Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Reverse-Lens for Macro

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Queenstown
    Posts
    75

    Default Reverse-Lens for Macro

    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.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Dunedin, NZ
    Posts
    905

    Default

    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.
    Canon 6D Gripped | Canon 24-70 f2.8 L ii | Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM | Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM | Gitzo Basalt Explorer 3 | Canon Speedlite 600EX's ST-E3-RT| Lightroom 5 |

  3. #3

    Default

    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).
    Canon 5DmkII, 400L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 24mmf3.5 TS-E, Canon 70-200f2.8L, Tamron 90mm SP AF Di f2.8 Macro, Sigma 50mmf1.4 EX HSM, Nissin Di866 flash, Manfrotto 190xprob & Markins Q3t head, Lee filters, Lowepro Flipside 400AW, Yong Nuo rf 602 triggers.


  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    4,649

    Default

    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.
    Canon > 5DIII | 17-40 L | 35 L | 24-105 L | 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L | 100 L | 400 f/2.8 IS II L | 600 EX-RT | 1.4x TC III | 2x TC III

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Queenstown
    Posts
    75

    Default

    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.


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    844

    Default

    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).

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    153

    Default

    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.

  8. #8

    Default

    efs 60 should be as good as the 100L for IQ, just a lot closer MFD for 1:1
    Canon 5DmkII, 400L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 24mmf3.5 TS-E, Canon 70-200f2.8L, Tamron 90mm SP AF Di f2.8 Macro, Sigma 50mmf1.4 EX HSM, Nissin Di866 flash, Manfrotto 190xprob & Markins Q3t head, Lee filters, Lowepro Flipside 400AW, Yong Nuo rf 602 triggers.


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rjd View Post
    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

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Queenstown
    Posts
    75

    Default

    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.


    Name:  DSC_0064.jpg
Views: 193
Size:  652.1 KB
    Name:  DSC_0081.jpg
Views: 182
Size:  516.6 KB
    Name:  DSC_0089.jpg
Views: 213
Size:  584.6 KB

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lawrence, South Otago
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Thats very impressive
    Canon 7d, 70-300mm 4-5.6L series lens, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

  12. #12
    stic Guest

    Default

    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...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Dubai/Waikato
    Posts
    4,515

    Default

    Good stuff.

    I tried it once just using sellotape, insanely hard to focus!
    Canon 5DIII | 7D | 16-35mm f2.8L II | 17-40mm f4L | 24mm f1.4L II | 50mm f1.2L | 85mm f1.2L II | 70-200mm f2.8L II | 300mm f2.8L IS II | 1.4x III | 2x III | 580EX II

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    153

    Default

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

  15. #15
    stic Guest

    Default

    Already replaced it...

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

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •