Cheap way into macro photography?

[FredtheLlama]

Afternoon chaps,

Because of the really bad weather we've been getting in the UK, I got to thinking that I should try my hand at indoor macro photography, from the warmth of my kitchen 😉

What are my options with an Olympus OM setup? I've heard of people using reversal rings on older zoom lens' with decent results, has anyone done this?

Cheers

 

[mdarnton]

I used to have the 50/3.5 macro and two one-inch rings, and that covered for everything I did, which was mainly flowers. That's an amazing lens. The problem with reversing rings is focusing, since you lose the helical.

 

[Keith]

Another vote for the 50mm f3.5

Very cheap to buy and as sharp as anything I've ever used.

 

[marcr1230]

A bellows rig on a reversed normal lens works also
I have a bellows in orig box - used it once or twice - it's very functional
Can't imagine it costs much

 

[FredtheLlama]

Thanks guys, I'll have a research about what you've said.

Would extension tubes increase the effect with the 50mm f3.5?

 

[sreed2006]

A reversal ring works well. It can be used by itself, with extension tubes, and with a bellows. The tough part is since the lens is reversed, there is no longer an automatic diaphragm, so it must be closed down manually on the lens.

The best reference I have found is an old book, "The Manual of Close-Up Photography" by Lester Lefkowitz. He has a web site which might provide inspiration: http://lesterlefkowitz.com/

 

[sreed2006]

Thanks guys, I'll have a research about what you've said.

Would extension tubes increase the effect with the 50mm f3.5?

Olympus designed the 50/3.5 to give its best results at 1:2, but says in "The OM System Lens Handbook" that it can be combined with a 25mm extension tube to go to 1:1. The handbook states that the 80/4 Macro lens is better for 1:1. The problem is aberrations that sneak in as magnification increases.

 

[FredtheLlama]

Thanks again.

After a little read about, I think I'll buy a cheap reversal ring and a set of extension tubes to give me a cheap jump into things. If I enjoy it I suppose I could dig deeper into my pockets!

 

[sreed2006]

You can do a lot with just those few items.

There are two types of extension tubes: manual and automatic. I have never found out, but if the manual extension tubes close down the aperture when attached to the lens, then putting a manual extension tube on a reversed lens would give you something of a hood, and solve the problem of how to keep the diaphragm closed down. (Automatic extension tubes will not close down the aperture on a reversed lens, obviously, because they depend on a camera doing that.)

 

[hans voralberg]

Thanks again.

After a little read about, I think I'll buy a cheap reversal ring and a set of extension tubes to give me a cheap jump into things. If I enjoy it I suppose I could dig deeper into my pockets!

I'd say the best investment is extension tube, two will give you very high magnification if not 1:1 with the benefit of the helical. You really need a tripod shooting in the kitchen! so the reversing ring would be annoying as it can't focus on a tripod, and without tripod it will shake a lot.

 

[FredtheLlama]

I'd say the best investment is extension tube, two will give you very high magnification if not 1:1 with the benefit of the helical. You really need a tripod shooting in the kitchen! so the reversing ring would be annoying as it can't focus on a tripod, and without tripod it will shake a lot.

Ah, I hadn't thought of that. I've got a few tripods lying around that I could use.

With the extension tubes, I'm struggling to find manual sets. Every one I find is an auto extension set. Whats the difference between the two? (excuse the ignorance!)

 

[Chris101]

Ah, I hadn't thought of that. I've got a few tripods lying around that I could use.

With the extension tubes, I'm struggling to find manual sets. Every one I find is an auto extension set. Whats the difference between the two? (excuse the ignorance!)

It refers to the iris. Auto tubes stop it down during exposure so you view with the lens wide open. Manual tubes require that you view at aperture (or stop up and down, well manually.)

A 25mm tube gives 1:1 with the 50mm f/3.5.

 

[zuiko85]

In close up photography the first things to consider is 'field size' and 'working distance'.

Field size; What are you going to photograph? How small is it?
OK, lets say it is a postage stamp, a flat, 1 inch square piece of artwork. This means that you will be working at an image to object ratio of 1:1 or close to that. With extention tubes used on a 50mm f1.8 Zuiko lens the total extention would have to be about 41mm with the lens helical making up the final 7~9mm of extention you would need to fill the frame.

At that extention 'working distance' in front of the lens would be about 3 inches. That would be about as much as one would want to push the standard 50 1.8 lens and working aperture for that ratio would probably be set to no more than f8 (with full 50mm extension actual stop is f16 with lens at f8)

With larger field sizes or larger 3D objects the constraints would be less. Extention tubes often come in sets such as 7mm-14mm-36mm and these can be combined, along with the lens own focusing travel to produce a large range of close up photography from 1:10 right on down to 1:1

The advatage of a dedicated macro lens such as the aformentioned 50mm f3.5 Zuiko is that it, in many circumstances, can be used as your standard lens and can focus right down to 1:2, and, with a 25mm extension tube, from 1:2 down to 1:1

Dedicated macro lenses are also designed for working very close and are sharper than the standard 50 f1.8 when working in the close focusing range.

 

[Chris101]

The f/3.5 macro also has an additional f-stop (f/22) for increased depth.

 

[redisburning]

I really like the 50/3.5 but let me allow for a few points about the lens.

the lens has a floating element and is better than the non-macro 50s away from infinity but it is actually optimized for infinity and better there than the non-macro 50s (source: Modern Photography tests) in terms of resolution.

it is a 5 element design similar to the later 55/3.5 micro-nikkors. having tested a few copies of these lenses, I concluded the Nikkor to be a bit better in terms of low frequency contrast but the Olympus to be stronger across the field. There was not enough difference to prefer one over the other for light macro work though the Nikon costs about half as much. for general shooting and for build, I much prefer the Olympus.

you really want to avoid specular highlights when stopped down. other than that, this lens has my favorite OoF rendering of ANY lens I've ever used although the 50/2 macro and Zeiss' 50MP are pretty good too in their own, very different ways.

what you really want is a tokina or vivitar series 1 90/2.5 in OM mount for the increased working distance IMO. I think both are worth having, and I like the 50/3.5 a LOT more, but reality is reality and for "I only want to shoot macro with this lens" work 90-100mm is more useful I have found. and this is coming from a guy who owns 6 50-60mm macro lenses and counts them as his 6 favorite lenses.

 

[btgc]

Speaking of cheap, what do you say about 7-element converters, going to 1:1 magnification? I have Panagor make and it has helped me to spend some time in a world I normally don't spend much attention to.

 

[TXForester]

Since you want to go cheap, I'd say extension tubes. I have an old set of Vivitar tubes in 12, 20, and 36mm. Each can be used alone or any combo of two or all three. I also have the 50/3.5 macro, but you won't need it if you want to go cheap. Extension tubes can work with any lens to get closer. Use them with short telephotos lenses to get close ups of insects that will fly away if you get within the shooting distances that we normally think of as close up and macro. I've even used them with moderate to long telephotos on lizards or other small creatures.

 

[Pioneer]

The best is a nice macro lens if you can find one. But extension tubes are very inexpensive and work very well. For some cameras diopter lenses are inexpensive options as well.

The extension tubes were the very first accessory I picked up for my old K1000. I took a lot of beautiful close up pictures with those extension tubes and my old 50/2 lens.

The very next accessory was an old Vivitar 2400 flash which I used primarily with a PC cord for my close up pictures. It came with a bunch of colored filters to attach over the top of the flash. 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

Bellows (BPM if you can find them) + enlarger lens.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Noll]

Another vote for the OM 50mm f3.5 macro. KEH has them for less than $60 these days. The OM extension tube was maybe another $15. Can't beat it in the macro world!

I scan my B&W negatives with this lens and an Panasonic G3, and I can see no distortion or curvature of field (of course, this is cropped from full-frame FOV). I find this amazing.

My copy is noticeably soft at f3.5 when I shoot it on m4/3 digital and use 100% live view. Stopped down to f5.6 -11 it is scathingly sharp. I like f8 best for negative/slide scanning.

The photos I posted in this thread were taken with this lens:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138560