[Spooked]

Hi fellow pentaxians, I hope Santa made your LBA fantasies come true

I have aquired the 50mm M 1.7 and fancy a touch of macro. I see 2 choices, extension tubes or reversing ring.

Which of these two options would offer the advantage in respect of closest focusing distance? Secondly, which would offer the greatest magnification.


I am aware of the challenges with this approach but the budget is tight

Do any of you have example images with either of these setups, i would love to see the outcome.


Thanks a million

Peter

[NaClH2O]

There is actually a third choice (besides a dedicated macro) and that is a Tele Converter. It also gives you some macro capability. Granted not as much as either a reversing ring or extension tubes but you also get the benefit of it's main function of increasing the reach of your lenses.

NaCl(just to muddy up the waters a bit more)H2O

[mer]

Minimum focusing distance , from smallest to longest :

1) Extension tubes
2) Reverse
3) Teleconverter

Magnification

1) Reverse + extension tubes
2) Extension tubes
3) teleconverter

This is not 100% as you dont specify how long are the extension tubes

[Spooked]

Hi NaClH2O

I have a 2x apk teleplus mc4, but i understood that it would not help in a macro situation, only to increase focal length.


Thanks

Peter

[Spooked]

Hi Mer

I was thinking maybe 50mm of tube


Peter

[Nesster]

I played with a screw mount 50/1.4 + extension rings + 2x converter. In various combinations and orders. You can get very close indeed, and get a strange looking rig to boot.

I'd posted a couple of photos with one variation of the setup here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/16340-play-takumar-etc.html

I went with the screw mount because the whole setup means working slow & this was by far the rock bottom cost way to go. Don't be afraid to experiment - I got an extreme magnification close-up by holding an enlarger lens to the camera!

[Peter Zack]

Best image quality will be using the extension tubes. There's no extra glass between the back of the lens and the sensor to distort or degrade the image. With 50mm of extension you get 1:1 ratio shots with a 50mm lens (life size). Generally the extension tube set will be about 58- 68mm with all 3 tubes in use (they come in 3 sections most of the time) Mine are a set of Vivitar's that have 12mm,20mm and 36mm rings. You can stack them with additional rings to go even further.

[Spooked]

Hi Nesster

A very cute Kitten! Thanks for the info!

Peter

[Spooked]

Hi Peter

Thanks, im leaning toward the tubes. I could pick up a manual series for 30 euro.

Peter

[Spooked]

Hi Nesster

Thats one funky looking Kitten you have there The setup did a grand job.


Thanks, Peter

[ccallana]

I recently did some tests with various combinations of 50mm, 28mm, 135mm, tubes, teleconverter - check out some of the results MacroTests - a photoset on Flickr

[Nesster]

Thanks for the interesting flickr set. I too was hazily aware of the difference in the order of pieces, but was more concentrated on seeing that the thing worked to be in on the fine points.

But does this correspond to your experience?

50mm + doubler + tube = 100mm + tube, ie, you get the magnification and working distance of a 100mm + tube.

50mm + tube + doubler = 50 mm + tube magnification and working distance x 2 by the doubler.

[roy]

i've tried all of the ways. there's also a macro converter. get the ETs, just be sure they're mechanically coupled to the lens. a reversing adapter is simple to make out of a body cap and step up/down ring. the advantage to the ETs is they will work with any lens. i particularly like to use them with a 200mm.. the combo gives you about 30'' of space as a 1:3-4 closeup lens. perfect for larger bugs.

[Slick]

FWIW, don't forget to consider bellows. I just started playing around with a Pentax bellows I got from ebay and it's pretty impressive so far. The only problem is I think your lens is K mount, the old Pentax bellows I've been seeing pop up are M42 so you would need a screw mount lens to use with it.

According to the scale on the bellows it goes to 16x with a 55mm lens, if I'm reading it right. Focus is about 3 inches. It's not very portable, though. You pretty much have to use it on a tripod.

I'm still figuring this thing out so if I'm wrong someone please correct me.

Slick

[ccallana]

Thanks for the interesting flickr set. I too was hazily aware of the difference in the order of pieces, but was more concentrated on seeing that the thing worked to be in on the fine points.

But does this correspond to your experience?

50mm + doubler + tube = 100mm + tube, ie, you get the magnification and working distance of a 100mm + tube.

50mm + tube + doubler = 50 mm + tube magnification and working distance x 2 by the doubler.

hmm lets see - 50mm on tubes alone is basically 1:1 @ ~3", 50+tc+tubes gave a little bit less than 1:1 at a longer distance. 50+tubes+tc gave same working distance as without the TC, but 2x mag.

with the 135, I got 1:2 @ 15" with just tubes. 135+tubes+tc kept same distance, 1:1, 135+tc+tubes kept the 1:2 but @ twice the distance.

So it worked better with the 135, but close with the 50.