[Lovephotography]

Hello everyone,
I've decided to get more serious about macro photography. In my research for a macro lens I have found the K and M 100 f4 lenses. The K lens seems to be nearly impossible to find while the M lens is everywhere. My biggest reasons for wanting the K version over the M are because the K is known for easy focusing, slightly higher quality, and it has a larger filter size, which I believe will bring in more light. I also only have equipment for a 52mm filter size (lens hoods and filters). Am I correct in believing that the K lens allows more light into the picture? How much of a difference does it make?

My next questions are about extension tubes. I have a Pentax 55mm f1.8 and after reading several threads here I cut a toilet paper tube to 2.75inches or 7cm just to see what an extension tube would do. It worked in turning my 55mm into a macro but it lacked contrast and it was very dark in the viewfinder (it was outside, so I couldn't use liveview). I think the contrast issue was cause by the way I held the tube, and it would be solved by "real" extension tubes. I want to achieve a 1:1 macro or better for most of my shots, which will be of flowers and plants rather than insects. Should I try to get one of the 100mm macros or a 50mm macro (M or K), or do you think my 55mm is fine? What set of extension tubes would you reccomend? I saw a thread on extension tubes, and the only one really reccomended that isn't hard to find was $65 from B&H. I am open to third party lenses, but I have looked into them and they all seem to be impossible to find, too expensive, or simply not sharp enough (or have bad bokeh). I don't like auto aperature or focusing, so I don't need a lens with either of them. I also much prefer prime lenses.

What about flashes? My k-30 camera has way too powerful a flash and I can't seem to find a defuser that works for a pop-up flash. All the hot-shoe flashes I find are way out of my price range especially when I add a defuser. Do you have any suggestions?

I have Vivitar Macro filters and though they technically work, they have a real issue with purple fringing and the sharpness of my picture reduces dramatically (I can't even use the +10). I don't want to reverse macro my lens because if I understand correctly it leaves the back element exposed and I don't want to chance destroying my lens.

Sorry for the scatterness of my post and questions. I really can't figure out how to organize it better as my brain is all up in the air with the new macro information I found and the confusion of what to get and what's best. $100 is hard to shell out for a lens that won't work for what I want, and $150 is an expensive lens for my budget.

The picture is an example of what I want to be able to capture. It was taken with my 55mm f1.8 with the toilet paper extension tube.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[baro-nite]

Hello and welcome. Good questions! If you already have 52mm filters and hoods, that is certainly a point in favor of the K lens. But the K and M are both f/4 and will have the same brightness in the viewfinder. Also, one rarely shoots macro with the lens at maximum aperture, because the closer you are to the subject, the shallower the depth of field.

You're right that the lower contrast in the photo you posted is probably due to light leaking in through or around your homemade tube. There are plenty of cheap tubes on the market (try eBay), or look for genuine Pentax (used). Keep in mind that "manual" tubes have no aperture linkage, meaning the image becomes rather dark in the viewfinder once you stop the lens down. "Auto" tubes have the aperture linkage so that the lens remains wide open until you click the shutter release.

If you haven't already read the Cheap Macro article, give it a look. There are lots of ways to get to 1:1 (and beyond).

For the pop-up flash, I have found this diffuser very handy.

[Just1MoreDave]

Hello everyone,
I've decided to get more serious about macro photography. In my research for a macro lens I have found the K and M 100 f4 lenses. The K lens seems to be nearly impossible to find while the M lens is everywhere. My biggest reasons for wanting the K version over the M are because the K is known for easy focusing, slightly higher quality, and it has a larger filter size, which I believe will bring in more light. I also only have equipment for a 52mm filter size (lens hoods and filters). Am I correct in believing that the K lens allows more light into the picture? How much of a difference does it make?

The K version has the same optical formula as the M. The filter size shouldn't make any difference. I have never had the K but I suspect these two lenses have the same amount of front element exposed. The K version just has a wider trim ring and barrel.

My next questions are about extension tubes. I have a Pentax 55mm f1.8 and after reading several threads here I cut a toilet paper tube to 2.75inches or 7cm just to see what an extension tube would do. It worked in turning my 55mm into a macro but it lacked contrast and it was very dark in the viewfinder (it was outside, so I couldn't use liveview). I think the contrast issue was cause by the way I held the tube, and it would be solved by "real" extension tubes. I want to achieve a 1:1 macro or better for most of my shots, which will be of flowers and plants rather than insects. Should I try to get one of the 100mm macros or a 50mm macro (M or K), or do you think my 55mm is fine? What set of extension tubes would you reccomend? I saw a thread on extension tubes, and the only one really reccomended that isn't hard to find was $65 from B&H. I am open to third party lenses, but I have looked into them and they all seem to be impossible to find, too expensive, or simply not sharp enough (or have bad bokeh). I don't like auto aperature or focusing, so I don't need a lens with either of them. I also much prefer prime lenses.

I have a set of three extension tubes that adds up to 68mm total, so I tried this out with my K55/1.8. It actually worked pretty well. The viewfinder wasn't too dark for focusing wide open. I had the typical macro issues trying to get enough depth of field, my subject from moving and a reasonable shutter speed, but that would happen with any lens. My combination was a little greater than 1:1. I took a shot of a ruler and got about 19mm across.

[photolady95]

Thread moved to correct forum. The Macro forum.

[Not a Number]

I was under the impression that both the K and M 100mm macro lenses had the same optical formula and are virtually identical except for more advanced coatings in the M series. And the later M series may have the linear positioning of the stop-down lever. Better coatings normally manifest themselves with reduced flare, increased contrast and color saturation.

The K's are probably harder to find because they were only in production for 2 years versus 7 years for the M series.

Did you paint the insides of your tubes flat black?

[bluestringer]

Don't have the K version, so can't comment on it, but I do have the M and I think it's a fantastic lens. I have both the 100 and 50. Both are 1:2. To get 1:1 with the 100, you can add a 50mm tube, 25mm with the 50, but the working distance with the 50 will be much closer. For flowers either one would work just fine. For a flash I use a Sunpak ring flash which has adapters for 49 and 52mm. KEH has them from time to time at a good price.

[Mistlefoot]

Unless you absolutely know what you want here I'd recommend the extension tubes. Macro photography was much different then what I expected. While I enjoy it immensely, there are so many things that make "my style" of shooting and macro photography challenging. I'd suggest getting some experience economically, or with a versatile lens that you can use beyond Macro.

Some surprises I found: You can't just wander around a garden and take 1:1 photo's of flowers. You have the challenge of a very shallow depth of field (dof). With my macro, wide open, 1:1, I have a DOF of less then 1 millimeter. That means I cannot hand hold and expect to get what I want in focus without luck.....and any breeze at all......well, I'll need to shield that. Even at F11 I'm looking at 3 1/2 millimeters. So this brings the need for a tripod into the equation most of the time. But then the challenge of getting the camera were I want using a tripod comes to play. And again....any breeze makes it harder.

This leaves almost all of my 'good' shots being indoor good light shots. And I still can't compete with shots taken by those talented folks who use rails and focus stacking (taking, say, 10 pictures, each with the camera moved a small amount and then utilizing software you make a composite and making more of the 'target' in focus).

In short......I'd recommend getting into macro photography with your eyes open and to be realistic about what your results will be. It really makes the learning curve much more fun and far less disappointing then it could otherwise be.

---------- Post added 07-31-14 at 06:54 PM ----------

Oh, and look into some of the third party led ring flashes. They can be had for under a $100 and although I don't have one, I've seen some users here with good results with them.

[Just1MoreDave]

What about flashes? My k-30 camera has way too powerful a flash and I can't seem to find a defuser that works for a pop-up flash. All the hot-shoe flashes I find are way out of my price range especially when I add a defuser. Do you have any suggestions?

The M or K lenses will make the popup flash fire at full power, no matter what. The really expensive P-TTL hotshoe flashes are the same. The hotshoe flashes with complete manual control are ideal, because they are cheap and have their own power adjustments. You could look at any old flash with manual power settings, as long as the voltage is OK. Or the new flashes like the Yonguo.

I don't want to reverse macro my lens because if I understand correctly it leaves the back element exposed and I don't want to chance destroying my lens.

You can make a lens hood out of a cap that helps a lot. Reversing something like an M28/2.8 gives you much higher magnification than 1:1. Then you are back to the usual macro issues, depth of field, etc. I always want macro rails when I try reversing.

[gofour3]

except for more advanced coatings in the M series.

The K & M series lenses all had the same improved SMC coatings introduced in June 1975, when the K Series was launched. There is no difference in coatings in these two series.

Phil.

[Not a Number]

The 100mm M macro was in production from 1977 until 1985. You're telling me Pentax - Asahi Optical used the same coating for 10 years or more? I find it hard to believe but I'll take your word for it. Minolta was constantly improving their multi-coatings even through out some of their model runs.

[gofour3]

Pentax - Asahi Optical used the same coating for 10 years

Yep up to when Pentax used Ghostless Coatings for the first time in the late 1990's on the Fa43/1.9. If it ain’t broken don’t fix it.

Phil

[mythguy9]

My biggest reasons for wanting the K version over the M are because the K is known for easy focusing

To answer your question about focusing, you don't really need to compare that ring smoothness when you are focusing so close to the subject. When you use extension tube, you are very close to the subject, so you probably better off focus by moving the whole camera-lens unit closer or further from the subject.

i find it very useful to learn about magnification ratio. So you just decide how large you want the subject to be, or how close you want to focus, preset the focus distance on your lens, and then move in or out to get the subject (usually eyes or stamen) into focus.

here are some photos of mine using the reverse lens stacking method (different to tube extension but achieve similar results).

??: 20 Portraits of Pinned Insects (Or: 20 Portraits of Pinned Hexapods, more accurately)

[Paleo Pete]

Can't say much about the lenses, I don't have either one but if I understand it correctly, the most important factor in letting light in is the aperture. With telescopes, yes, the size of the objective lens or primary mirror matters a lot. With camera lenses, it's probably not as important.

The dark viewfinder when using the toilet paper tube is because the aperture is usually held open when using standard lenses, so you can see to focus, then it stops down to take the picture and opens back up. With the tube in place you have no aperture control (that little arm sticking out the back of the lens) so the aperture can't work as it should.

That's why a true extension tube is a good thing, and you can also take the lenses out of a teleconverter and make it into a great extension tube, and usually a lot cheaper than a true extension tube. That's the one thing missing from the cheap chinese ones available on fleabay. They work fine, but you have the same problem. Open up the aperture to focus, [manually] stop down to shoot, and you often lose your focus in the process. I Have the same problem using my M42 macro rigs.

Moving in close or further away is usually much better than using the focus ring, I use that technique most of the time, but I do sometimes use the focusing ring too.

Pop up flash - You can make a diffuser from a cash register receipt. The printed side is heat sensitive, it will turn black after a half dozen flashes, so make sure that side is facing away from the flash. Get one about 5 to 6 inches long and fold it in half lengthwise. Then fold it in thirds, making a small envelope. Tape it so it won't unfold, then separate it so only one layer is in front of the flash and slip it on top of the built in flash. As long as the heat sensitive side is facing away from the flash, I've used them for a week or more until they got lost or crushed. I got a girl at a convenience store to give me one unprinted, she scrolled off about 2 feet, the store name printed at the top so I knew which side to use. It lasted me 2 or 3 months.

You can also find older flashes with adjustable power levels that will work well. Mine is a Vivitar 285 HV, does a great job. Voltage is a consideration, but not hard to check if you can use a multimeter. Mine checks at around 7 volts. I think Pentax is good up to at least 12 volts, maybe a little more, but I try to stay around 5-7V. I have 3 or 4 that will work, left over from 30 years of film, the Vivitar is the only one I use due to the adjustable power level. It also has a slot in front for diffusers, but I don't have any that fit.

Here is the forums review on the 285HV

Vivitar 285HV Zoom Thyristor reviews - Pentax Camera Accessory Review Database

A bit of googling and you might find an affordable one.

[Just1MoreDave]

I had some time to take a reasonable shot with the K55/1.8 plus 68mm of tubes.


IMGT8189 by just1moredave, on Flickr

[Lovephotography]

Wow so much information! Thank you guys! It makes perfect sense that I don't need to worry about the easy focus. Come to think of it, I wasn't using the focus ring when I experimented with the macro extension tube. The tube was not painted black, but I can't use it for a cheap extension tube because it was extreamly difficult to use even for a simple experiment. The shot I took was handheld, but I plan to use a tripod when I can get the macro gear together. I looked at the Cheap Macro thread and now I'm very interested in the reverse stacking of lenses (the back element will be protected by the second lens, correct?).

I have a few more questions for you guys:

1 - what reversal rings do you reccomend for reverse stacking of lenses? All the ones I find have very bad reviews that worry me about losing my lenses (or getting the ring stuck to it or the camera).
2 - I've heard both good and bad reviews on the cheap ebay extention tubes and I'm very confused about it. I really don't want to lose a lens from a bad tube (I'd rather spend the $65 and save a $100 lens). Should I bite the bullet and buy the $65 tubes or is there a cheaper one that's also good?
3 - If I have a fully manual lens, like the K and M series, do I need to worry about an extension tube with an aperature lever? Whenever people talk about auto or aperature controlled extension tubes and teleconverters I never understand what kind of lens they expect us to use with it.
4 - What's the difference between using a teleconverter without glass and using an extension tube?
5 - Can I stack teleconverters and extention tubes indefinately, limited only by ability to focus and lighting?
6 - Is there a chance that reverse stacking lenses can damage them, assuming it's not due to bad reversal rings?
7 - If I were to use a macro lens with the reverse stacking lens technique would it ruin the flatfield sharpness?

Just1MoreDave - That's so cool! Is it a dandilion?


I almost forgot to ask: with reversal stacking, can I attach a K lens to an M lens, or is the different filter size an issue?