[boriscleto]

So should I just get a reversing ring to use with the standard 18-55mm lens that came with the camera? Would that be enough? Or do I need a K-mount bellows? What does a bellows do differently or in addition to reversing the lens? And would that same standard 18-55mm lens work with the bellows? Do bellows come with lens mounts or do I need to buy those as well? Can either of these 2 options do the trick alone or together or should I spring for a used Sigma or Tamron mentioned above?

And what do you recommend for lights?



For this other equipment above, I have the tabletop shooting setup, but nothing else. Which of these items would be most necessary - and if it depends on what equipment I use in the above, can you please specify? Thanks. I think I def need product support jigs or some way to hold the jewelry pieces esp to get them at specific angles.

Thanks again!

Reversing the kit lens is problematic. There is no aperture ring...Extension tubes pose the same problem unless you can find them with electrical contacts. They do exist for K-mount but they run $100-200. I got lucky and found a set of Kenko AF extension tubes on shopgoodwill, I paid $130 plus shipping. But that included a black KX, PZ-70 an A 35-80 and a F 35-80.

---

Last edited by boriscleto; 07-03-2018 at 08:37 AM.

[UncleVanya]

After having seen the results from the 18-55 recently I honestly think a reversing ring isn't a bad approach. You use the zoom function to change the image magnification etc. However I haven't tried this and the working distances may be very short making lighting tricky. But at the cost to try, it seems as good a place as any to start. I don't own an 18-55 lens anymore or I would attempt this. It does mean you have to figure out how to hold the aperture open (no apperture ring, so the lens closes down)

It may be easier to get an older prime like a 50mm f1.7 or even the 50mm f4 macro mentioned. But trying the 18-55 first is cheap. I have used a strip of printer paper folded up to wedge the lever open on lenses without aperture rings.

[WPRESTO]

So should I just get a reversing ring to use with the standard 18-55mm lens that came with the camera? Would that be enough? Or do I need a K-mount bellows? What does a bellows do differently or in addition to reversing the lens? And would that same standard 18-55mm lens work with the bellows? Do bellows come with lens mounts or do I need to buy those as well? Can either of these 2 options do the trick alone or together or should I spring for a used Sigma or Tamron mentioned above?

And what do you recommend for lights?



For this other equipment above, I have the tabletop shooting setup, but nothing else. Which of these items would be most necessary - and if it depends on what equipment I use in the above, can you please specify? Thanks. I think I def need product support jigs or some way to hold the jewelry pieces esp to get them at specific angles.

Thanks again!

Bellows are flexible but very clumsy to to use, and best for extreme close-up (= greater than life-size). Simply reversing your zoom directly o to the camera body will only provide a limited range of magnifications, which could be either too much or not enough for your purposes. A used Tamron or Sigma will be MUCH easier to use and not that much more $ than purchasing a used K-mount bellows. GO FOR: either a Tamron or Sigma macro second hand (as noted above, I would select the Tamron) OR get the Raynox macro explorer kit, which I highly recommend for starting out doing macro.

[GoldMountain]

Multiple recommendations for the 90mm Tamron macro, and for a dedicated macro lens, that is definitely the bargain. It has had an excellent reputation going way back to the Adaptall 2 version, and it has been very popular, so good clean used copies are almost always available at excellent prices. DO NOT hold out for an AF version. The vast majority of us who do macro regularly use MF.

BUT ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION: The least expensive way to get into quality macro is the RAYNOX MACRO EXPLORER system, less than $130 brand new. These quick-attach close-up filters work very well on many lenses, both SFL and zoom (performance on zoom lenses a little unpredictable, work extremely well on some, not-so-hot on others). There's a thread here on PF devoted to images taken with the Raynox units. LOOK AND SEE how a simple attachment can provide IQ indistinguishable from images taken by dedicated macro lenses that cost five times as much. LOOK AT my post, #2867 in the macro lens thread. Especially look at the detail on the nail, and keep in mind, that image has been cropped.

A few people mentioned the RAYNOX MACRO EXPLORER system, which seems to fit any lens so no adapter needed. How does something like this compare to reversing the lens?

And this a good Raynox kitamazon.com : Raynox DCR-250 Super Macro Snap-On Lens : Camera Lenses : Camera & Photo?tag=pentaxforums-20&?

[UncleVanya]

A few people mentioned the RAYNOX MACRO EXPLORER system, which seems to fit any lens so no adapter needed. How does something like this compare to reversing the lens?

And this a good Raynox kitamazon.com : Raynox DCR-250 Super Macro Snap-On Lens : Camera Lenses : Camera & Photo?tag=pentaxforums-20&?

It is simpler to go back and forth and ask metering and af still works in non reversed method. I really like the Raynox, but Canon and Nikon also make excellent Apo close up lenses. The clip on and off adapter works well with the Raynox.

[aslyfox]

As I understand it

One of the nice things about a dedicated macro lens is that it is usually a very good lens even when not trying macro photography

[UncleVanya]

As I understand it

One of the nice things about a dedicated macro lens is that it is usually a very good lens even when not trying macro photography

Usually very sharp and contrasty but also typically in the past optimized for flat subjects. I have no complaints about the F/FA/DFA 100 Series lenses as general purpose lenses or macro lenses.

[pres589]

Good cheap macro: DA50-200 + a $13 set of Vivitar "Series 1" close focusing & macro filters. I have $80 in that collection of stuff and had great fun taking pictures of flowers and such.

The M 50 f4 Macro seems like a nice general purpose lens with wonderful rendering.

I've got a 105mm f2.8 1:1 macro, made by Kino Precision in Ricoh branding that's quite nice.

[stevebrot]

Jewelry doesn't tend to flee so you don't need the 100mm reach.

Working distance and potential interference with lighting are big considerations. Below is my Sigma 50/2.8 EX DG Macro at 1:1. Not shadowing the subject is a huge consideration.



Even removing the hood does not help this situation much. In case it is not obvious, ringlights don't work at this distance and if the subject where in a tent, the camera would have to be in there as well. One of these days, I should do a repeat only with the Tamron 90mm.


Steve

[WPRESTO]

Shown below:
1) the Raynox macro explorer kit components: quick attach device, 1.5X and 2.5X achromatic lenses (1.5 reduces focus distance front of lens to subject to 8 inches, 2.5X to 4 inches, of any lens regardless of focal length when the lens is set to infinity)
2) assembled system (1.5X unit) mounted on my old 200mm f4 SMCA.
3) Image taken with the rig above
4) Image taken with the 2.5X Raynox mounted on a Sigma 17~70mm has severe vignetting
5) BUT, if you crop away the vignetting, IQ is very good;
6) image taken with a 1.5X Raynox mounted on a Sigma 18~250mm zoom, lens @ 250mm and infinity. IQ is not as good as with preceding lenses, but unexpectedly good from such a long-range zoom out at its maximum FL, which is where all such lenses have their poorest performance.

MINIMAL PP done on these images, primarily small adjustments to exposure. All of them could therefore be improved by applying some sharpening.

[stevebrot]

So should I just get a reversing ring to use with the standard 18-55mm lens that came with the camera?

Reversing rings are inexpensive, though I suggest not buying the cheapest quality level. Be aware that focus with a reversing ring is done changing the distance to subject. The focus ring on the lens does nothing with most primes and very little with an internal focus zoom. As noted in comments above, lenses with aperture rings work best for reversed use.

Or do I need a K-mount bellows?

Bellows are very versatile, but a dedicated macro lens is easiest to learn with.

Do bellows come with lens mounts or do I need to buy those as well?

Except for expensive units like Novoflex that use adapters, a proper K-mount bellows should come with a proper K-mount on the front and a removable/rotatable mount on the rear. Being able to remove/rotate is very important since clearance to flash overhang may be a problem with some bodies and bellows. Note that all bellows require a lens with aperture ring. As with a reversed lens, bellows focus is best done by adjust distance to the camera rather than by extension on the rail. That is why an over/under rail configuration is handy. The top rail is used for extension (determines magnification) and the lower for adjusting distance. FWIW, a focus rail does a much better job of the latter task.

Can either of these 2 options do the trick alone or together or should I spring for a used Sigma or Tamron mentioned above?

I could do the task easily with my Pentax Bellows-K but would probably use the Tamron 90/2.8 (77B) instead. Doing with reversing ring and no focus rail would be a challenge.

And what do you recommend for lights?

When using a tent, something as simple as clamp-on work lamps with standard incandescent bulbs from Home Depot will work. Care should be taken in regards to bulb type with continuous lighting, both from perspective of color temperature and phasing (LEDs are notorious).


< $20 each at Home Depot (https://www.homedepot.com/p/Globe-Electric-Utility-Clamp-Work-Light-6618701/300374841)

A couple of inexpensive generic manual flash with an on-camera trigger with that same tent would be more reliable from the perspective of consistent light spectrum and easy of tailoring brightness. I have two Yongnuo YN560III with YN560RX transmitter (Nikon foot) at a total outlay of under $150 USD.

Again...the tent is a key component.

There are a ton of good suggestion on this thread. I am impressed with the response.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Usually very sharp and contrasty but also typically in the past optimized for flat subjects. I have no complaints about the F/FA/DFA 100 Series lenses as general purpose lenses or macro lenses.

By optimized for flat subjects, that simply means that the plane of focus away from center does not curve towards the camera making for softer edges and corners. Flatness of field is one of the nice things about macro lenses and is important for flat subjects such as stamps or coins. Be aware that not all dedicated macro lenses do native 1:1 without a 2x converter. Know before you bid/buy.


Steve

[UncleVanya]

By optimized for flat subjects, that simply means that the plane of focus away from center does not curve towards the camera making for softer edges and corners. Flatness of field is one of the nice things about macro lenses and is important for flat subjects such as stamps or coins.


Steve

True - but as our Pentax overlords have explained before some lenses were designed to not be particularly flat in perspective to enhance their real world use in a 3d world. I'm very happy with the F - FA - DFA lenses and have no experience with problems with older macro lenses but I have no knowledge of the older lenses used outside their intended purpose. (Should be easy to find examples on Flickr, I've just not looked)

[stevebrot]

Shown below:
1) the Raynox macro explorer kit components: quick attach device, 1.5X and 2.5X achromatic lenses (1.5 reduces focus distance front of lens to subject to 8 inches, 2.5X to 4 inches, of any lens regardless of focal length when the lens is set to infinity)
2) assembled system (1.5X unit) mounted on my old 200mm f4 SMCA.
3) Image taken with the rig above
4) Image taken with the 2.5X Raynox mounted on a Sigma 17~70mm has severe vignetting
5) BUT, if you crop away the vignetting, IQ is very good;
6) image taken with a 1.5X Raynox mounted on a Sigma 18~250mm zoom, lens @ 250mm and infinity. IQ is not as good as with preceding lenses, but unexpectedly good from such a long-range zoom out at its maximum FL, which is where all such lenses have their poorest performance.

MINIMAL PP done on these images, primarily small adjustments to exposure. All of them could therefore be improved by applying some sharpening.

Thanks for showing off how capable the Raynox products are.


Steve

[stevebrot]

I'm very happy with the F - FA - DFA lenses and have no experience with problems with older macro lenses but I have no knowledge of the older lenses used outside their intended purpose.

The main issues with poor flatness of field have historically been with wide-angle lenses. When I bought my Tamron 28/2.5 (02B) in 1982, field flatness was a marketing point for that lens and used to partially justify a street price more than twice that of the Pentax-M 28/2.8.


Steve