I'm pretty sure you can obtain a similar picture (i.e. magnification) with the naked 28/2.8 AI-S. In fact, in your picture the magnification of the Zeiss lens is around 1:4 (if you didn't crop; if you cropped, it's even lower). Max magnification of the AI-S 28/2.8 is 1:3.9 @ 20 cm.
I'm afraid not.
Original ratio 1:3.9 max
Here is 1:1
---
Update
Just check it back, same ratio.
So I made the BS with Raynox250.
Question is, Raynox is to magnify/increase original lens ratio, why nothing hapens in this case?
PS: Google it for ratio definition. In macro photography 1:1 is to refer object actual size. Ripolini, yu are right. I was wrong to think of sensor size instead of object real size.
---
Update
More interesting to find something online to satisfy myself curiosity.
The longer and bigger magnification affects more. For 2828AIS, ratio increased from .39 to .53, not much.
I'm pretty sure you can obtain a similar picture (i.e. magnification) with the naked 28/2.8 AI-S. In fact, in your picture the magnification of the Zeiss lens is around 1:4 (if you didn't crop; if you cropped, it's even lower). Max magnification of the AI-S 28/2.8 is 1:3.9 @ 20 cm.
I'm afraid not.
Original ratio 1:3.9 max
Here is 1:1
---
Update
Just check it back, same ratio.
So I made the BS with Raynox250.
Question is, Raynox is to magnify/increase original lens ratio, why nothing hapens in this case?
PS: Google it for ratio definition. In macro photography 1:1 is to refer object actual size. Ripolini, yu are right. I was wrong to think of sensor size instead of object real size.
