Going beyond 90mm for Macrophotography

[hsolatges]

Hi, I am new to this forum but I have been a reader for years. So I know you are ones I can follow advices from.

I have a Pentax K5. I have been able to get my hand on a Vivitar Serie 1 90mm f2.5 and its 1:1 adaptator. That means beautifulness and true sharpness.

But I want more. I would like to use a close-up ring to go beyond the 90mm. So there is my questions:

Considering the hight quality of the macro lens, should I buy a cheap close-up rings kit and trust my lens for the final sharpness? Or should I buy Canon 500D close-up ring, which is quite expensive, so the quality remains not too damaged?

In other words, does the Canon 500D close-up rings worth its price?

In term of budget, both are possible. But I have others items (Pentax 40mm pencake, flash & tripod) I want to buy so the money which goes here will not go there...

Thank you very much!

Here's my first shot:

[Stagecoach]

Firstly, welcome to CiC. Will be useful if you fill in the member details with your location and a name as we are all friendly here.

Secondly, excellent capture of the mantis one of my favourites to photograph.

And thirdly, have you considered 'extension tubes' as an alternative to a CU lens. The CU lensed will degrade IQ to a certain degree and the advice generally is never buy cheap ones.

There's some good info in the Macro tutorial section here explaining magnification affect along with pros and cons of each method.

Grahame

[hsolatges]

Thanks for your reply. I have updated my profile.
As for the tube solution, I read in a guide (not yours cause I haven't read it yet) that the shorter the focal is, the better tubes work. As I am working with a 90mm (~135mm), I thought tubes shall not be very efficient. But if you tell me it will give me something interesting, sure I willl go with this really cheap and IQ preserving solution!

[jcuknz]

As I recently found out it appears that anything more than the 2 dioptre Close-up lens will not give even reasonable IQ and far better as Grahame suggests you should get extension tubes.
That cheap set of CU lens is rubbish, I've got one , they will degrade what your lens produces.

However it is desirable that you get a set of "auto extension tubes" rather than the cheaper plain tube type. I do not know your Pentax lens but unless it has a manual aperture control as well as the automatics it will likely default to wide open ... fine for focusing but normally you want to be able to use a small aperture for maximum depth of field ... these days of stacking it maybe possible to work wide open but even then most lens are not at their best used wide open.

I did a search of Amazon, Ebay and B&H [ New York ] and unless the camera and lens are M42 compatible Auto extension tube sets are only found on Ebay and pricey like over UKP 100 with single ones less.

But as I say I don't know the Pentax digital cameras/ Vivitar lens but since it is a minor player with digital there seems a scarcity of auto tubes. If the lens has a manual adjustment of aperture and even better the typical Pentax "auto-manual' slider then you 'could' get plain tubes as I have had and used for decades [ my legacy Pentax lenses].

If you search for Grahame's thread you will see excellent results using extension tubes.

I did a quick test with a 4 dioptre B&W Schnieder CU lens which from the name I assumed would be good and also happened to have a set of auto extension tubes. Used on my Panasonic GH2 with the 'older' 14-140mm zoom.... I prefer to use CU lens in principle but not when they do not produce the goods

Both straight out of camera with only resizing and combining in editing. Not a good test but the point it illustrates is the fall off at edges of CU lens which may or maynot be a factor with an object centre frame as opposed to flat object here.



Previously I posted a couple of shots using my usual 2d [500mm] and the new 4d [250mm] CU lens

2d.....

4d..... Bigger and BA

[Stagecoach]

Solatges,

I use a 105 mm 1:1 macro and a set of 3 Kenko tubes giving a max extension if all used together of 68mm. From memory this gives approx 1.8:1 magnification on my crop frame camera (I never remember the formulae) and would be slightly greater for a 90mm FL lens.

I'll look out the exact figures I have from some tests I have done and post the info for you.

Grahame

[jcuknz]

Trouble is I fear Grahame that he maybe has the wrong camera to do this ... you have Canikon for which lots of stuff is made. If he is prepared to live with the less 'auto' set-up and can focus and then close aperture satisfactorilly the option of plain tubes [ non-auto] is a considerable cost saving. AF can be a drawback with macro and manual using a pre-set focus is often the way to get what you want as the point of focus ... aperture control is the chief consideration and my Pentax lenses all have the A-M slider to focus wide open and then close to required f/stop for the shot.

Since he wants to go close there is the other option with Pentax bodies of working with M42 mount things like my Bellows so long as a simple conversion of female M42 to Male Vivitar is available for the front end. [SRB-Griturn.com may have what he needs from the UK]. My bellows gives me 120mm extension

I used to be Pentax in film days but they were slow in coming out with digital and I had choosen bridge cameras instead of DSLR by then.

EDIT ....just read #3 and rest assured extension tubes work just the same with all focal lengths but you just need more extension with the longer lens This was my rig when I had a DSLR and my 135mm lens with bellows and ext tubes kept me back from the subject as photo illustrates

But despite what I have said before there is the option of the 70c CU lens [ plastic from discount store ...

[Stagecoach]

Soltages,

With a set of Kenko extension tubes totalling 68mm extension on a 1:1 105mm used on a 23.6mm width sensor you can fill the frame with 12mm, basically 2:1.

Just took this as I could not find my figures, ignore the poor quality.



The problem as John points out is that the Kenkos with the full contacts are not available for Pentax.

But Vivitar make a set AT-23 which appear to have the same features as the Kenkos that I assume would fit your Vivitar lens and fit to your adaptor? I got the info from here http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1...-tubes-k5.html
the pentax forum.

Grahame

[hsolatges]

Woaw! Soooo much help down there!

Actually, I am working in full manual mode (focus, aperture, speed, iso). My camera is not even able to know which is the lens focal... And I am fine this way.

Is light a real issue with extension tubes? Will the light drop be such that I won't be able to see where I am focusing anymore?

Though, I don't have AF nor Aperture control with my antic Vivitar...

Thanks a lot for your knowledge and advices!

[jcuknz]

To #8 ... if the lens is an antique then surely it has a ring to adjust aperture The camera cannot do it but you can "Man'ually
I only use AF because I am lazy and in pre-digital times I always manually focused by pre-setting the focus and then moving camera in and out to find focus on the screen [ easier I know with a FF film camera but possible if the camera has 'live view' on its LCD???] A monopod makes this easier while providing some support.
The 70c magnifying glass taped to the lens is worth playing with ... one photographer confounded the experts with a series of shots taken with similar gear. It should not be posssible but he did it.

of course with everything on the borderline it helps if you are reasonably competant with a good editing programme.

[Stagecoach]

Solatges,

I have had absolutely no concern or even noticed a light drop when using all three tubes and I'm basing that on looking through the viewfinder.

I'm sure there will be a formulae somewhere that proves it does reduce.

[jcuknz]

Grahame your clever camera compensates Ah Yes Nikon of course read about them .....
I cannot be bothered to find the formulae but I know when you at at 'double extension' [ that is 90mm with our freind's lens**] the aperture is letting in a quarter of the light it lets in at infinity focus setting. So f/8 effectively is an f/16 aperture ... BUT .... the wonderful AE compensates* and saves us having to use the maths as when I started in photography [c.1952 ] .... YEAH I'm an OLD B....

* You just have to keep an eye on the shutter speed doesn't get too long for hand holding which is a reason why people use flash which nicely gets stronger to compensate for the smaller effective aperture as you get the flash closer to the subject as Grahame has demonstrated his rig in recent months.

** or it would if it was a 'simple lens' but it likely has built in focusing so requires less extension to achieve 1:1 or DE.

[IzzieK]

Solatges...I am still learning macro myself and am not really satisfied with any of my shots yet, but I would like to welcome you to this forum. Enjoy our company and do please try to look at other postings and respond to it in some way so we might feel comfortable with you too...

[hsolatges]

Sure, I will as far as I can.

[ajohnw]

I bought the stronger Canon achromatic close up lens recently and sent it back to the people I bought it off. Talking to then later as I visit them from time to time one of the sales person informed me that he thought that it wasn't possible to buy them of Canon but he would try if I wanted. Makes me wonder where they came from.

Results were poor.This could be down to 2 things. Lens not good enough or the close up lens itself. The lens is fine with a Sigma achromatic close up lens on which I would estimate is a bit less than 2 dioptres.

What a number of people do to get past 90-100mm is fit a teleconverter and also sometimes an extension tube as well. I've done this with a 100mm Sigma macro lens. With 1.4x I can't really see any degradation of the image. With a 2x I can. I'm currently shooting M 4/3 and seem to have problems when ever I add an extension tube so have more or less given up on that. I'm not sure why but AF for instant more or less stops functioning as it should. The other problem is that these restrict the focus range. The teleconverter doesn't and that can be handy at times.

I've also taken a lot of macro shots with a 75-300mm zoom lens on M 4/3 fitted with an achromatic close up lens. I can see degradation at the longer end of the zoom range say 250mm plus. I get great working distances and the zoom feature sets the magnification ratio. The drop off is probably down to the zoom lens as like most it does fall off at the long end. How usable it is depends on the final image size.

Forgot to add that there is plenty of information on macro photography on CinC's tutorial pages that are off the home page. This includes calculators in some cases to show what attachments can do. From memory these are based on initial,magnification. If not available it's easy to photograph a rule and relate the results to the sensor size.

On extension tube and for that matter teleconverters the reason for the light level drop off is simple. The image coming out of the back of the lens is expanded so the light level falls proportionally.

John
-

[DanK]

Is light a real issue with extension tubes? Will the light drop be such that I won't be able to see where I am focusing anymore?

Yes, light will decrease. Adding a fill set of 68mm Kenko tubes to your 90mm lens will decrease light by roughly two stops.

The reason is simple geometry. At any given level of illumination, any give area of the subject will reflect a certain amount of light. When you add tubes, you increase magnification by reducing the size of the area on the subject that maps to the total area of the sensor, so you are reducing the amount of light reaching the sensor.

I just tested this out with the closest lens I have, which is a 100mm macro. The effect of adding 68mm of extension was indeed roughly 2 stops.

The solution is simply more light. Outdoors, you should still be able to focus manually. Indoors, I use halogen lamps for macro.

Apart from the issue of electrical connections with your particular body, I think the best way to increase magnification when you are starting with a macro lens is extension tubes or (equivalently) a bellows.

[xpatUSA]

Some time back I was going to extremes (small watch parts) and bought tubes, CU filter, and a Raynox DCR-250 (2.5x) to compare on a Sigma 70mm macro lens.

The DCR-250 was a clear winner for my purposes.

http://www.cameratips.com/recommenda...raynox-dcr-250
.

[ajohnw]

Some time back I was going to extremes (small watch parts) and bought tubes, CU filter, and a Raynox DCR-250 (2.5x) to compare on a Sigma 70mm macro lens.

The DCR-250 was a clear winner for my purposes.

http://www.cameratips.com/recommenda...raynox-dcr-250
.

Actually Ted I'm inclined to feel that my 75-300 plus close up is better than my Sigma 100mm macro lens. Hard call on the Olympus 60mm macro but the working distance is so small. The close up lens was bought to try. A Sigma one that they used to make to go with one of their zoom lenses. They crop up on ebay every now and again. This one is a 55mm fitting. Another smaller one is less powerful. If coated it's BBAR. Unusual for Sigma.

The dsr-250 is quoted as being 8 dioptre. Sounds a little strong to me. Even the dsr-150 is 4.8. I posted a link recently that showed some high powered microphotography using these on a bridge camera on a home made macro rail for taking shots for stacking.

I've just bought a 150 off amazon uk - discontinued by manufacturer so for the UK a little cheaper than usual. Something to play with when it's wet cold and miserable.

John
-

[rpcrowe]

First-off. I will agree that the Vivitar Series One, 90mm f/2.5 macro lens is one of the sharpest lenses that I have ever owned and I suspect at least as sharp as many of today's DSLR macro lenses. It is far better than the Vivitar 90mm f/2.8 macro lens which was available in the same mounts. I am sorry that I sold my Vivitar Series One when I got rid of my Pentax ME and MX film cameras.

It appears that some of the above discussions are using terms interchangeably when they are actually talking about two different items:

1. Close-up filter such as the Canon 500D and other less expensive c/u filters. The advantage of the C/U filter is that is screws on the front of the lens and is very quick to mount. While the Canon model provides very good image quality, I am not absolutely sure that it is up to the quality of your bare Series One Macro lens. There are other less expensive to downright cheap close-up lenses available on the market which will degrade your imagery to one degree or another. If you are interested in only occasional macro work or when traveling, the close-up lens is a decent solution to getting a higher ratio than 1:1 with your macro lens or just getting closer with normal lenses. I don't usually carry a macro lens on my travels but will slip a close-up lens in my kit just in case I want a close-up image...

2. Extension Tubes. These have no optical elements and simply are a way to extend the distance between the optical center of your lens and the sensor, in order to allow the lens to focus at a closer lens to subject distance. Having no optical elements, there "should" be no difference in image quality between the most expensive and least expensive extension tubes. However, there is one glaring difference! Many of the "el-cheapo" adapter rings have no electrical connection between the lens and the camera. It is difficult, if not impossible to shoot with this type of tube and stop down beyond the maximum aperture. Since most macro work is done at smaller apertures, these cheap tubes are almost worthless. Some photographers have "jury-rigged" ways to stop down the lens when using tubes without electrical connections but, I would not consider this type of tube.

The Canon OEM extension tubes are quite expensive but, there are other very good brands such as Kenko which can be had at a lower cost...

I have an older Tamron 90mm f/2.8 AF SP macro lens along with a single Kenko extension tube. I am planning to use the macro lens along with my Canon 1.4x TC (needs at least one extension tube to allow the lens and TC to mesh) but, I have not gotten around to doing this since I have been very busy with dog rescue. I don't know what image ratio to expect with this combination or if the combination will even produce decent results.

BTW: For extreme close up shooting, using an old manual focus lens in front of your normal lens combined with a reverse mounting ring can work quite well at a very low price. It doesn't matter what brand lens you use because it is attached to the camera via the reverse ring. The old style lenses with f/stop rings work best. A shorter focal length will provide greater magnification when using a reverse ring. Do a YouTube search for reverse lens mount macro photography... https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...o+photography+

FINALLY: when we speak of image ratio (ratio of the image size to subject size) we are talking about the image size on the sensor. Since no one (that I know of) displays their images at the sensor size (imagine displaying a 24mm x 36mm image!) the image ratio in the final size image is always greater than the native image ratio in the sensor.

[chauncey]

Allow me to preference this by saying that...I only know Canon!

I use a 180 macro...sometimes, with Kenko extension tubes and sometimes using Canon's 2X teleconverter added into the equation, successfully I might add. There is some shadowing at the corners from the tubes that is easily curable in RAW processors. Needless to say that it is a setup that requires a tripod and manual focusing, I use a tethered scenario with computer controls. Additionally, I would suggest a brace of some kind to aid in lens support due to the length of the long set-up. Something like this...



We all have different types of tripods...right?

[Stagecoach]

Allow me to preference this by saying that...I only know Canon!

I use a 180 macro...sometimes, with Kenko extension tubes and sometimes using Canon's 2X teleconverter added into the equation, successfully I might add. There is some shadowing at the corners from the tubes that is easily curable in RAW processors. Needless to say that it is a setup that requires a tripod and manual focusing, I use a tethered scenario with computer controls. Additionally, I would suggest a brace of some kind to aid in lens support due to the length of the long set-up. Something like this...

We all have different types of tripods...right?

William,

Out of curiosity what is the maximum magnification you can achieve with that rig?