shooting reverse mounted lenses for macro

[Pinchers of Peril]

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.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

First, don't use a modern AF lens which has electronic aperture. You will want the aperture wide open for focusing, but stopped down for the badly needed depth of field. Using a 18-55mm EF-s for a reverse macro is about the worst thing I could imagine.


Its best to use a old manual lens like a 50mm M42 which will stop down when you push the pin in on the rear. A M42 to Canon adapter will hold the pin down for you, allowing you to adjust the aperture. The adapter will also let you use the lens as a normal lens on your camera. Similar adapters are available for Nikon lenses which push the aperture lever into place.

A cheap reverse adapter is available at Amazon. Get one that matches the front threads on the lens you pick, or plan to buy a set of step up or step down adapters.

The cost of the whole setup might vary, if you have access to a old 50-85mm lens, see if you can use it. Don't use a zoom, they are a poor choice.

You will need to focus by moving the camera towards or away from the subject, the focus ring is of little use. Hopefully you can rig up something to do that.

This means you need:
1. Reverse Adapter
2. Manual Lens
3. Device for holding the aperture lever, pin, or whatever into a position that will allow the aperture to stop down as you rotate the aperture ring.
4. Adapter rings for the front threads as required.
5. Macro head for a tripod that lets you move the camera and lens toward or away from the subject in very fine increments.

Good Luck. (You will want the Macro head with a regular macro lens as well, so consider rigging up something homemade or get a cheap one to start.)

 

[Pinchers of Peril]

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).

 

[mrzero]

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.

 

[Pinchers of Peril]

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.

 

[mrzero]

What would be the benefit of mounting the reversed lens to the 40mm vs directly to the camera?

I don't know, honestly. In fact, the DOF locking might only be necessary/optimal when you are mounting the reversed lens directly to the body. There are a ton of articles about reversed lens macro on the internet. You might be able to keep autofocus on the first lens when you are stacking two, and maybe auto aperture as well.

For your situation, I would suggest going for the Canon brand extension tubes, so you could use them on your L zooms. Kenko sells a set of fully electronic tubes that many swear by, but folks with heavy lenses have reported sometimes they can flex under the weight and cause the electronic contacts to lose their connection. I don't own either set, yet, this is just my view from reading on here and preparing my roadmap in my head. There are a ton of cheap ($20) extension tubes, but those do not have any electronic contacts. This causes you to lose autofocus and aperture, requiring the DOF-stopdown technique and manual focus. You would also lose the ability to manual focus on the 40mm, however, because it is focus-by-wire and that requires camera power.

Like I said, I bought the 100mm non-L macro, so I haven't really used any of these techniques.

 

[Pinchers of Peril]

Thanks mrzero, yeah I'm going to look into the canon extension tubes (definately must cheaper than a "real" macro lens).

 

[IMG_0001]

My take for macro on the cheap was to buy an old pentax macro bellow in m42 mount from ebay. If you look for the right model, it comes with an integrated focusing rail. The one I bought came with a novoflex 105mm f4 macro lens for less than 200 dollars. the kit I bought was a kit for medical photography built in the 70s. The only thing required is an m42 to eos adapter and you are set. If you are ready to pay more, you can also find bellows with tilt shift capabilities which make awesome focus plane effect akin to those from large format photographic chambers.

From my understanding, another advantage of the m42 mount is that many relatively inexpensive enlarger lenses from the film era are also in this mount and that those were optimized for high magnification like macro lenses.

Bear in mind that such a setup is slow to operate and although I've seen some great insects shots taken with those, I've found it more suited to static subjects. Reversed lens and macro tubes are not really faster though.

Best regards.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

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.

While the DOF trick works to fix the aperture, and you can set it at f/11 - f/16 as you would usually use for macro, there is not enough light to get good focus. You want to focus with the aperture wide open and then stop down. That's pretty difficult, putting the lens off an on a different camera to control the aperture. The focus may get hosed while you are doing this. Just get a manual lens. You can often find a old 35mm film camera with manual aperture for a few dollars on craigslist.

 

[surapon]

Dear Friend, Mr. Pinchers of Peril
I use to use this " Reverse Ring for Macro" , so long ago----Yes, Cheap and you can use most of the Lens that you already have as long as WIDE ANGLE LENSES, AND YOU CAN SWITCH TO MANUAL FOCUS operation.
After I read your post, I use almost 2 hours to find "the 77 mm. Macro Coupler Ring" in my box some where.
And After I find, I use my Canon 5D MK II, Canon EF 24-70 mm ( 77 mm Filter) + Sigma 50 mm . F/ 1.4 ( 77 mm. Filter) and Shoot this Computer Chip for you to see.
The Black round ring of the Photos are the Only Detail that the sensor allow from This Two Lens on FF Sensor.
The Full Detail photos are the Crop Pictures.
Yes, I set Manual Mode at Camera, And Set Manual Focus at both Lenses( at Minimum distant / Macro distant).
At Camera Set F = 13.0, ISO = 400 ( although in the bright sun shine), SS = 1/ 250 Sec, Hand held Shooting---Lazy Surapon, Which If I use Tripods, The Photos will be 1000 time sharper---Ha, Ha, Ha.
Yes, The First time of Shooting, I set F = 16, BUT TOO DARK/ Under Exposure, That why, I reset to F = 13 = Perfected Exposure.
Enjoy.
Surapon

PS. I just move the Camera in and out ( 1-1.5 Inches) from the Computer chip, until sharper image on Viewfinder, and press the shutter.

 

[surapon]

The Full Detail photos are the Crop Pictures.
Yes, I set Manual Mode at Camera, And Set Manual Focus at both Lenses( at Minimum distant / Macro distant).

 

[surapon]

The Full Detail photos are the Crop Pictures.
Yes, I set Manual Mode at Camera, And Set Manual Focus at both Lenses( at Minimum distant / Macro distant).
Enjoy
Have a great Sunday afternoon.
Surapon

 

[Pinchers of Peril]

Wow, those are pretty impressive macro shots.

 

[surapon]

Wow, those are pretty impressive macro shots.

Thanks, Dear Pinchers of Peril.
Sorry, Not Sharp Photos, Because Just Hand Held Shooting , Not With the Tripods and the Slider, Which will be 100 time sharper.
Nice to talk to you, Enjoy shooting with the " Reverse Mounted Lens Methods"
Surapon

 

[Valvebounce]

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.

 

[pdirestajr]

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.

http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2011/02/cheap-macro-with-35-80mm-lens.html?m=1

 

[Pinchers of Peril]

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.

http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2011/02/cheap-macro-with-35-80mm-lens.html?m=1

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.

 

[Pinchers of Peril]

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.