Best way to greater magnification for macro work

[Martin Zimelka]

Hi all.

I have a Zeiss MP 100/2 ZF, which only has a maximum magnification of 1:2.
I have an option to buy an Nikon PN11 extension tube, but wanted to know whether I could get good results with the following two options...

1)D810 + Zeiss 100/2 + reversed 50mm 1.8D
2)D810 + reversed Zeiss 35/2 ZF

Has anyone tried these or similar combinations? I don't want to reverse mount the 35/2 on the 100/2 since I feel combination will apply too much torque on the D810 lens mount.

[Les Olson]

You will get more magnification with reverse mounting than with extension tubes, but reverse mounting is much harder to work with. 

If you reverse mount a lens of focal length X onto a lens of focal length Y which is on the camera, the magnification is Y/X.  If you reverse mount a lens directly on the camera, the shorter the focal length, the greater the magnification.  The catch is that the working distance is very short, which can make it hard to get light on the subject.  You have to focus by physically moving the camera, and with the shallow DoF that is demanding to do accurately.  I have never tried a 35mm, but I have found that hand-holding a reversed 50mm is OK and a reversed 28 is difficult; a reversed 24mm is maddening.  I have never tried it on a proper macro apparatus.   

My two cents worth is that reverse mounting is great if you just feel like messing about with lenses, and don't mind a low - or very low - proportion of in-focus shots, but it is not a good technique if you are in a hurry.

     

[richardHaw]

did this some years ago and everything gets more complicated because you have to use focus stacking
at high magnifications, you lose an incredible amount of DOF.

the best for me was to use a EL-Nikkor with bellows

[Martin Zimelka]

Thanks for the input...

I want to achieve a high magnification to take images of small inanimate objects, and I imagine 2x is a good starting point.
The cheapest option for me is to simply start with option 1, and get a $5 coupling ring and a step down ring in order to reverse mount my 50mm to my 100 macro.
Depending on how I take to this type of macro work, I'll decide to buy a rail and do focus stacking. The subjects will most likely be ones collected outside and then brought indoors.

But then something in me is wondering whether I should get a rail first and progress later with higher magnifications...

[Jack Dahlgren]

Thanks for the input...

I want to achieve a high magnification to take images of small inanimate objects, and I imagine 2x is a good starting point.

Depending on how I take to this type of macro work, I'll decide to buy a rail and do focus stacking. The subjects will most likely be ones collected outside and then brought indoors.

But then something in me is wondering whether I should get a rail first and progress later with higher magnifications...

Nikon PB4 is both rail and bellows. Your 35mm should give you much more than 2x mounted on it.

[pluton]

Here's what it looks like with the ZF 100/2 and a reversed 50/1.8 Ai on the front, first with the ZF100 set at infinity, second w/ the ZF at minimum focus distance.  ZF 100 at f/16, 50/1.8 Ai wide open.
I think this 50-on-the-front gag might work better with a 105/4 Micro-Nikkor...

[Bruno Schroder]

I think you will not avoid getting a rail or a bellows. The DOF is too small for proper focusing without one. If you are not in a hurry, try getting the old Olympus rail on eBay. They are very sturdy and precise, unlike the Chinese knockoffs. If you choose for the below, as Richard says, for me it is an EL-Nikkor on PB-4 or PB-6. They are really affordable and really good.

[Oskar O]

For 2x and beyond, your best bet is to reverse a 50 mm enlarger lens and either using tubes or bellows extend it far enough. They are small lenses with manual apertures, so handling is easy and they don't shade the subject. They are also optimized for closeups. An El-Nikkor 50/2.8 is cheap, easy to obtain and a good starting point.

Another option is to reverse a lens in front of your 100 mm, but it can be tricky to find a good lens to reverse. The Internet may offer some clues for combinations.

Extending the 100 mm lens will work well until 1:1, but the extension gets unwieldy when trying to get beyond that; the Zeiss 100 mm is a large lens and a relatively long focal length.

No idea how well a reversed Zeiss 35/2 will work, the big downside it that it is relatively large, making handling harder and it's not optimized for closeups.

At 2x, you will need a rail or excellent hand holding technique 

[Roland Vink]

I think the PN-11 would be a useful option for increasing magnification. With this tube you will achieve magnification ratios between roughly 1:2 - 1:1.

Note that for magnifications nearer the 1:2 end (where the focus ring is set near infinity) the floating elements configured for distance shooting, not macro, so you are likely to encounter some loss of quality such as field curvature, especially towards the edge of the frame. This may not be a problem in practice - macro subjects are usually near the center of the frame and the outer portions of the image are out of focus anyway. Also, macro shooting usually requires stopping well down for depth of field, which largely cures the problem anyway. As you focus closer towards 1:1, the floating elements configure more for closeup shooting, so quality improves. The Nikon AIS 105/2.8 micro is a similar - it is also a 1:2 macro lens with floating elements, and requires the PN-11 for 1:1. It has markings on the barrel showing the recommended aperture to avoid aberrations, starting at f/11 near 1:2 and gradually opening up to f/2.8 towards 1:1.

An advantage of the PN-11 is the built-in rotating tripod mount. When working from a tripod, this this gives you a much better balanced setup and allows you to switch from horizontal to vertical framing while staying on target.

I often use the PN-11 with my AF-D 105/2.8 micro, with this combination I can get magnifications up to about 1.6x life size.

If you want to shoot only a little beyond 1:2, the 27.5mm PK-13 extension tube is worth considering. With this tube you will get magnifications from about 1:4 to 3:4. This is a useful range for subjects such as flowers which are not too small. In the range from 1:2 to 3:4 the lens will be extended further, better optimised for macro shooting than using the PN-11 at the same magnification, so you should expect better IQ.

[benveniste]

To get to 2x with the Zeiss, the first thing I'd try is a combination of the Raynox DCR-250 close-up lens and something like a PK-13.   Using Bill Claff's simple calculator I come up with 2.17x with that combination.  Here's an example where I reversed a 50mm onto a 105mm VR, but it's at roughly 3.5x:

[Martin Zimelka]

Super, thanks everyone.
That was really useful.

[David H. Hartman]

...the best for me was to use a EL-Nikkor with bellows

+1

Think of the distances in an enlarger from the negative carrier to the film. OK, that may not work for some. Anyway if an enlarging lens is designed for 4x to 10x enlargement then reversing it may give good results at 4:1 to 10:1 macro. If a lens is totally symmetrical reversing will make no difference. If the lens is almost symmetrical reversing may or may not help or it might help marginally.  The subject distance will be about the same as the distances inside the enlarger. The exact subject distance is controlled by the principle points in the optical design and the degree of bellows or extension tube displacement from the image sensor. Exact distances aren't easy to know unless you do some math and have an accurate schematic of the lens design and the right formulas.

When using a bellows or extension tube always use a genuine Nikon product because the air inside is pure Nikon and superior to other brands!

OK, some lenses work well with tubes and bellows and others don't. When moving away from the parameters the lens was designed for the image quality may decline slowly or more rapidly. Not having optical glass in the device is no guaranty of superior performance.

My suggestion is test and find out what works and what doesn't.

Dave Hartman 

One can always buy expensive true macro lenses.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

First, define the magnification you desire. Then, work out the easiest way to get there in terms of optical components. Some times an inexpensive cine lens of 16 to 25 mm focal length, and a bellows will suffice. It is as a general rule beneficial to keep to lenses with small image circles and quite narrow field of view as these measures reduce the often severe issue of hot spots or flare.

The ever present issues of vibration, reduced depth of field, diffraction, and loss of contrast cannot be avoided, but at least they can be kept under control for field work if primary magnifications are less than 2-3 X. Added illumination is almost always required and of course is easily set up in a studio. For the field, a ring flash solves many problems and adds a few of its own. The exact same applies to focus stacking.

This fly eye is 16X with a 25 mm lens and a lowly D1. No focus stacking at that time.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

This is a setup for high magnification, up to ~6X, that is robust enough to be used in the field. Basically the system comprises an Olympus OM 38 mm f/2.8 lens head, and two sets of metal Olympus extension tubes in a rugged construction that really can stand up to field challenges (the 65-115mm variable extension tube is on the camera, the shorter 20mm unit is the one with a red rear cap).  For indoor and studio work, the Nikon PB-4 Bellows reigns supreme, but it is too awkward and vulnerable to use for many field applications including situations with inclement weather.

I have swapped rear bayonets for Nikon F mounts and added the ubiquitous CPU chips, otherwise the items are as they came off the Olympus production lines some twenty years ago. The larger adapter ring on front of the lens is for the SB-21 ring flash when I require it. The entire outfit is placed on a 'macro rail', in this case a Novoflex that I have used now for 45+ years. It is going on stronger than myself

[richardHaw]

in case focus stacking is required or desired, there is another way to take a series of photos to stack. instead of moving the camera setup back and forth, you can move your subject instead. this will not apply to lighter things but if you are shooting coins and other stuff then this is also viable