tube -- so this lens reversed might give
similar magnification as a 28mm reversed and mounted directly on the camera.

But I never mount them directly on the camera -- in my case I am using a nice old FD series
belows as an infinitely variable "extension tube" which I like a lot.

But the thing to do is .... try things out !! It isn't all about magnification though, at least it
certainly isn't once you find out ways to get the amount of magnification you want.
I am in the midst of trying all the different lenses I have to see which give me the best results
in terms of resolution, lack of flare, color saturation, contrast, overall image quality.
The main things is to experiment and try things, expect to be surprised.



Krosavcheg
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Total Posts: 2657
Country: Japan

I am more so amazed by Tom's ability to place/compose subjects..
So far I personally haven't been able to encounter a jumper who didn't scurry away in a flash at a sight of me..



madugo
Registered: Dec 15, 2008
Total Posts: 25
Country: United States

nicely done!



Marshall Alsup
Registered: Apr 08, 2007
Total Posts: 79
Country: United States

Amazing shots and info in this thread. One thing I didn't see answered:

When shooting at >1x magnification, with the lens perhaps only an inch away from the subject, how do you keep it from running away?

I realize one can approach slowly, which is what I've tried to do (with limited success ) with my 105vr, but it seems that if I had to get much closer there would be no way. I'm just curious how you do it.

Anyway, again, great shots all!



sdbponline
Registered: Apr 28, 2012
Total Posts: 3
Country: United States

Sigma 70-300mm with reverse 50mm.........

http://turtleman9100.megashot.net/photos/272042



Drewdeezy
Registered: Aug 25, 2012
Total Posts: 2
Country: United States

amazing shots my friend these are great inspiration and fun to look at



gokalp
Registered: Mar 16, 2005
Total Posts: 4
Country: United States

Krosavcheg wrote:
I am more so amazed by Tom's ability to place/compose subjects..
So far I personally haven't been able to encounter a jumper who didn't scurry away in a flash at a sight of me..


Yeah, are there any tricks to this? Any suggestions?



kwoodard
Registered: Aug 04, 2012
Total Posts: 2381
Country: United States

New to this forum, but love me some Macro...

This time did a little "Free-Lensing, Reverse Macro" (holding the lens backwards in front of the lens mount, tilting slightly to achieve the desired focal plane).

This is maybe a 20% crop, I am about 3 inches away. Little guy flew into the shot.


Up close and personal by Kevin.Woodard, on Flickr

The color/dots are about 1/16 of an inch below a clear acrylic coating. This is NOT a crop, the ball is about 1.25" in diameter...


Free-Lensing Macro by Kevin.Woodard, on Flickr

What do you all think?



tbranscombe
Registered: May 09, 2011
Total Posts: 2
Country: Canada

Hard to ignore an unanswered question!

I think you have a great subject, but one that has been obscured by the bright highlights far too much. I would like to see some further tries with more diffuse light sources, and perhaps a black background to pop the colours that little bit more.

Terry



Tom Hicks
Registered: Feb 16, 2003
Total Posts: 23147
Country: United States

I know it's been a while since my last post , hope all is well.



MarkB1
Registered: Apr 07, 2009
Total Posts: 6011
Country: Australia

Good to see the stickies back.



sozypozy
Registered: Jan 02, 2013
Total Posts: 600
Country: United States

Macros are expensive. How far do you think I can get with the reverse lens technique with my kit lens?



Tom Hicks
Registered: Feb 16, 2003
Total Posts: 23147
Country: United States

sozypozy wrote:
Macros are expensive. How far do you think I can get with the reverse lens technique with my kit lens?


all you can do is give it a try , there going to be a large learning curve.



1       2       3              8      
9
       10       11       end