I will appologise for the narrow depth of feild, I also tried to center the ruler at the 3 to 4 scale of the .50th inch side of the ruler (oops I should have flipped it over and used the centimeter side) . I have yet to do the math, it is 8:40 pm and my days normally start around 5:00 am here. So the math will have to wait a day.
p.3 #4 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
bobarue, I wrote the original post. The forum was having trouble at the time, and I couldn't start new topics, so Tom posted it for me after I PMed him.
The monitor I now have is a Samsung 226BW. Which is likely the same as yours if you have a newer Samsung 22"
FANTASTIC MONITOR. Highly recomended.
After starting it up, I couldn't stop saying things like "So this is what my photos REally look like", or "So this is what the internet really is!". A whole new experience.
p.3 #6 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
Very interesting thread and most informative. Many thanks to all the posters. Brian has already advised me of the value of extension tubes and I'm tweaking my budget to buy the 3 tube set from Kenko.
In the meantime, I'm intrigued by the possibilities of lens reversing. I have a Tamron 90mm I'm using with my XTi. Buying a reversing adapter to fit a Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II lens on the XTi seems pointless, since I already have the Tamrom 90mm. Is that true?
However; using a 52mm reversing ring to mount the Canon EF 50mm on the Tamrom 90mm seems like a plan. I'm guessing that would produce a magnification a little less than 3:1. Is my thinking correct?
Also, I have a Canon EF 70-300mm 1:4 - 5.6 IS USM lens. I could mount the Canon EF 50mm on it using a 58/52mm reversing ring. I'm unable to figure the math as to what magnification that would produce.There might be some vignetting and the IS may not work, but that's fine. Will that plan work?
Perhaps neither plan will work. I'm thinking the minimal cost of two reversing rings would be well worth it, if it's doable. All comments would be appreciated.
p.3 #7 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
Hello All
I've been following this thread for a while and have to admit all the numbers makes my head spin. Please correct me if I am wrong - a 100mm macro and a reverse lens 50mm would give me 2:1 ratio.
Cheers
Preston
p.3 #9 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
Preston wrote:
Hello All
I've been following this thread for a while and have to admit all the numbers makes my head spin. Please correct me if I am wrong - a 100mm macro and a reverse lens 50mm would give me 2:1 ratio.
Cheers
Preston
Yes, and taking in account the crop of the camera 3 to1
p.3 #11 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
Wait wait wait. the crop should not affect the max mag ratio of a macro. If it doesnt affect the mag ratio of a standard lens, it should affect the max mag of a lens plus another lens.
p.3 #14 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
restating my earlier question:
When using a lens as an extension tube, i get great results. I have been, with brian's prior advice, able to reverse mount a Nikon f/1.8D 50mm on my Sigma 150mm macro lens. Having come from using a Tamron 90mm, wow, the learning curve is tougher than i would have thought it would be.
Anyway, my question:
Should my Sigma 150 be set at 1:1 or at infinity focus? I have done some rough tests, but infinity focus does not seem to give the same level of magnification as setting it 1:1 and it seems to cause a bit of additional vignetting.
Thanks all you great people!
examples this time:
at infinity focus:
at 1:1 focus:
these are not great images, they are just here for informational purposes
p.3 #15 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
Justin,
My images above with the ruler, were all taken at the 1:1 with the reversed lens at infinity.
Just a question? How much bigger is your 150 mm from the reversed 50 mm. The differences between the 100 mm Macro and the 50 mm was 6mm, that is to say my reverse adapter is a 58mm/52mm. Could that be the difference?
p.3 #19 · Reverse mounting info. Topic Name Change.
Tom Hicks wrote:
Yes, and taking in account the crop of the camera 3 to1
Ok let me try and explain. I will post some sample shots .
This first image is shot with a 100-300 lens with the 50mm on front. The 100-300 lens is set at it min focus distance, 50 set at 1.4 and infinity , 100-300 set at f8 and is at 100mm EXIF intact.
. I have yet to do the math, it is 8:40 pm and my days normally start around 5:00 am here. So the math will have to wait a day.
