Reverse-Macro Imaging

[John Koerner]

Nice, but ou have to work with rather short object - lens distance.

Why not use a dedicated macro lens??

Here is an example of what I meant by greater than 1:1.

The following image is a full 1:1 macro image, taken with a "dedicated macro lens," the Voigtländer 125mm f2.5 Apo-Lanthar.

(It is actually a stacked shot of 5 images).

[John Koerner]

Now, here is a shot of the same spider, on the same leaf, taken at 2:1 (with a 20mm lens, reversed).

[John Koerner]

Standard 1:1 macro lenses can't get you as close as you sometimes need to be.

(In truth, I should have taken more images to stack, as more of the spider would be in focus.)

[John Koerner]

Look into the Olympus OM range. They have two very interesting lenses, viz. 20/2 and 38/2.8. both can easily  be adapted to other brands simply by swapping the bayonet mount. The lenses are very compact and produce excellent quality images. Not the cheapest approach, but saves a lot of hassle.

For high magnifications there is no way to avoid extensive lengths of bellows or similar. Doing > 5X under field conditions verges on madness as you hardly can observe your target and the limited field of view and even more minuscule depth of field give no clue to the actual environment anyway.

The 38 mm Olympus is doable up to around 5X with an added extension tube, though. but count on many misses and few keepers.

This is my sample of the 38/2.8 adapted for Nikon. It has a bespoke extension tube (modified from Olympus) with CPU contacts to allow full metering with any Nikon camera. I have also fitted a narrow lens shade to cut off stray light which otherwise is a hassle and easily contaminates image contrast.

Thanks for the tips

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Here is another device, capable of going to 10X, and if one is unlimited by battery power or card storage, and has ancillary focusing light, and is intent upon doing a mission near impossible, can be used outdoors although I would definitively not recommend this.

The lens is a Canon Macro lens 20 mm f/3.5 on a rig of sturdy extension tubes and a focusing helicoid. Do note there is a filter drawer near the front end of the rig, as I also use this for UV photography.

Depending on the actual shooting conditions and camera in use, I can replace some of the extension with PN-11 to get a tripod mounting ring.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

An example of photomacrography with the 20 mm Canon lens. A female catkin of Hazel Corylus avellana, captured at 12 X.

[BW]

Excuse me for asking, but have you taken this picture outside? I couldn't see this happening in regards to wind.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Illustrating an earlier point, Børge. This is not doable outdoors. At least not with the technique used.

[BW]

Thats good to hear! I thought there were something terrible wrong with my technique

[John Koerner]

Thats good to hear! I thought there were something terrible wrong with my technique

Yet the 12x flower photo illustrates another problem: getting the flash right.

I am still struggling with this. Bjørn's photo show blown highlights, completely whited-out elements, and somewhat unnatural colors (from the flash), rather than a soft, pastel natural light.

In my first two images, on the preceding page, I was able to omit the blown highlights through my use of diffuser on the flash, but my colors came out wrong, unnatural, and weren't was vivid (in the 2nd photo) as they were in the 1st photo (taken in 100% natural light).

Ultra-macro often requires the use of flash, especially passed 2x-3x magnification. As you mention, the movement of wind/subjects almost demands flash (which changes the light/color).

I know some people who have perfected their flash/diffuser combinations in their extreme macro efforts, achieving an even, natural color, but I am no where near perfecting my own flash techniques yet.

Working on it though

[richardHaw]

this is my setup. pretty simple, just a PB-4 bellows unit with a 20mm on the reverse. i actually find that the 28mm-35mm FL works better for me. the 50mm EL-Nikkor is also a great lens for this. i am currently building a contraption for this

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Cannot see the problems you allude to. No blown highlights on the 12X image seen on my calibrated monitor ?? Colours are very accurate.

Besides, this is a scan from film. 120-film in fact, as I used a 6x9 camera and the "open flash" technique.

[John Koerner]

Cannot see the problems you allude to. No blown highlights on the 12X image seen on my calibrated monitor ?? Colours are very accurate.

All of the white "dots" are blown highlights to my eye (from the left side of the base, across all petals).

I am assuming those are water drops reflecting light. (in natural light, you can often see through the water drops, and see the plant beneath it, whereas the flash use just turned them into white spots).

Flash almost always changes the color, color-calibrated monitor or not.

To illustrate the point, take any 2 photographs you want, 1 in natural light, the other with a flash, and the colors in the images will look very different.

It takes heavy, heavy diffuser use to create no reflections at all with flash use (I am still trying to get it right  )

Besides, this is a scan from film. 120-film in fact, as I used a 6x9 camera and the "open flash" technique.

Thanks for the info.

[John Koerner]

this is my setup. pretty simple, just a PB-4 bellows unit with a 20mm on the reverse. i actually find that the 28mm-35mm FL works better for me. the 50mm EL-Nikkor is also a great lens for this. i am currently building a contraption for this

Very nice.

I am working on a bellows unit/table also.

I am also trying to work on a "field portable" bellows system.

(Still need to get more pieces to the puzzle for both.)

Share some of the images from this, would love to see them

[John Koerner]

All of the white "dots" are blown highlights to my eye (from the left side of the base, across all petals).

I am assuming those are water drops reflecting light. (In soft natural light, you can often see through the water drops, and see the plant beneath it, whereas the flash use just turned the water drops into white spots on your image.)

Even without blown highlights, flash almost always changes the color, color-calibrated monitor or not.

To illustrate the point, take any 2 photographs you want, 1 in natural light, the other with a flash, and the colors in the images will look very different.

It takes heavy, heavy diffuser use to create no reflections at all with flash use (I am still trying to get it right  )



Thanks for the info.