Putting a reversed short lens in front of a longer lens is a good way to get beyond 1:1 macro ratio. But it eat light, of course. So when I got the AF160FC ringflash I was curious to see if it was compatible with the reverse ring light holder K to put a ring flash to the mount of the lens (thanks Diminotrov). And yes, it is.
But like before, since you with most lens configurations end up very close to the subject, the ringh flash is of course also very close to the subject. Sometimes it only iluminates the background (which can cause a nice siluete effect). Anyway, here are some shots I made just in the beginning of my vacation, putting either the FA35/2 or the FA50/1.4 reversed in front of the DFA100/2.8 macro, which should give magnification ratios of about 3:1 or 2:1.

First, with the DFA100 set to f5.6, to demonstrate how extremely thin the DOF is (in the later shots, I've closed down more, but the DOF is still very thin. You can't work against this, so one have to use it instead.


Stammen of some flower


Stigma of some other flower. The small "balls" are pollen. Appears as if bee's & Co have left pollen from different plants. Is that a pollen tube forming from one of the pollen near the center of the photo?


Same flower with the focus on the fillaments.


Different flower, more fillaments.


Actually forgot what part this is , but it is hairy...


I think this is part of a very tiny flower (a few mm in total).


Part of a flower petal someone found to be tasty.


Inhabitant in the same flower, perhaps the hungry one?

[SMPhoto]

All very interesting and well done. Feels like looking at these flowers under a microscope Thanks for sharing! (#1 and 7 are my favorites!)

[Jimbo]

Maybe a little closer!! WOW. Love the 4th shot. JIM

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Thanks! This is real fun. The reversed lens doesn't have to be a modern lens. Just any old manual normal lens or moderate wide angle (say 50, 35 and 28 mm) will do. If you have a 100mm lens on the camera and reverse a 50mm in front of it you get 100/50 = 2:1 macro. Take a 200mm lens and a 28mm you get about 7:1, etc. Since you rapidly reduce the amount of light you have to work with, it's good if the reversed lens is fast (and wide open). If you got no ring flash, you can work with tripod.

[gawan]

Wonderful macro studies, I like the abstractness!

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Wonderful macro studies, I like the abstractness!

Thanks Gawan!
If you go down in the fine details everything is abstract!
Must get some more use for the reverse ring before summer is totally over.

[8540tomg]

Great series Douglas.

I have all the gear to do extreme marco work but just don't seem to get around to it. You open up a whole new world with this sort of magnification.

Tom G

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Great series Douglas.

I have all the gear to do extreme marco work but just don't seem to get around to it. You open up a whole new world with this sort of magnification.

Tom G

Thank's Tom!

I should also do it more.

And it really doesn't take much money...this is cheap macro anyone could afford...it just takes a reverse ring (~5USD) and a cheap 28mm or 50mm (~20USD), provided you already have a tele (it doesn't have to be a macro lens either), and if you dont, you could always buy a cheap 135mm (another ~20USD). 50mm on a 135mm gives you 2.7:1 macro, 28mm on a 135mm gives you 4.8:1.

[canoetripper]

Hi Douglas - Can you please tell me where I can purchase the flash adapter you referenced?

reverse ring light holder K

Many thanks!
- Kris

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Hi Kris

You will have to look for it second hand. It was made for the earlier Pentax ring flashes (in film days), it fits the new ring flash, but it isn't in production any longer.
Mind you, at the magnification I worked with here, the focus distance is so small that the subject is more or less within the macro flash ring, but as you see it worked anyway.

[margriet]

I have a question about these magnification ratio´s...
You say 100mm with 50 reversed gives 2:1 and it doesn´t matter of you use 100mm macro or tele. But where does the difference in magnification between the last two go? I just can´t believe it won´t matter if you use a 100 1:1 macro or a 100mm 1:2 or 1:4.. but hey, I like to be eye-opened if you can explain this!

Your pictures by the way are top! I have been experimenting with 100mm macro and tele / macro converter 3x, the world of small things is getting bigger and bigger But as you say, it takes a lot of light and even with flash searching through viewfinder in dark places can be madness on the eyes.. you got any tips about this?

regards, margriet

[baro-nite]

Thanks for sharing this, Douglas. I do a lot of flower macro myself, and have been contemplating reverse-stacking lenses to go past 1:1. This really shows the possibilities, nice work!

[cbova]

I have a question about these magnification ratio´s...
You say 100mm with 50 reversed gives 2:1 and it doesn´t matter of you use 100mm macro or tele. But where does the difference in magnification between the last two go? I just can´t believe it won´t matter if you use a 100 1:1 macro or a 100mm 1:2 or 1:4.. but hey, I like to be eye-opened if you can explain this!


regards, margriet

Wonderful images, so much detail goes unnoticed everyday. I'm all about the budget extreme macro. I have a Sigma 105 macro, M50 1.7, and a Tamron 28 2.8 (M42). I think I'll order a few reversing rings and give this a try.

margriet,

If I understand your question correctly, I'll try to explain. A 100mm focal length is what it is, all 100mm lenses will have the same 'size' image in the view finder, film/sensor at the same distance. For example a flower at 15 feet away will be the same magnification for a 100mm 'macro' or a 100mm 'telephoto'. The difference you are reffering to is the ability of the lens to focus on objects close(r) to the sensor. In other words when you have a 1:1 macro lens you can focus on a coin, for example much closer than you could with a 100mm tele with 1:4 ratio. The 1:1 ratio simply means that you can focus on an object and it will be life size on the sensor. Think of taking a picture of a piece of paper the exact same size as the sensor in your camera... a 1:1 ratio will let you focus close enough so that that rectangle takes up the whole field of view. A 1:4, for example will only take up 1/4 of the image. It all boils down to how close the to the subject the lens can focus.

This is why any 100mm lens would work for reversing.

Chris

[crewl1]

These are very cool Douglas, love the detail of the pollen balls.

[trco]

Excelent! Nice setup and nice images.