Macro dilemma

yeatzee · 05-12-2010, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by gofour3

Because of the location of the optical nodes in the K28/3.5, it is one of the best lenses available for reversing, examples:

Reversed will give you 1.9:1 magnification.
Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #1 will give you 2.32:1 magnification.
Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #2 will give you 2.56:1 magnification.
Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #3 will give you 2.81:1 magnification.
Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #1+2+3 will give you 3.90:1 magnification.
Reversed with Bellows K extension at 32mm will give you 3.02:1 magnification.
Reversed with Bellows K extension at 137mm will give you 6.72:1 magnification.

For the last listing the film plane to subject distance is 280.5mm.

Phil.

And wouldn't you know, i've been searching for this lense

Thanks for the info!

Originally posted by Blue

Yeatzee, when you get into the greater than 1:1 realm, consider a tripod and focusing rail. That allows the actually moving of the camera for focusing. One of the first dedicated piece of macro equipment I bought was a focusing rail.

I've thought about it, but I still can't wrap my head around the idea of a tripod and focusing rail being useful in the photography of living creatures which I shoot exclusively.

Blue · 05-12-2010, 09:46 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

I've thought about it, but I still can't wrap my head around the idea of a tripod and focusing rail being useful in the photography of living creatures which I shoot exclusively.

It takes some getting used to, but as magnification goes up, that arena is smaller. You have to think like a praying mantis an plan to ambush those flies. If they are going to a certain flower, mushroom or carrion, set up there and wait. Its a skill that has to be developed with practice.

Edit: I've been watching this for a few years. He has gotten relatively famous for his macro work.

Flickr: Thomas Shahan's Photostream

here's his setup:

Macrophotography Setup on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

yeatzee · 05-12-2010, 10:03 PM

Yeah, but he says he's only used that specific setup for like two images on his flickr. I messaged him, fingers crossed he responds as I'd love to know his current setup (thats over 2 years old isn't it?).

Anyways, this is the story of my life: As soon as im almost focused the dang insect runs away. Now imagine if I had a tripod? Without I can chase the insect down and hopefully get the shot. With, not so much

Story of my life on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Blue · 05-12-2010, 10:15 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

Yeah, but he says he's only used that specific setup for like two images on his flickr. I messaged him, fingers crossed he responds as I'd love to know his current setup (thats over 2 years old isn't it?).

Anyways, this is the story of my life: As soon as im almost focused the dang insect runs away. Now imagine if I had a tripod? Without I can chase the insect down and hopefully get the shot. With, not so much

Story of my life on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Actually, a large number of his images were with that setup or a variation on it, tubes, bellows reversed lenses etc. Some times you have to look under the tag list to see the info.

Edit: The A* or FA* 200mm macro or Sigma 180mm macro would give you more working distance but you still would need tubes, etc to get the mag and the trouble then is those lenses are already, HUGE.

yeatzee · 05-12-2010, 10:20 PM

Originally posted by Blue

Actually, a large number of his images were with that setup or a variation on it, tubes, bellows reversed lenses etc. Some times you have to look under the tag list to see the info.

I know that, I meant that setup as is without any switching or removing of parts

I am VERY intrigued by the prospect of a reversed 28mm however because of him though....

Blue · 05-12-2010, 10:22 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

I know that, I meant that setup as is without any switching or removing parts

o.k. He just uses different combination of tubes, lenses, reversed lenses etc on it.

Originally posted by yeatzee

I am VERY intrigued by the prospect of a reversed 28mm however because of him though....

A 28 reversed on a 50mm would get you at about 1.78:1

yeatzee · 05-12-2010, 10:25 PM

How much mag. for just a 28mm reversed?

Blue · 05-12-2010, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

How much mag. for just a 28mm reversed?

It will depend on whether or not if its a symmetrical or asymmetrical. If it is asymmetrical

Magnification can be calculated by measuring the entrance opening and exit opening.

m = exit/entrance

You can measure that with a ruler.

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 05-12-2010, 10:53 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by yeatzee

Well I finally found some flies today only to be sorely disappointed by the amount of shots taken.... a whopping ZERO. This was because 1:1 was not enough magnification that I needed so I strapped the M 50mm reversed on the sigma 105mm macro for tha extra "oomph." BUT, with this setup my working distance is less than an inch away from the from element! All my macro shots in the last month have been taken using this technique (see: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100783-macro-jumping-spider.html, https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100408-macro-arm-killer.html, https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100412-macro-praying-mantis-portrait.html,etc. etc.). I am very happy with the results, but the efficiency is not there. 98% of my macro shoots are filled with me not taking a single picture, but rather trying to get close enough to the subject without scaring it away. Eventually, I *usually* get the opportunity to take the shot but If I miss it I often have to wait another 10+ minutes to get another opportunity. Its killing me...

<b>

So, What can I do to get ~2:1 magnification, yet have a much longer working distance? Anything I can do with my current equipment (see signature)?

</b>

First I must say that you have indeed been posting some very impressive macros. But I understand you perfectly when you try to say that you look for higher standards even though you are not there yourself and might not ever get there. I'm like that myself. Backside is that you never are really happy with your own achievements, even when they are pretty good.

I'm currently using two combos that gives me > 1:1 in combination with good working distance.

SMC Pentax DFA 100mm macro with a 1.7x soligor converter. Gives me up to 1.7:1 with good working distance. That's an AF converter so autofocus still work, and contrary to what is often said about macro, I do find AF usefull now and when with moving subjects.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/101219-macro-spider-cow-lip.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100790-macro-not-jumping-spider.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/72147-bug-hemiptera.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/73315-butterfly-dfa100-m...converter.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/72369-howerfli...10-photos.html

Same lens but with an extension tube made from a Kenko 2x AF converter where I have removed the glass. From measuring it appears to give me up to 2:1, though I'm not sure how to calculate it:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/60715-dfa-100m...airy-legs.html

Also this combo gives me working autofocus. This home made converter even give me AF on SDM lenses.

Dissclaimer: I don't mean any of these shots are near the standards you aim at, but it is at least >1:1 with good working distance.

Besides these I've been experimenting with combos of reversed lenses (up to 20mm lens reversed on a 200mm giving macro 10:1), bellows etc, but nothing I'm prepared to post yet. And they don't give me much working distance.

Blue · 05-12-2010, 11:09 PM

Douglas, I didn't know Soligor made an AF 1.7x teleconverter.

audiobomber · 05-13-2010, 05:00 AM

Originally posted by yeatzee

How much mag. for just a 28mm reversed?

Here's a good article on calculating macro magnifications. www.peterforsell.com

pcarfan · 05-13-2010, 06:01 AM

If I remeber this right, a forum memeber who posted the most breathtaking set of macros I've evnr seen mentioned something about spraying cold water from a spray bottle to keep the subjects still. I guess that is something to consider.

**Digitalis** · 05-13-2010, 06:21 AM

Pcarfan, I have used that technique a lot myself...I can personally vouch for it's effectiveness. though it can cause a bit of a problem with the reflections from the water on the subject. using a polariser on the flash head and one on the lens can help diminish that though.

pcarfan · 05-13-2010, 06:22 AM

Originally posted by Blue

Edit: I've been watching this Hidden content may not be quoted for a few years. He has gotten relatively famous for his macro work.

Flickr: Thomas Shahan's Photostream

here's his setup:

Macrophotography Setup on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

WOW! incredible work.....Thanks for posting it here.

Ira · 05-13-2010, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by yeatzee

Id still be interested to here the response though, so go for it Ira!

Not MINE! I'll post what others have done!

05-12-2010, 09:46 PM	#17
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by yeatzee I've thought about it, but I still can't wrap my head around the idea of a tripod and focusing rail being useful in the photography of living creatures which I shoot exclusively. It takes some getting used to, but as magnification goes up, that arena is smaller. You have to think like a praying mantis an plan to ambush those flies. If they are going to a certain flower, mushroom or carrion, set up there and wait. Its a skill that has to be developed with practice. Edit: I've been watching this for a few years. He has gotten relatively famous for his macro work. Flickr: Thomas Shahan's Photostream here's his setup: Macrophotography Setup on Flickr - Photo Sharing! Last edited by Blue; 05-12-2010 at 09:52 PM.

05-12-2010, 10:53 PM - 1 Like	#24
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	Originally posted by yeatzee Well I finally found some flies today only to be sorely disappointed by the amount of shots taken.... a whopping ZERO. This was because 1:1 was not enough magnification that I needed so I strapped the M 50mm reversed on the sigma 105mm macro for tha extra "oomph." BUT, with this setup my working distance is less than an inch away from the from element! All my macro shots in the last month have been taken using this technique (see: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100783-macro-jumping-spider.html, https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100408-macro-arm-killer.html, https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100412-macro-praying-mantis-portrait.html,etc. etc.). I am very happy with the results, but the efficiency is not there. 98% of my macro shoots are filled with me not taking a single picture, but rather trying to get close enough to the subject without scaring it away. Eventually, I usually get the opportunity to take the shot but If I miss it I often have to wait another 10+ minutes to get another opportunity. Its killing me... <b> So, What can I do to get ~2:1 magnification, yet have a much longer working distance? Anything I can do with my current equipment (see signature)? </b> First I must say that you have indeed been posting some very impressive macros. But I understand you perfectly when you try to say that you look for higher standards even though you are not there yourself and might not ever get there. I'm like that myself. Backside is that you never are really happy with your own achievements, even when they are pretty good. I'm currently using two combos that gives me > 1:1 in combination with good working distance. SMC Pentax DFA 100mm macro with a 1.7x soligor converter. Gives me up to 1.7:1 with good working distance. That's an AF converter so autofocus still work, and contrary to what is often said about macro, I do find AF usefull now and when with moving subjects. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/101219-macro-spider-cow-lip.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/100790-macro-not-jumping-spider.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/72147-bug-hemiptera.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/73315-butterfly-dfa100-m...converter.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/72369-howerfli...10-photos.html Same lens but with an extension tube made from a Kenko 2x AF converter where I have removed the glass. From measuring it appears to give me up to 2:1, though I'm not sure how to calculate it: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/60715-dfa-100m...airy-legs.html Also this combo gives me working autofocus. This home made converter even give me AF on SDM lenses. Dissclaimer: I don't mean any of these shots are near the standards you aim at, but it is at least >1:1 with good working distance. Besides these I've been experimenting with combos of reversed lenses (up to 20mm lens reversed on a 200mm giving macro 10:1), bellows etc, but nothing I'm prepared to post yet. And they don't give me much working distance.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Dilemma: Pentax 70 pancake or Sigma 70 macro?	WMBP	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	10-01-2009 03:36 PM
Dilemma..	SteveM	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	08-09-2009 12:13 AM
K-7 Dilemma	lawsonstone	Photographic Technique	14	05-16-2009 04:18 PM
Dilemma, dilemma ...	Bronco	Pentax DSLR Discussion	31	04-15-2008 05:39 PM
Macro LBA Dilemma - FA100 f/2.8 or DFA100 f/2.8?	Bud	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	04-19-2007 11:40 AM

05-12-2010, 09:41 PM	#16
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by gofour3 Because of the location of the optical nodes in the K28/3.5, it is one of the best lenses available for reversing, examples: Reversed will give you 1.9:1 magnification. Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #1 will give you 2.32:1 magnification. Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #2 will give you 2.56:1 magnification. Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #3 will give you 2.81:1 magnification. Reversed with Auto Extension Tube #1+2+3 will give you 3.90:1 magnification. Reversed with Bellows K extension at 32mm will give you 3.02:1 magnification. Reversed with Bellows K extension at 137mm will give you 6.72:1 magnification. For the last listing the film plane to subject distance is 280.5mm. Phil. And wouldn't you know, i've been searching for this lense Thanks for the info! Originally posted by Blue Yeatzee, when you get into the greater than 1:1 realm, consider a tripod and focusing rail. That allows the actually moving of the camera for focusing. One of the first dedicated piece of macro equipment I bought was a focusing rail. I've thought about it, but I still can't wrap my head around the idea of a tripod and focusing rail being useful in the photography of living creatures which I shoot exclusively.

05-12-2010, 10:03 PM	#18
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675 Original Poster	Yeah, but he says he's only used that specific setup for like two images on his flickr. I messaged him, fingers crossed he responds as I'd love to know his current setup (thats over 2 years old isn't it?). Anyways, this is the story of my life: As soon as im almost focused the dang insect runs away. Now imagine if I had a tripod? Without I can chase the insect down and hopefully get the shot. With, not so much Story of my life on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

05-12-2010, 10:15 PM	#19
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by yeatzee Yeah, but he says he's only used that specific setup for like two images on his flickr. I messaged him, fingers crossed he responds as I'd love to know his current setup (thats over 2 years old isn't it?). Anyways, this is the story of my life: As soon as im almost focused the dang insect runs away. Now imagine if I had a tripod? Without I can chase the insect down and hopefully get the shot. With, not so much Story of my life on Flickr - Photo Sharing! Actually, a large number of his images were with that setup or a variation on it, tubes, bellows reversed lenses etc. Some times you have to look under the tag list to see the info. Edit: The A* or FA* 200mm macro or Sigma 180mm macro would give you more working distance but you still would need tubes, etc to get the mag and the trouble then is those lenses are already, HUGE.

05-12-2010, 10:20 PM	#20
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by Blue Actually, a large number of his images were with that setup or a variation on it, tubes, bellows reversed lenses etc. Some times you have to look under the tag list to see the info. I know that, I meant that setup as is without any switching or removing of parts I am VERY intrigued by the prospect of a reversed 28mm however because of him though....

05-12-2010, 10:22 PM	#21
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by yeatzee I know that, I meant that setup as is without any switching or removing parts o.k. He just uses different combination of tubes, lenses, reversed lenses etc on it. Originally posted by yeatzee I am VERY intrigued by the prospect of a reversed 28mm however because of him though.... A 28 reversed on a 50mm would get you at about 1.78:1

05-12-2010, 10:25 PM	#22
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675 Original Poster	How much mag. for just a 28mm reversed?

05-12-2010, 10:42 PM	#23
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by yeatzee How much mag. for just a 28mm reversed? It will depend on whether or not if its a symmetrical or asymmetrical. If it is asymmetrical Magnification can be calculated by measuring the entrance opening and exit opening. m = exit/entrance You can measure that with a ruler.

05-12-2010, 11:09 PM	#25
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Douglas, I didn't know Soligor made an AF 1.7x teleconverter.

05-13-2010, 05:00 AM	#26
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by yeatzee How much mag. for just a 28mm reversed? Here's a good article on calculating macro magnifications. www.peterforsell.com

05-13-2010, 06:01 AM	#27
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	If I remeber this right, a forum memeber who posted the most breathtaking set of macros I've evnr seen mentioned something about spraying cold water from a spray bottle to keep the subjects still. I guess that is something to consider.

05-13-2010, 06:21 AM	#28
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Pcarfan, I have used that technique a lot myself...I can personally vouch for it's effectiveness. though it can cause a bit of a problem with the reflections from the water on the subject. using a polariser on the flash head and one on the lens can help diminish that though.

05-13-2010, 06:22 AM	#29
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Originally posted by Blue Edit: I've been watching this Hidden content may not be quoted for a few years. He has gotten relatively famous for his macro work. Flickr: Thomas Shahan's Photostream here's his setup: Macrophotography Setup on Flickr - Photo Sharing! WOW! incredible work.....Thanks for posting it here.

05-13-2010, 06:24 AM	#30
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by yeatzee Id still be interested to here the response though, so go for it Ira! Not MINE! I'll post what others have done!