[ChrisPlatt]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

No need to make a mountain out of a molehill.
The OP should do fine with single exposures using a standard macro lens.
Us film users like to keep things simple.

Chris

[pepperberry farm]

I would buy the Tamron 72B if I could find one. A half hour of Google searching (my Google-fu is pretty good) and I haven't found anything.

they can be scarce - the prior model of that lens (Tamron 52B or 52BB) does well also, but requires an extension tube to get to a full 1:1 macro...

good luck in your search!

[BrianR]

I don't know If this thread was already posted but I will try again.
Years ago I purchased new a Pentax Program Plus, and a bit later I bought a macro lens. Well the lens turned out to be useless for what I want to do: take close up pictures of small plants and flowers. .

What macro lens have you tried? Do you have any examples of what went wrong with your previous attempts?

You may have to stop wayyy down to get the DoF you want, but some macro lenses go down to f/32 for that reason. Diffraction will kick in before that (reduction in overall sharpness), but it sounds like the trade off of greater DoF is more important to you.

Macro photography can be cumbersome and tedious. How else are you going to have the stigma and petals of a flower in focus when there is a depth difference of one inch and your best DOF is only 1/4 inch?

Running the stacking process is no more tedious than selecting the images and a few taps or mouses for "OK".

The added step of having to scan a ton of negatives is an extra level of tedium, much worse than hitting a few buttons and going for a coffee while you wait. I'd think anyone getting into heavy or regular stacking would be much better off in both a cost (that film will add up as I'm sure you know) and ease of use sense with even the cheapest used dslr they could afford instead of film.

[goatsNdonkey]

This is the photograph of one of the smaller plants and flowers posted to FaceBook. I would say the flowers are maybe a bit under 1/2" across. The whole plant is not much more than 1 1/4" from flower to base.

There is a very different issue to consider in this photo you posted that has nothing to do with equipment. And that is how to select what to focus on in a macro or close-up photograph in which not everything can be in sharp focus. In this picture, what is in focus is in the background; I don't know your camera or how you used it, but it could be that area was automatically focused on because it was in the center of the frame.

If the yellow pollen structures on the ends of the stamens of the central flower were what was in sharp focus, instead, this would be a much different, and I think much better photograph of those flowers. If the background structures were in softer focus, it would matter less.

[bluestringer]

You can do much better than that smartphone photo with a pentax 50mm f1.7 and extension tubes. Make sure you have good lighting also. Here's a set of pentax tubes at KEH camera.

Pentax Extension Tube Set 1 2 3 | eBay

[goatsNdonkey]

My favorite book about macro and close-focusing photography (do people still read books?) is Lester Lefkowitz's Manual of Close-up Photography (Amphoto Books, 1979). It is extremely easy to read, yet goes into great detail (with copious photo examples) of all of the major methods and concepts: types of lenses, lens reversal, lens extension, supplementary lenses, depth of field issues, lighting, even making your own extension tubes and other equipment to help with the most extreme kinds of magnification. It's a wonderful resource. You might keep an eye out for it wherever you find used books for sale.

[ChrisPlatt]

Digital cameras, scanning and postprocessing may have added new techniques,
but for a hundred years amazing macrophotography was done solely with film.

Folks who grew up using digital often don't understand most film photographers
desire to keep the process simple.

The OP states he wants to use his Pentax film SLR and a macro lens.
IMO some of the recommendations here are unnecessarily complicated.
If everything you mention was actually required I wouldn't bother.

Chris

[goatsNdonkey]

Not all of the suggestions are complex, but choosing the simpler ones from among the group might seem complex.

One of the simpler things, is that most of us get better at whatever method we are doing with practice and time. First attempts don't always succeed. And back in the old film days, we all had to get used to the idea that we didn't know what worked until the film came back.

[ChrisPlatt]

If you opt for a Tamron Adaptall lens don't forget to budget in the cost of the interchangeable mount.
The cost of the Adaptall PKA mount will add significantly to the purchase price.
The PK version is cheaper but will allow aperture priority AE or manual exposure only.

Chris

[monochrome]

If you opt for a Tamron Adaptall lens don't forget to budget in the cost of the interchangeable mount.
The cost of the Adaptall PKA mount will add significantly to the purchase price.
The PK version is cheaper but will allow aperture priority AE or manual exposure only.

Chris

Correct - Tamron Adaptall-2 52B/52BB requires the 1:1 Extension (or 01a 2x TC). The better 'A' adapter for ease of use and the fitting hood for better contrast are helpful. A complete set of those four (or five) elements runs $200 - $300.

[WLubarsky]

You can do much better than that smartphone photo with a pentax 50mm f1.7 and extension tubes. Make sure you have good lighting also. Here's a set of pentax tubes at KEH camera.

Pentax Extension Tube Set 1 2 3 | eBay

My macro lens is an Auto Promaster MC 1:2.8 50mm. Marked on the side of the lens is an indicator: Macro 1:10, 1:8, 1:5, 1:4. Would extension tubes still allow autofocus (this is not a killer issue)? Also, I always shoot in AE mode (I'm not much of a photographer), the lens doesn't have an electrical contact. How would aperture priority function?

---------- Post added 07-07-16 at 05:29 AM ----------

Correct - Tamron Adaptall-2 52B/52BB requires the 1:1 Extension (or 01a 2x TC). The better 'A' adapter for ease of use and the fitting hood for better contrast are helpful. A complete set of those four (or five) elements runs $200 - $300.

This is beginning to run out of my budget, I am comfortable under $300.

---------- Post added 07-07-16 at 05:36 AM ----------

There is a very different issue to consider in this photo you posted that has nothing to do with equipment. And that is how to select what to focus on in a macro or close-up photograph in which not everything can be in sharp focus. In this picture, what is in focus is in the background; I don't know your camera or how you used it, but it could be that area was automatically focused on because it was in the center of the frame.

If the yellow pollen structures on the ends of the stamens of the central flower were what was in sharp focus, instead, this would be a much different, and I think much better photograph of those flowers. If the background structures were in softer focus, it would matter less.

The pollen structures are secondary to the rest of the flower structure and the plant itself, with my budget I can't have everything. Needless to say the photo is still better than anything I can get.

[monochrome]

Fast (f/2.5) 'A' 1:1 in a single lens (or with matched extension tube) is the expensive feature. Slower (f/4) 1:2 with extension tubes is somewhat less expensive. Such as K50 or M50 f/4 and Auto Extension Tubes (with aperture lever) can be at the low end of you price.

[goatsNdonkey]

The pollen structures are secondary to the rest of the flower structure and the plant itself, with my budget I can't have everything. Needless to say the photo is still better than anything I can get.

There often seems to be a bit more depth-of-field behind the point most sharply focused on, so taking care not to focus on a part that is too far back, might make more of the flower appear in focus.

After considering all of the suggestions, if you want to just keep using the lens you have, you'll get more depth of field if you can close the aperture a couple of more stops -- that may mean shooting when there is more light or using a slower shutter speed or using a faster iso film.

Also, as has been mentioned, the greater the magnification the less depth-of-field. Try a few shots in which you don't frame the flower quite so tightly, even at the settings you were using for your posted example, you will have a bit more depth-of-field -- meaning more of the flower in focus.

Also, as was mentioned, the cell-phone that seemed to do this sort of thing so well probably had a much wider-angle lens. Wide-angle lenses can give an appearance of greater depth-of-field, but don't have the longer working distance (between camera and subject) that some people like. Also, when different focal length lenses are used at the same aperture and magnification the depth of field is exactly the same (Lefkowitz, pp70-71). The cell phone images might not have as great a magnification as you were attempting with film slr and lens and/or the cell-phone might have automatically boosted the iso greatly above that of the film you were using in order to use a much smaller aperture than you used.

[ChrisPlatt]

There's a 50/2.8 Sigma that goes down to 1:1 without extension.
It appears to be within your budget.
Check Pentax Forums and other reviews.

Chris

[bluestringer]

My macro lens is an Auto Promaster MC 1:2.8 50mm. Marked on the side of the lens is an indicator: Macro 1:10, 1:8, 1:5, 1:4. Would extension tubes still allow autofocus (this is not a killer issue)? Also, I always shoot in AE mode (I'm not much of a photographer), the lens doesn't have an electrical contact. How would aperture priority function?

---------- Post added 07-07-16 at 05:29 AM ----------


This is beginning to run out of my budget, I am comfortable under $300.

---------- Post added 07-07-16 at 05:36 AM ----------


The pollen structures are secondary to the rest of the flower structure and the plant itself, with my budget I can't have everything. Needless to say the photo is still better than anything I can get.

"My macro lens is an Auto Promaster MC 1:2.8 50mm. Marked on the side of the lens is an indicator: Macro 1:10, 1:8, 1:5, 1:4. Would extension tubes still allow autofocus (this is not a killer issue)? Also, I always shoot in AE mode (I'm not much of a photographer), the lens doesn't have an electrical contact. How would aperture priority function?"


No, the tubes are manual only, but have aperture control. You would need to shoot in manual mode. Auto focus is useless in 1:1 macro anyway. If that lens goes only to 1:4 it is really not a macro lens, but a close focus lens. You can pickup a pentax 50 f1.7 fairly cheap and would be much better.