[NoRules]

Since this is a forum about equipment, I'll concentrate on that.
Oh Boy! The last month has been exciting! I have been experimenting and reading about macro photography. I have found out what to buy (and what NOT to buy!) for my kind of subject matter, i.e. dead insects, for the Q system. Lots of stuff had to be ironed out, but after spending nearly 10 hours a day reading, mostly to learn about insects, I'll admit , I have reached a lot of conclusions I'd like to share. First of all, I do dead insects in BW, and yes, now also in color, because of the amber inclusions. The point being my subjects are from 1-4mm small, very detailed and very 3D (wings and legs sticking out everywhere). So when I say 1-4mm, I mean my photographed field is about 3,5x5mm total. For everything bigger I use a K-01, which blows the Q's out of the water every time, when proper lens is used. To take advantage of the Q, think VERY small.

So this is what I have gathered of insight in Q macro photo. When stuff gets small, like a field of 4x5mm, a DSLR has to go 3-5x in macro, when a Q stays at 1.2x. This is a huge difference in hardware. If you get to 5x on a DSLR, know what you are doing, have the $$$$, and proper workflow and technique, the DSLR will still be better, but the setup just looks terryfying! For 4x5mm field with a Q, you can hold the setup in the palm of your hand, and a lot of the tripod/ table/ stability problems are gone, and you have great working distance to subject for lights, diffusors and other stuff. So size does matter a lot. As a conclusion, for those who wonder, given enough hardware, money, technique, a DSLR will always win, but if you don't have like $5000, and want to see the eyes of a 1mm gnat, a $200 Q, with a $40 bellows and a $50 Takumar macro 50mm reversed, will get you there in style! And only pros will be able to see any difference. And with the Q, your laboratory is also portable. Did I mention that?

The setup for 1:1 to 2x macro for the Q is very easy. (Forget about the talk of enlarging lenses, microscope objectives, reversing enlarging lenses, stacking lenses, infinity optical tubes, reversed cine-lenses, and all that. That stuff is for DSLRs to get to the field size of 4x5mm). With the Q, we only need 1:1, or a bit closer, so any 50mm prime lens will do. Even the $5 Russian Helios. Yes, I have one, and I have tested it. The best lens is the Pentax 50mm FA 2.8 macro. I have tested a lot of lenses, maybe 40, and my conclusion is that this macro is absolutely superb. If you have an old Takumar 50mm macro, fine, but if you put a baffle IN FRONT of ANY 50mm, even a Takumar from the 50s, with a hole slightly smaller than the rear lens element, you can not see any difference in optical performance (unless you take pictures of very small stamps). So, you need a Q, any 50mm lens, and an adapter. You also need a set of extension tubes, but I prefer bellows. For us Q users there is one rule to follow: If the subject is smaller than the nail on your pinky, reverse the lens. Yes, even the macro lens. You'll figure out why For this you need a $10 reverse adapter that fit the filter thread of the lens and the make of bellows/ extension tubes. That's it. With this setup a midge of 2mm total will fill the frame and be captured by all 12MP of your camera.

The most important lesson I learned, is that equipment is overrated. Other factors are far more important. 90% of the lenses I bought is now up for sale. For the Q I need 1 lens, and for my K-01 I need 4 (a 100mm macro, the 50mm, a 50mm enlarging lens, and a microscope objective Nikon 5x M-Plan, + a fistfull of adapters) to get from 1:2 to 5x.

The vital factor in this operation is the photographing technique.
Use continuous light. (I use powerfull flashlights on tripods, but there are tons of other alternatives. The on board flash is usefull for triggering slaves, so you can use anything from a reflector on a wire to studio flashes or a table LED-lamp. The light is what gives your images the unique style. Just make something work. Experiment with household items, make your own diffusors and reflectors).

Use a remote. You get IR remotes for Pentax for $1,50 on eBay. I'm not kidding! Just buy spare batteries.

Find a concrete floor. Anywhere. This point can not be overexaggurated!!!! When filling the frame with a subject 3mm long, the camera picks up your heartbeat, your breath, your effort to keep standing, even if you are 2 meters away. This fact is more important than any lens or camera. You might figure out a way to wall-mount your camera and use a wall mounted table. It might work also. As a last resort.

In the camera I use the Black/White setting with focus peaking. If I do RAW, I'll get color pictures in the end anyway. But with peaking on, and BW, it's just much easier to get focus right.

If you decide to focus stack, you will also need a rail. Buy a screw rail or worm drive rail!!! Rack and pinion will NOT work. I have now tested 6 rails and 2 bellows. (And forget about the motorized ones. They cost $1000, they are not better at this, and you'll need a hack for Pentax systems anyway). With a manual screw-driven rail for $50-100 you get movements of 1,5-2 micrometers with consistant precision. If money is burning a hole in your pocket, get the one from RRS.

For framing, get a mechanical microscope stage (MMS) (The worm drive or screw drive rails are not good for framing so tiny subjects, because they do wobble, when turned back and forth, but they ARE superb for stacking). You get the mechanics for $15 on eBay, and just build your own table from a glass plate from a picture frame and a small piece of plywood (20x20cm). You'll understand the concept when the MMS arrive in the mail. It will save you at least half an hour for each subject you take pictures of.

Thats all.

I now use the Q7 for 95% of my macro work, the dead insect project, but I'll probably use the K-01 more when insects get bigger, and I venture outside.

Here is my last image. I dare say I have made some progress from my last one The subject is an insect caught in Baltic Amber. The amber is from the Eocene-period, some 33,9-56 million years ago, and petrified. (Amber was some years ago de-classified as a mineral, but the inclusions are still fossils). Image is done with the above described setup with the Pentax Q7. The inclusion is so damaged I don't even know to which order it belongs, but it's probably a Diptera Nematocera, because most of them are, and because of the one antennae that can be seen. It's about 2,5mm tall total, which makes this a 2,5-3x mag. macro. The stuff that the Q shines at

Attached Images

 

[roberrl]

Stunning picture ... and I would love to see a picture of the rig you used to take it.

Your words are very comprehensive but my aged brain works better with a picture.

[NoRules]

Hi :-)

Thank you sir!

A picture will look very boring and be of little use. It's a reversed 50mm macro lens on bellows, and a Q7 in the other end, standing on a Chinese rail with a screw in it. Here is the shopping list: Pentax FA 50mm 2.8 Macro, 52mm Pentax PK reverse adapter, Pentax K Bellows, Pentax PK to Q adapter with mechanical shutter, the Pentax Q7, iShoot Macro Focusing Rail 150. You can get a PK-Q adapter on eBay for $15 if the original is too expensive. With bellows, adapters can be very cheap and still do the job.

A picture of my work bench is far too personal. It looks like my kitchen exploded there Point being, that making of the stage is part of ones own creative road, and should not be shown or copied. The reason for this is two-fold. It will be boring if all our images looked the same, and it might even stop someone making a better stage with other stuff. Now, the finding-out of it all is part of the fun. I would not dare rob someone of it!

Best of luck!

[kb244]

Nioce. :P

Lens reversals are usually heavily vignetted or have focus/softness falloff, so I guess this is where the crop factor shines, that and the decision to approach the macro in this way.

[NoRules]

Thanks Karl!

Yes! There are a lot of benefits of using the Q for macro work.

And here is one more. I know this is a bit crazy, but this is a real scenario: I have this amber stone, and in that stone there is this little gnat, or female Diptera Nematocere Chironomidae. She is a very tiny creature, her body is only 1mm long. But she is very nicely preserved, because, the smaller she is, the less she has decayed after death for the last 40 million or so years. And I would love to take her picture so that she can be remebered for ever. To photograph her, if I had a DSLR with FF sensor, I would need to use a 40x microscope objective on a bellows. The problem with this is not the bellows, or the shaking of the shutter, or the adaptation. One could also mount the camera directly on the microscope. The problem is that she sits in the stone, 2-3mm deep, and polishing further down might hurt her. And to get a a nice, pretty image I need some immersion fluid, maybe 1mm or 2mm. Now, hang with me here. Here is the thing: A 40x objective has a working distance of 0,3mm. That places the lens INSIDE the stone, almost touching her, destroying her fraile body. But there is a workaround. You could use a ELWD objective that costs $1000, then you get 8mm of working distance, but that is only 3mm from the surface of the fluid and glass, so now, how do you put pretty, delicate, soft light on the pretty lady with that kind of distance? You don't. You can't.
Or you use a Pentax Q7 and a 5x objective, ment for surface stuff, like the Nikon M-plans. That gives you a working distance of 20mm, and that is plenty to set your lights. If she would only turn around and face the camera...

And here she is, all shy and modest. Not my best work by far, but point proven. This is what might be referred to as an impossible shot. Before the Q, that is.

[wissink]

Wow really neat work. I enjoy hearing the passion emanating from your descriptions.

[NoRules]

Thanks! I always get carried away Sorry.

[wissink]

Thanks! I always get carried away Sorry.

No sarcasm at all. I really enjoyed it.

[teiki arii]

What about this lens for your work?