March 03, 2015, 12:15:56 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Pinchers of Peril

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
Photography Technique / Re: shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro
« on: January 20, 2014, 04:30:03 PM »
Hi Pinchers of Peril.
I have the reverse mount adaptor that fits a lens straight to the body, cost a couple of quid from HK for a trial, there are adaptors with power to the lens via a cord and body simulator ring, thes are very expensive! My basic reverser did highlight the shallow DOF with a 17-85 wide open, I tried a picture of the carpet fibres, DOF so thin that the cats whisker on the carpet was in focus, the tips of the carpet fibres weren't. I can see the merit of getting a manual lens of fixed focal length to be able to do this better.
I also have some fairly cheap extension tubes, came as a set, wih metal mounts and plastic barrels with electrical contacts. I have had better success with these as there is a bit more DOF available, but as they were a Christmas present I was forbidden from getting out all my gear for the test run Christmas day. So I ended up hand holding the test shots and haven't had the time to find a subject and set up properly for a decent test yet.
Conclusion, if I had a manual lens I probably would not have bought the extension tubes, I think the tubes make for easier macro work so far. My limited experience would suggest that the two methods have very different results regarding magnification, seemed much greater on the reversed lens, though this may be a function of the lens I tried?

Cheers Graham.

Yeah I think I might go the extender route and see how that goes.  It seems a little more practical.

Photography Technique / Re: shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro
« on: January 20, 2014, 04:29:14 PM »
You can always get an old cheap 35-80 kit lens and pop off the front element.

Then you have a crazy macro zoom! You can find these lenses for next to nothing.

wow that is crazy!  I hadn't heard about this before.  Would be fun to try if I could find the lens for super cheap.

Photography Technique / Re: shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro
« on: January 13, 2014, 08:59:11 AM »
Wow, those are pretty impressive macro shots.

Photography Technique / Re: shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro
« on: January 08, 2014, 04:34:30 PM »
Thanks mrzero, yeah I'm going to look into the canon extension tubes (definately must cheaper than a "real" macro lens).

Photography Technique / Re: shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro
« on: January 08, 2014, 11:30:44 AM »
If you have an 18-55 that you want to use, all you need to buy is a 52mm-58mm reversing ring.  Do the stop-down trick (mount the 18-55, set your desired aperture, press and hold the DOF button, then remove the lens I believe), then do the reverse mount on your 40mm.

If you are just looking for cheap macro fun, I know some folks use extension tubes with the 40mm (and possibly the 50mm 1.4) that you already have.  If you buy the good Canon tubes (possibly also Kenko) you can also use them on your L zooms as well for closer focusing.  The cheaper ones work theoretically but I believe some folks have had problems with the weight causing them to flex.  I have the 100mm macro but I am planning on adding the extension tubes to my 40mm for that purpose.

Thanks for the reply.  What would be the benefit of mounting the reversed lens to the 40mm vs directly to the camera?  Yeah I will have to looks into extension tubes as well.  Any suggestions of a good set of extension tubes to use for the 40mm?  Thanks for the tip about using the DOF button, I think I had read that as a hack to get around lenses that don't have manual aperature rings.

Photography Technique / Re: shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro
« on: January 08, 2014, 09:07:19 AM »
Thanks for the reply.  Yeah I was curious about focusing and whether I could use the focus ring or just have to move the camera.  I imagine it would be best to use live view as well since you can zoom in to verify focusing.  I have a 5dIII so I can't really put any of those fancy focusing screens in.  I'll have to see if I can find some old manual lenses.  I think probably the reason I was reading a bunch of stuff about people using the 18-55 is because they were showing that it is not a "useless kit lens" and you can actually do something pretty cool with it (even if there are better lenses suited for this).

Photography Technique / shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro
« on: January 07, 2014, 11:20:56 PM »
Hey everybody,
     I have read about people reverse mounting their lenses for macro work.  I am interested in getting into some macro stuff but don't really want to spend the money to get a "proper" macro lens so I was wondering if any of you guys had experience with this.  If so what do you recommend as far as reverse lens mounts and what lenses are you using?  Any tips on technique (I realize there is obviously no autofocus or metering when the lens is mounted this way).  I have read that a lot of people will use cheaper kit lenses (18-55) and get pretty good results with that.  I'd feel much more comfortable using a kit lens as the rear element would just be totally exposed when shooting this way.  Thanks.

Lenses / Re: I'm done - I have all the lenses I need
« on: December 26, 2013, 05:47:20 PM »
Okay, I crumbled.  I LOVED my 50 f/1.2 and missed it terribly so I just bought another one.  The good news is that with the rebate, it becomes a net/net purchase vs. my eBay sale :)

In other news, I strongly predict that the 50 f/1.2 II will be announced tomorrow :o

Ha ha... that's hilarious that the thread you started saying that you were done with lenses, ends with you buying a new lens.  I know the feeling.  Once my lens collection was where i wanted it to be, I got the "I should get a Fuji x100s" itch because it looks so cool ha ha.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Grab a Pancake! $129 at B&H Photo
« on: December 20, 2013, 11:01:58 AM »
This lens is so awesome.  It's really great when you want to have a smaller set up.  I sold my old 35 f2 (not the IS version) and got this lens instead and I am so happy that I did.  I don't know if I just have a good copy or what, but even wide open this thing is really sharp with good contrast and saturation.  If you have any desire to get it, then at $129 you totally should.  Go look at the 40mm gallery in the forum here... some pretty awesome pics.

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D3: is shutter dying?
« on: December 20, 2013, 10:52:18 AM »
Thanks for posting this question.  I've seen the same thing when taking some indoor photos and it's good to know the reason.

Software & Accessories / Re: LCD screen protector for Mark5dIII?
« on: December 18, 2013, 05:28:22 PM »
No.  I'm not necessarily super rough with my equipment, but I don't baby it either.  I've never had a problem with scratches on the lcd screens on any of the dslrs cameras that I've owned.  That being said, I have seen pictures of other people with scratched lcds.  Honestly though I hate lcd sceen protectors, they annoy me so maybe I am biased. 

Lenses / Re: Should I choose the 70-200 2.8 II?
« on: December 18, 2013, 05:01:46 PM »
This lens is freaking awesome.  Everybody likes to talk about the weight and it is pretty heavy, but honestly it balances out the 5dIII really well.  Just keep using it and your arms will get strong and then you can work your way up to a 600mm and it'll be nothin'

Pricewatch Deals / Re: EOS Rebel SL1 w/18-55 IS STM $460
« on: December 14, 2013, 09:13:19 PM »
When I click on the link, I'm not seeing the price listed here

Lenses / Re: Dropped 16-35L II
« on: December 12, 2013, 05:16:47 PM »
This post hurts my heart. 

Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 11, 2013, 01:27:34 PM »
My first digital camera was a Sony DSC S75 point and shoot.  The front of the camera had threads on it so you could add attachments.  I was so excited and bought a "fish eye attachement" and a "2X telephoto" attachment.  The photos actually looked pretty good on the 1 inch lcd on the back of the camera, but not so much on my computer screen.  When I downloaded them to my computer the image quality was so negatively affected that it looked like I had smeared a thin layer of vaseline on the lens. 

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10