Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
1 Like  #1
deep into some flowers at 2:1 and 3:1 macro ratio
Lens: DFA100/2.8 macro, FA35/2 and FA50/1.4 Camera: K-7 ISO: 200 
Posted By: Douglas_of_Sweden, 08-15-2010, 11:21 AM

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?

Views: 3,650
08-15-2010, 11:31 AM   #2
Senior Member
SMPhoto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 185
All very interesting and well done. Feels like looking at these flowers under a microscope Thanks for sharing! (#1 and 7 are my favorites!)
08-15-2010, 12:04 PM   #3
Veteran Member
Jimbo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Maple Ridge BC Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,368
Maybe a little closer!! WOW. Love the 4th shot. JIM
08-15-2010, 01:44 PM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,374
Original Poster
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.

08-19-2010, 04:00 AM   #5
Veteran Member
gawan's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Helsinki
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,400
Wonderful macro studies, I like the abstractness!
08-19-2010, 05:16 PM   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,374
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gawan Quote
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.
08-20-2010, 04:06 PM   #7
Veteran Member
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,461
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

08-20-2010, 11:43 PM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,374
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
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.
01-01-2012, 01:25 PM   #9
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18
Hi Douglas - Can you please tell me where I can purchase the flash adapter you referenced?

reverse ring light holder K

Many thanks!
- Kris
02-27-2012, 01:44 AM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,374
Original Poster
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.
02-27-2012, 04:18 AM   #11
Senior Member
margriet's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 191
I have a question about these magnification ratioīs...
You say 100mm with 50 reversed gives 2:1 and it doesnīt matter of you use 100mm macro or tele. But where does the difference in magnification between the last two go? I just canīt believe it wonīt 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
02-27-2012, 06:45 AM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,147
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!
02-27-2012, 10:33 AM - 1 Like   #13
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Barrington, NH
Posts: 59
QuoteOriginally posted by margriet Quote
I have a question about these magnification ratioīs...
You say 100mm with 50 reversed gives 2:1 and it doesnīt matter of you use 100mm macro or tele. But where does the difference in magnification between the last two go? I just canīt believe it wonīt 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

Last edited by cbova; 02-27-2012 at 01:52 PM.
02-27-2012, 10:40 AM   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,804
These are very cool Douglas, love the detail of the pollen balls.
02-27-2012, 12:21 PM   #15
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Kidričevo, Slovenia
Posts: 47
Excelent! Nice setup and nice images.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dof, flash, flower, front, lens, macro, photo, pollen, ratio, shots
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Crop Factor and Macro Ratio GregK8 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 45 08-13-2010 12:49 PM
Magnification ratio in macro photography ntx Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 08-19-2009 02:22 PM
Macro Flowers metroeloise Post Your Photos! 10 11-24-2008 07:36 PM
Macro Flowers photomad_2007 Post Your Photos! 1 06-08-2008 06:00 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:54 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top