Reverse-Lens for Macro

[jex_the_bug]

ok iv got way to much time on my hands and read somthing about reversing a lens to make it in to a macro.

this all looks like something to wast a while playing with. iv had a look to see what my 50mm looks like if i hold it in front of the camera the wrong way round and got a few snaps (got to make or buy a proper adapter). but i was just wondering if any one has tried this? and what lens set-up would work best? may be an old FD lens. also am i right in thinking a 35mm will give closer results then say a 75mm?

any help would be great.

[riley989]

Can't remember the details but I remember that this works with the twin lens kit you get with canon cameras (the 55-250 and 18-55), you put one on the camera normally, and the other in reverse in front of it, using the reverse lens to manually focus, you can even buy double threaded rings to attach them together by the filter threads.

[rjd]

I tried with my 50/1.8 and a reverse adapter , it works but its damned tricky.

You have (on canon) no aperture control so you have to 'hack' the aperture with DOF preview.

Also you effectively have no focus either so you have to move the camera to focus. quality wasnt great either.

it works, and for some setups I think can work really well (especially with 2 lenses) but there are better options (though none cheaper).

[Adam]

i tried it a while back. I bought some cheap reverse fittings off ebay for a few $$$. It works OK, but as Rob said, no focus, no aperture control, and very tricky. The fascination wore off after a while...

Check out this thread on FM - http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/780820

There are lots of photos of macro set ups with reversed lenses to give you an idea.

[jex_the_bug]

thank,

i had read about hacking the aperture can that damage any thing do you think?
the more i read about it the more confused i get.

[SteveB]

You might be talking at cross-purposes here. One technique is taking the lens off the camera and turning it 180 degrees, which is what I think Rob is talking about. Another technique is to use an additional lens, reversed and attached to the front of the existing lens, which is what I think Jex is talking about.
For the first method, an older manual Pentax or enlarger lens is ideal so you can still adjust the aperture. You can use an FD lens but it takes a bit more jiggery-pokery. You can add dumb tubes on to that setup for the lowest cost options at reasonable magnifications.
For the second method you can use anything because you just want it wide open. You are just using it in the same way as a screw on diopter. A 50mm lens is 20 diopters so you get huge magnification and the associated problems that brings (lighting, dof, stability).

[peedee]

I tried this a few years ago, then bought an EF-S 60mm macro. Best thing I ever did really, in regard to macro work.

Or at least I thought so at the time, before I bought the 100 L macro, which is a different kettle of fish altogether.

[rjd]

efs 60 should be as good as the 100L for IQ, just a lot closer MFD for 1:1

[peedee]

efs 60 should be as good as the 100L for IQ, just a lot closer MFD for 1:1

I used to think that it was a good lens on a 20D. Then on a 50D I began to have my doubts. On a 7D I decided it was definitely not perfect, to the point I went into my supplier and asked to try another one, which they obliged with. There was no picking the difference between them, so I doubt it was my particular lens. I found it quite lacking in IQ compared to the 180mm L, but also a very different type of lens altogether ( obviously ). Once I bought a 5D3 I had to get a different macro lens anyway for the shorter work, and bought the 100L. Comparing the 2 on the 50D reveals that when tripod mounted, with MLU and a remote trigger the 100 is consistently sharper ( IS turned off ). As I like to hand hold, the result is not even comparable - the IS in the 100 macro L is superb, truly superb and makes the IS in my 24-105 and 70-200mk2 feel not very brilliant ( which they both are ).

But take this for what its worth - the 60mm is 1/2 the price of the 100 L macro, its the same focal length on a crop sensor more or less, has better DOF effectively, and lacks IS. Ya get what ya pay for I think.

If it were able to be mounted on FF cameras, I suspect it would be really shown up on the 5D3, which in spite of its considerably lower pixel density, ( or possibly due to this ) gives me a consistently sharper result than my old 7D did or the 50D which I retained as a spare body. This, of course, it just in my experience with my style of shooting. Others will no doubt argue that they found the opposite, and if thats what they find, then good for them, and we can all be happy

[jex_the_bug]

here are 3 from my first attempt today. i didn't use my 50 1.8 back to front on my 5d like i was going to as i couldn't find my old body cap i needed to make an adapter. so i just taped it back to front on my partners crap tamron 70-300 and used her D40. i think if i could get a set up like this on my 5D and then focus stack i could get a great result.

the first one is a letter from the edge of a $2 coin to show the magnification.

[Bronny]

Thats very impressive

[stic]

You can buy the attachment rings on trademe for $12 each...

They are the ones that attach to the body and the lens screws on reversed...

Gonna get one as i have a 17-85 that no longer auto focuses so might as well use it for something...

[mesodan]

Good stuff.

I tried it once just using sellotape, insanely hard to focus!

[peedee]

Stic, why not get it fixed? Its most likely the ribbon cable - which is not hard to replace.

[stic]

Already replaced it...

And to be honest, the 18-135 is much sharper than the 17-85...