Nikon PB-6 Modular Bellows System

[John Koerner]

I have painstakingly collected mint components of every aspect of the Nikon PB-6 Modular Bellows system, and this is the first image I have tried to take with it, dipping my "toe" in the water, so-to-speak.

This tiny crab spider is about 7mm (1/4") wide: she'd fit on your pinky fingernail
I used a Nikon D810 + Nikkor AI-S 50mm f/1.2, reversed, on the PB-6 @ an approximate reproduction ratio of 4:1. (It is a 23-image stack.)

It is really not that high-mag, compared to what the full system is capable of, but again I am just dipping my toe in the water.

BTW, this is a pregnant Mecaphesa sp. of Crab Spider, who is missing her right front leg

I am thrilled with the results and handling of the PB-6 Bellows, but know that I can do better, as I grow accustomed to it.

Despite the magnification, I did not use any flash at all. Nor was it natural light. I have been working on my studio lighting, as I don't like the look of "flash dots." I have been working with reverse-lenses in-studio and am getting my lighting to where (I think) it looks like a natural-light shot taken outside, no flash. (I use live specimens only, nothing dead.)

Would appreciate any constructive criticism, thanks.

Jack

[Andrew]

Very well done!!

[John Koerner]

Thank you. It is very difficult to stack live subjects, but she cooperated nicely.

I may get rid of 3 AI-S primes, after this (which I had incrementally-selected for various reverse magnifications), and just keep 1 lens and use the bellows.

It is more convenient than I had imagined, and the results are very nice.

[pluton]

Fabulous work, but one suggestion:  The lighting is even, soft, without annoying specular highlights, but appears to come from no particular direction or side of the subject.  Maybe from the top and behind, if I had to guess...but that could be just the lighter color of the abdomen attracting my eye.
I'd like to see a bit more "directionality" in the lighting. A feeling that the light is coming from somewhere.  That means some shadows may be introduced, but to have the light directional AND have the viewer still feel that they are seeing everything: That is the art.

[pluton]

One question:  If you dispose of the small AiS primes, does that mean you are turning away from field work?  I have always been amazed at what you were achieving in the field, and most photographers are loathe to take a bellows rig out into the field.

[John Koerner]

Fabulous work, but one suggestion:  The lighting is even, soft, without annoying specular highlights, but appears to come from no particular direction or side of the subject.  Maybe from the top and behind, if I had to guess...but that could be just the lighter color of the abdomen attracting my eye.

Thank you.

I appreciate your observations, also. I had 4 diffused Jansjö LED Worklights over the setup, at various points, precisely to remove any evidence of specular highlights.

At this level of magnification, the traditional macro-flash (or even diffused camera flash) leaves such highlights. I positioned 4 diffused LED lights on each side of the subject, in front: 2 overhead slightly, 2 in front of slightly. Although I have 2 additional rear LEDs (for 6 total), I did not use the last 2, because (as you pointed out) the abdomen is already lighter than the carapace, and hence didn't need any additional illumination.

I'd like to see a bit more "directionality" in the lighting. A feeling that the light is coming from somewhere.  That means some shadows may be introduced, but to have the light directional AND have the viewer still feel that they are seeing everything: That is the art.

Interesting perspective. Unlike typical photography, with high-mag macro work adding strong lighting to make that possible is required (not optional). As such, most shooters are trying to get rid of "any signs of flash use," at all, because they invariably leave a definitive "mark" (usually a glow-point on the subject's eyes or body).

My goal here was to present as detailed perspective of the specimen as I could, using multiple (but diffused) lighting sources, but to do so in as unobtrusive  a manner as I could, trying my best to remove any "signs" of harsh light, while letting the creature's own form as well as the background comprise the "art."

Due to its tiny, tiny size, it is not really possible to illuminate the whole subject with one light source.

Your post will have me experiment with this idea, one diffused light source, perhaps to create different moods, so thanks for your input.

[John Koerner]

One question:  If you dispose of the small AiS primes, does that mean you are turning away from field work?  I have always been amazed at what you were achieving in the field, and most photographers are loathe to take a bellows rig out into the field.

No, I will never turn away from fieldwork, but I appreciate the question.

For the field, I am going to be experimenting with 4 different Nikkor zooms, each of which achieves 1-3x magnification range (which is the max you can do outside). I will keep my favorite, and sell the others.

Rather than carry 3 primes out to the field, I will now just bring the 1 zoom, whichever I feel gives me the most in one package.

For the studio, I am now equipped to go as high as I want.
Interestingly, I almost never used my 50mm AI-S ... either outside or in-studio ... because I already have 1:1 covered.
Now, however, with the bellows, what I am discovering is that my 50mm has has a magnification range of 1.6x to 4x  which is the ideal range for live subjects.
I have a feeling my 50mm will quickly become my most-used macro lens, rather than the least-used (at least in the studio).

My 28mm (which got the most use in the field) has now become a 3.2:1 to 7.7:1 on the bellows, which may be useful in certain cases, but not really on spiders. It starts a little too close, really.

My 20mm begins at 5:1 on the bellows, and goes all the way to 11:1. I haven't even tried it yet, but will have to be using dead subjects in order to stack at that kind of magnification.

Maybe I will keep all three primes for my bellows: the 50, the 28, and the 20. They seem to be a natural flow, and may prompt me to go higher and higher in magnification. But I have a feeling most of my work will be on the 50mm and 28mm.

Cheers,

[David H. Hartman]

John,

You didn't mention which small primes you are letting go but I think it's generally not a good idea to sell tools but rather keep the options open.

Dave Hartman

[John Koerner]

John,
You didn't mention which small primes you are letting go but I think it's generally not a good idea to sell tools but rather keep the options open.
Dave Hartman

Dave, you're articulating what I'm thinking.

My first thought was, "Wow, I really don't need these extra lenses," with the idea to lighten the load.

Therefore,  rid of my 28mm f/2.8, my 20mm f/2.8, and my 18mm f/3.5 AIS lenses.
(I use them, reversed, to be able to go 2.1x, 3.4x, and 4.1x, respectively.)

I have two zooms arriving next week that will get me 1-3x magnification, so I won't need any of these primes in the field..

For the studio, with the PB-6 Bellows, my 50mm f/1.2 now carries a 1:1 to 4:1 range (which is my normal macro range).
If I add the PB-6E Extension, the 50mm goes all the way up to 8.5x magnification. (I have never even shot this high before.)
Since I have never photographed that high, my first thought was getting rid of all of these other lenses, and investing the money into furthering my studio macro set up.

However, I may still keep the 28mm, which will get me up to 15.7x with the Extension Bellows.

Although the 20mm and 18mm will get me still higher, I honestly can't imagine me going over 10x magnification, let alone 20x+ ...

Thanks,