[Blue]

Popular Photography had an article in the February 2009 issue about the merits of 50mm f/1.4 lenses. One of the things they suggested was using a lens-reversing ring to mount the lens backwards into your camera's lensmount and using it for macro photography. According to the article you can magnify your subject to a 1:1, 2:1, or even 3:1 ratio. Obviously, using this setup everything would have to be set manually. Has anyone here tried that method?

CN

This is where I would disagree with Pop photo. If the goal is to get 1:1, 2:1 or 3:1, lens stacking is the way to go and it is possible to maintain electrical lens functions. However, both techniques maybe a bit much for someone new to macro. For the 50mm f1.4, I think the Raynox or the Canon 250d with a 49mm step-up ring to 52 or 55mm.

Edit: Here is a link to a recent thread on lens stacking. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-pentax-photography/46859-reversed...questions.html

---

Last edited by Blue; 01-25-2009 at 09:27 PM.

I am with heather and blue on this one... Get a raynox 150 or 250 and clip it on the FA 50. It can be used on most of your primes and even some of the zooms for a great little macro option.

I cant find my FA 50 shots with it, but here is a Helios-44M 58mm shot with it.

[audiobomber]

I love the Raynox diopters but I'm not sure how well a Raynox would do on an FA 50mm. What I mean is, I don't know if an adapter ring would compromise the system. The Raynox is supposed to be mounted as closely as possible to the lens, and it's recommended to remove any filters. The extra space due to an adapter ring may cause a problem?
Also note that even the more powerful Raynox 250 would only be about 1:2 macro on a 50mm lens.

[Blue]

I love the Raynox diopters but I'm not sure how well a Raynox would do on an FA 50mm. What I mean is, I don't know if an adapter ring would compromise the system. The Raynox is supposed to be mounted as closely as possible to the lens, and it's recommended to remove any filters. The extra space due to an adapter ring may cause a problem?
Also note that even the more powerful Raynox 250 would only be about 1:2 macro on a 50mm lens.

That's why I suggested a possibility of using the canon 250d with a step-up ring.

Edit: Another option may be to just pick up a used 50mm macro lens in either the A, M, or K configurations or even m42.

Edit: Edit: Igilligan, the ant on the dandelion is interesting.

I do not use and extra adaptor ring with my raynox and FA 50...
Here is a quick shot I just took of a ipod ear bud and a quarter... with the fa50 + raynox 250

That's why I suggested a possibility of using the canon 250d with a step-up ring.

Edit: Another option may be to just pick up a used 50mm macro lens in either the A, M, or K configurations or even m42.

Edit: Edit: Igilligan, the ant on the dandelion is interesting.

Believe it or not it is actually a tiny spider... it is weaving a web over the floaties.

I also us a 49mm to 58mm step up adaptor with my Sony 3358 macro... Less magnification but better depth of field.

Here is the sony 3358 with the Jupiter 9 85mm macro... this is a crop



As you can see, I am a believer in the macro adaptor lenses as long as you get good ones.

[Luciferase]

Popular Photography had an article in the February 2009 issue about the merits of 50mm f/1.4 lenses. One of the things they suggested was using a lens-reversing ring to mount the lens backwards into your camera's lensmount and using it for macro photography. According to the article you can magnify your subject to a 1:1, 2:1, or even 3:1 ratio. Obviously, using this setup everything would have to be set manually. Has anyone here tried that method?

CN

I did this setup and spend 2 min playing because I have most adaptor rings sitting around (mainly I don't want to damage my 50mm f1.4 inner elements and expose it too long unmount)

Need:
kit lens 18-55mm (52mm filter)
pentax FA 50mm f1.4 (49mm filter)
c-adaptor both sides 52mm
step down ring 49 to 52mm

Setup:
Have the 18-55 mount to your camera, follow by C-adaptor, then step down to 49mm and inverse your 50mm f1.4 (use the A ring to fully open the lens)

The focus distance is less than 5cm and the image quality IMHO is not that great as compare to my tamron 90mm f2.8 macro.

The setup is very hard to take insect macros, but may be suitable for stationary objects.

[audiobomber]

I do not use and extra adaptor ring with my raynox and FA 50... [/IMG]

How do you attach the Raynox?

I guess I was just not reading you right. The Raynox has its own clip adaptor that allows you to clip it right into the front filter rings on the lenses.
So what I was saying was that the raynox (even with its own clip) does not need any step up or down adaptors like some of the other macro filters that were being discussed. The canons/sony all need 49-58mm step up adaptors to mount to the 49mm threads of the FA 50. So the raynox actually sits closer to the front element than the others that need step ups.

But my sony 3358 does need step up filters to use it on the 49 and 52mm lenses. And I have had no real issues with it either.

Sorry for the confusion

[audiobomber]

I guess I was just not reading you right. The Raynox has its own clip adaptor that allows you to clip it right into the front filter rings on the lenses.
So what I was saying was that the raynox (even with its own clip) does not need any step up or down adaptors like some of the other macro filters that were being discussed. The canons/sony all need 49-58mm step up adaptors to mount to the 49mm threads of the FA 50. So the raynox actually sits closer to the front element than the others that need step ups.

I'm still confused. The Raynox adaptor says it fits 52-67mm filter sizes. I can't mount a Raynox on my FA 50mm because the adaptor won't grip it.

Hey Dan

I completely forgot that the raynox does not naturally fit the 49mm threads...

My raynox works on my 49mm lenses... But, early on I just squeezed the adaptor clips all the way in and then screwed the thing on the threads of the 49mm lenses like you would any filter. After awhile I could just gently force the clip grips into the 49mm threads.

Was it wrong? probably, but it works!

[audiobomber]

I just squeezed the adaptor clips all the way in and then screwed the thing on the threads of the 49mm lenses like you would any filter. After awhile I could just gently force the clip grips into the 49mm threads.

LOL! Ah yes, the old "Armstrong" method.

LOL! Ah yes, the old "Armstrong" method.

But I am laughing...


Dainty and proper I am not...

The "Armstrong Method" sort of sums up my life thus far...

and then duct tape to fix what I break

[Ben_Edict]

I'm new in this forum. I'm so happy that i found this place because it will help me a lot as a new K200d owner. I bought my K200d a week ago and also bought a FA50mm f1.4 prime lens. This lens yields good pics. However, I want to know if is it possible to attach a macro lens to my 50mm? If it's possible will it affect the IQ? Or are there other ways to make this lens into a macro lens?

Thanks

Adding a macro lns to the FA 50 is a cheap and simple solution to get into macro photography the first time. You should simply try! When it comes to image quality, there is undinably a loss of that, when adding a macro lens to the 50. You can minimize this IQ-loss, by choosig a better grade macro lens. Usually you would then go for a "achromatic" macro lens, which is glued together from two lenses, to give better sharpness, especially in the corners and to reduce colour fringing, which a simple macro lens may introduce.

Furthermore most achromatic lenses are multi-coated, thus reducing flaring and stray light and producing better contrast. Achromatic lenses can often befound cheap made by Canon or MInolta on ebay. They may be old, but as long, as they are hnot damaged, they are of high quality. They usually come in sizes like 58mm or 62mm, but you can use step-down rings to adapt them to your FA 50.

A macro lens reduces the effective focal length of your camera lens. So adding a 10 dpt. macro lens to your 50mm FA lens, will in effect yield a 33mm lens BUT without affecting the minimum focusing distance of your lens. So the focusing tube of your lens will be as long as it always was, but the focal length reduced. This in effect gives you added magnification. It sounds complicated, but it isn't:

The macro lens will usually have a value of +1 dpt, +2 dpt or even +10 dpt

Diopters are a convenient measure (the reciprocal value of the focal length, aka 1/f ) for optical calculations, as you can simply add and subtract values.

So, to see what a macro lens does to your FA 50, we simply convert it s 50mm focal length into diopters, too: 1/0.05 (we use meters as the measure of length) = 20 dpt.

So adding a macro lens will give you different possibilities:

• +1dpt lens added to your FA50 gives you a 21dpt system = 47.6mm lens (not impressive
  
• +2dpt added to your FA 50 gives you a 22dpt system =45.5mm
  
• +5dpt added = 25dpt overall = 40mm
  
• +10dpt added = 30dpt overall = 33.3mm effective focal length

So, the more diopters the macro lens has, the shorter the effective focal length of your lens. And the higher the possible magnification will be, you can reach, when the focusing tube of your lens is fully extended. Apart from IF lenses (IF=Internal focusing) all lenses usually are focused by sliding the lens elements nearer to the sensor (for far distances and infinity) or farther away (for near distances). The shorter the focal length of the lnes, the less travel will be involved and the longer the lens' focal length, the longer the focusing tubes's travelling action has to be (very inconvenient for really long focal lengthes).

I am saving you (and me...) the hassle to calculate the different magnifications for the diopter lenses above, because this will be even more elaborate, but I guess, some basic understanding of how things work is always helpful - especially in photography.

Ben

[gemini]

A macro lens reduces the effective focal length of your camera lens. So adding a 10 dpt. macro lens to your 50mm FA lens, will in effect yield a 33mm lens BUT without affecting the minimum focusing distance of your lens. So the focusing tube of your lens will be as long as it always was, but the focal length reduced. This in effect gives you added magnification. It sounds complicated, but it isn't:

The macro lens will usually have a value of +1 dpt, +2 dpt or even +10 dpt

Diopters are a convenient measure (the reciprocal value of the focal length, aka 1/f ) for optical calculations, as you can simply add and subtract values.

So, to see what a macro lens does to your FA 50, we simply convert it s 50mm focal length into diopters, too: 1/0.05 (we use meters as the measure of length) = 20 dpt.

So adding a macro lens will give you different possibilities:

• +1dpt lens added to your FA50 gives you a 21dpt system = 47.6mm lens (not impressive
  
• +2dpt added to your FA 50 gives you a 22dpt system =45.5mm
  
• +5dpt added = 25dpt overall = 40mm
  
• +10dpt added = 30dpt overall = 33.3mm effective focal length

So, the more diopters the macro lens has, the shorter the effective focal length of your lens. And the higher the possible magnification will be, you can reach, when the focusing tube of your lens is fully extended. Apart from IF lenses (IF=Internal focusing) all lenses usually are focused by sliding the lens elements nearer to the sensor (for far distances and infinity) or farther away (for near distances). The shorter the focal length of the lnes, the less travel will be involved and the longer the lens' focal length, the longer the focusing tubes's travelling action has to be (very inconvenient for really long focal lengthes).

I am saving you (and me...) the hassle to calculate the different magnifications for the diopter lenses above, because this will be even more elaborate, but I guess, some basic understanding of how things work is always helpful - especially in photography.

Ben

sorry, where did you find this info?

very interesting