Hi All,

just wanted to know what you think about these two images.

Taken with a K-5iis, reversal ring with Pentax-m 75-150 f4 Lens.

as i am in no way a pro, just got back to photography two weeks ago, would love to know how i can improve...

[Dewman]

First picture : 1/200 - ISO 200
Second Picture : ISO 100 - 1/6
And your running the lens reversed :
You have chosen a hard road ..


Advice : Spin the lens around , buy a few close up filters .. 150mm Lens , a +2 , +3 and a +4 to start with ..
Run at least F16 , use a flash if you need to Maintain Aperture and Shutter speed ..


https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/12-post-your-photos/244609-macro-pentax-kit-lens-k200d.html


https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/12-post-your-photos/244639-macro-two-more...-kit-lens.html

Am I understanding this correctly.... the first photo was with an 18-55mm kit lens and a combination of close-up filters? That's it? If so, I'm totally blown away!

[Volker76]

cheaper solution: extension tubes. Their big plus: unlike filters they don't introduce aberrations etc.
Btw, F16 is not good. You loose details and sharpness thanks to diffraction. Closing down the lens only makes it worse.

In my experience going beyond f11 isn't worth the hassle.

[Dewman]

cheaper solution: extension tubes. Their big plus: unlike filters they don't introduce aberrations etc.
Btw, F16 is not good. You loose details and sharpness thanks to diffraction. Closing down the lens only makes it worse.

In my experience going beyond f11 isn't worth the hassle.

Hmmm.... so I'm expected to believe that anything more than f:11 is not "worth the hassle"? What "experience" do you have that led you to that statement?

[old4570]

Am I understanding this correctly.... the first photo was with an 18-55mm kit lens and a combination of close-up filters? That's it? If so, I'm totally blown away!

All the images in my post were Kit Lens + Close up filter ( Links ) Ahh , the first one ... Yes ..
Im simply blown away by the lack of interest in close up filters ..


Amazed even !

---

Last edited by old4570; 12-28-2014 at 12:16 AM.

[Volker76]

Hmmm.... so I'm expected to believe that anything more than f:11 is not "worth the hassle"? What "experience" do you have that led you to that statement?

a bunch of spiders that lost detail with every increase in f-numbers?

I tried it, the gain in DoF was more than compensated by the loss of detail.

You don't have to believe me. Just google airy disk.

This guys even have a calculator (use advanced settings...)

Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks

[baro-nite]

cheaper solution: extension tubes. Their big plus: unlike filters they don't introduce aberrations etc.
Btw, F16 is not good. You loose details and sharpness thanks to diffraction. Closing down the lens only makes it worse.

In my experience going beyond f11 isn't worth the hassle.

It all depends on the final output. If the goal is pixel-level sharp, even f/11 is pretty questionable at 1:1 magnification (increasing magnification also increases the effective f-number). But f/16 has its uses.

Likewise, a Raynox is undeniably useful. The accepted wisdom that adding supplementary lenses can only degrade the image might be correct in theory, but in practice you can get excellent results this way. I've even found that corner performance at high magnification is actually better with stacked lenses than with a single lens on extension.

[bladerunner6]

First picture : 1/200 - ISO 200
Second Picture : ISO 100 - 1/6
And your running the lens reversed :
You have chosen a hard road ..


Advice : Spin the lens around , buy a few close up filters .. 150mm Lens , a +2 , +3 and a +4 to start with ..
Run at least F16 , use a flash if you need to Maintain Aperture and Shutter speed ..


https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/12-post-your-photos/244609-macro-pentax-kit-lens-k200d.html


https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/12-post-your-photos/244639-macro-two-more...-kit-lens.html

What brand of close-up filters do you use, please?
Thanks.

[Volker76]

It all depends on the final output. If the goal is pixel-level sharp, even f/11 is pretty questionable at 1:1 magnification (increasing magnification also increases the effective f-number). But f/16 has its uses.

Likewise, a Raynox is undeniably useful. The accepted wisdom that adding supplementary lenses can only degrade the image might be correct in theory, but in practice you can get excellent results this way. I've even found that corner performance at high magnification is actually better with stacked lenses than with a single lens on extension.

Imagine my surprise when I tried my K3 and some spider that looked good at f13 with the K30 wasn't all that nice and crisp with the K3....

[old4570]

What brand of close-up filters do you use, please?
Thanks.

The cheapest I can find , literally !
Most are "Green lens" brand ...


One of these days I might need to spend ten dollars ..

[BrianR]

Hmmm.... so I'm expected to believe that anything more than f:11 is not "worth the hassle"? What "experience" do you have that led you to that statement?

Higher apertures get more in focus but everything get's a little less defined as you go up into diffraction land. It's a compromise and the 'best' choice of apertures to use and avoid is subjective. Depends on what you're photographing, what the final output is, how critical you are, if focus stacking is an option, etc. Digital is cheap and easy to experiment with, do your own tests to help you choose your own compromises.

[ts357]

one new photo,
for some reason it looks a bit messy.

[baro-nite]

one new photo,
for some reason it looks a bit messy.

Lens(es) and settings used?

[ts357]

75-150mm with revesal ring adapter, f4, popup flash with diffuser.

[Doundounba]

Btw, F16 is not good. You loose details and sharpness thanks to diffraction. Closing down the lens only makes it worse.

In my experience going beyond f11 isn't worth the hassle.

In my experience, this is just spreading FUD around, and I invite others to try it for themselves to determine where they put the line. Simply stating you couldn't get good shots at F/16 isn't exactly saying much. I recently went from K-01 to K-3, and while I agree that the K-3 is more exacting, I have a number of shots that are sharp enough at F/22 and even F/25. They might have been even sharper had I been able to get several stacked F/11 frames with no subject movement - which often is just not going to happen - but they're still perfectly usable and plenty sharp, IMHO. Advising people to stack several F/11 shots instead will mean that they mostly just won't get a usable shot at all. SOOC, pixel-level sharpness is not the be-all and end-all of (even macro) photography.

p.s.: My photo stream is in my signature. See right here for a retrospective of my favorite 2014 K-01 macro shots. See here, or here, or here for recent, decently sharp, F/22+, K-3 shots.

[baro-nite]

75-150mm with revesal ring adapter, f4, popup flash with diffuser.

OK, so the flash should eliminate camera shake as a factor (it looks like the flash is indeed overpowering the ambient light). So I'd say the issue is choice of aperture. It's rare to find a lens that performs well reversed and wide open. I'd try stopping down from 2 to 4 stops and boosting flash power and/or ISO accordingly. You'll get a sharper image with less chromatic aberration and greater depth of field. Experiment to see what aperture is best.