Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

mollyc

macrumors G3
Original poster
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
A quick hand held to start things off. Working with an 8.8mm focal length certainly helps with depth of field.
Lumix ZS200, FL=8.8mm, ƒ3.3, SS=1/400, ISO=1600

View attachment 2165672
Really pretty.


LEGO is a big hobby of mine and I like building LEGO Modular sets

Super fun!


Macro on macro in that first photo!


Excellent use of negative space.


I'm actually really drawn to the spoon images.

Great photos and participation, everyone. ❤️
 

katbel

macrumors 68040
Aug 19, 2009
3,632
32,566
TinyElephant.jpeg
Books.jpeg
Mini Orchid*.jpeg

Using tripod 🙂 and Sigma Macro 70mm
Tried reverse macro but it didn't really work for me: the only lens that worked was the 350mm: weird results, but not a macro

CC welcome
 

mollyc

macrumors G3
Original poster
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
View attachment 2166093 View attachment 2166091 View attachment 2166089
Using tripod 🙂 and Sigma Macro 70mm
Tried reverse macro but it didn't really work for me: the only lens that worked was the 350mm: weird results, but not a macro

CC welcome

I would love to see you get closer; these don't seem close enough for macro. Macro lenses can be used as regular lenses if you stand back far enough.


View attachment 2166132

View attachment 2166133

View attachment 2166134

Some images of cacti from this afternoon . Taken with my G9 and a PL 45 macro . ISO 3200 , aperture between f4 and f5 , speeds around 1/20 for the top 2 and 1/80 for the lowest . Hand held . Natural light .Better stuff to come .
C&C is fine.

These are a little shaky given your shutter speeds, but I see you might have been maxing out your ISO. Lots of great textures, though. 🙂

View attachment 2166179 View attachment 2166178

Had a tiny bit of down time before a meeting today downtown so I was able to walk around a park and get some shots. Both taken with my 24-70 and my camera shoved right up about as close as I could get to it. haha

These are fun and much closer than what I would think 24-70 would get.

Just got back from a walk and found some treasure. Last two cactus shots are from the sunroom.

View attachment 2166183
View attachment 2166182
View attachment 2166184
View attachment 2166192
View attachment 2166185 View attachment 2166186

CC Always Welcome

Happy to see blooming magnolias! The first cactus one here is my favorite of this bunch.
 

Walhydra

macrumors member
Jan 2, 2023
67
214
Massachusetts
OK. All I have is an LG Electronics LM-Q610 Android phone, and I'm not tech savvy yet. I rely on the automatics, except that for this one I used the zoom feature at X4 (and held my breath....). The first image is the subject, our Tiffany table lamp reproduction. The second is the "pretend" macro. ;)
23Feb28-717_4028px.jpg
23Feb28-621_4028px.jpg
 

mollyc

macrumors G3
Original poster
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
Okay, I did a test of my 105mm macro vs a reverse freelensed 50mm. The 50mm does not get to a 100% magnification.

105mm:

Web_February_28_2023_001-2.jpg



The next two are RF with a 50mm lens. Although the framing is different (sorry! unintentional), I used the same water drop for my focal point, so you can see that the image above has a much larger drop and less of the flower filling the frame.

Web_February_28_2023_001-3.jpg


Web_February_28_2023_002.jpg



But! This does prove the point that while, not a "super macro" like Kat had read somewhere, it is a good "poor man's macro" if you don't have a true macro lens and do have a spare 50mm lying around.
 

mollyc

macrumors G3
Original poster
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
OK. All I have is an LG Electronics LM-Q610 Android phone, and I'm not tech savvy yet. I rely on the automatics, except that for this one I used the zoom feature at X4 (and held my breath....). The first image is the subject, our Tiffany table lamp reproduction. The second is the "pretend" macro. ;) View attachment 2166205 View attachment 2166206
Oh, wow, that gets in really close! Great experiement. 🙂
 
  • Like
Reactions: bondr006

katbel

macrumors 68040
Aug 19, 2009
3,632
32,566
Okay, I did a test of my 105mm macro vs a reverse freelensed 50mm. The 50mm does not get to a 100% magnification.

105mm:

View attachment 2166209


The next two are RF with a 50mm lens. Although the framing is different (sorry! unintentional), I used the same water drop for my focal point, so you can see that the image above has a much larger drop and less of the flower filling the frame.

View attachment 2166211

View attachment 2166210


But! This does prove the point that while, not a "super macro" like Kat had read somewhere, it is a good "poor man's macro" if you don't have a true macro lens and do have a spare 50mm lying around.
Example 1 : do you think they are cheating? And this other page
Maybe it works better with DSLR than mirrorless. Anyway at least you were successful
The problem with my camera is the infinity focus: still need to find how to do it
Thanks a lot for trying it!
 

mollyc

macrumors G3
Original poster
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
View attachment 2166229
Is this one close enough? The elephant is the tiniest ever..not like the real animal, 😉
the box itself is 10" and it's an amazing work if you think of its dimensions
Yes, that's much closer...but set your lens to the closest focus it goes - it will say 1:1 or 1:2 depending on what strength your macro lens is, and then get as close as you can will catching focus; you'll have to switch your lens to manual focus for this to work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: katbel

mollyc

macrumors G3
Original poster
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
Example 1 : do you think they are cheating? And this other page
Maybe it works better with DSLR than mirrorless. Anyway at least you were successful
The problem with my camera is the infinity focus: still need to find how to do it
Thanks a lot for trying it!
So the first link just goes to a photo with no text, so I am not sure the context. I think there is more than reverse freelensing going on there though, with the details captured.

The second link says that the camera is a Canon 300D which is a crop frame body; this naturally appears like a closer image vs full frame. I think your camera is a full frame? The camera I used today is a full frame, so I could just crop some of the sides off to make it appear closer, which is the same thing that a crop sensor does.

The text of the second article also states that the wider the lens the more magnification when reversed. This holds true with what I've found when trying to reverse freelens with an 85mm. I also have a 35mm but I've never been successful at keeping the aperture open since it's a newer style lens. However, I've since gotten an adapter for my medium format camera that will actually hold the aperture, so I could try that lens again and see what happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: katbel

mollyc

macrumors G3
Original poster
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
For now, I would just practice good technique with your actual macro lens at the shortest focusing distance and then worry about freelensing. 🙂
 
  • Love
Reactions: katbel

Walhydra

macrumors member
Jan 2, 2023
67
214
Massachusetts
  • Like
Reactions: katbel

Walhydra

macrumors member
Jan 2, 2023
67
214
Massachusetts
Just got back from a walk and found some treasure. Last two cactus shots are from the sunroom.

View attachment 2166183
View attachment 2166182
View attachment 2166184
View attachment 2166192
View attachment 2166185 View attachment 2166186

CC Always Welcome
The first shot (IMG
Just got back from a walk and found some treasure. Last two cactus shots are from the sunroom.

View attachment 2166183
View attachment 2166182
View attachment 2166184
View attachment 2166192
View attachment 2166185 View attachment 2166186

CC Always Welcome
The first shot (IMG-3740.jpg) intrigues me the most. Even more interesting would be if you could make the parts of the plant in the foreground pop with a narrower depth of field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bondr006

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,352
6,495
Kentucky
I've been out of the project for a few weeks, but figured I'd jump back in.

Here are two that I think have room for improvement, but mostly were me pushing the limits of what I have on hand.

These were all taken on my D800 with an ancient 55mm AI-converted Micro-Nikkor-P f/3.5 lens, my personal favorite macro lens. I have a bunch of Nikon F era(probably 60s and 70s) macro accessories. The one thing in storage that I'd love to pull out are my PB4 bellows, which in addition to having a lot of extension do incorporate stop down by a cable release for easy full aperture viewing.

Here's my full stack to get to this one-

PB-11, 12, and 13 rings stacked, which are 8mm, 14mm, and 27.5mm respectively(49.5 total extension). The Nikon tubes are nice in that they keep full aperture viewing. On top of those is a generic set of tubes that measure 60mm to me. Then I have an M2 tube, which was shipped with the 55mm Micro lenses and is 27.5mm to allow them to go to 1:1(the built in helical is 27.5mm). The generic tubes lose stop-down coupling, so to that stack I added an E2 ring, which allows stop down by a cable release(or rather push/lock the release for open aperture focus, release for stop down). It's also a 14mm tube.

This is a total of 151mm of extension. Adding the helicoil racked all the way out gets to 178mm, which I think should put me in the 2.5x lifesize range, but I really need to measure focal plane to subject to calculate exactly(if you really want to get exact about this, and forgive me if this has been mentioned, but your camera should have the Φ engraved on the top plate to get exact plane, and magnification is measured from here to the point on the subject in focus).

Lighting is by a couple of strobes. I need to get a stronger power pack out, as I had to raise the ISO to 1600 to get the exposure in the ballpark. The lens nominally was set to f/32, but I think that's an effective aperture of f/160? Forgive me for being fuzzy on the math.

_DSC5364.jpg


Then, just to get fun, I stuck a 1.4x teleconverter on the back. As some back of the envelope math, if you place extension tubes in front of a teleconverter, you can treat it like the TC multiplies the effective length of the extension tubes by its magnification power, so this would give me ~250mm of extension, or nearly 4x lifesize.

Miraculously, I did this all handheld. It really should be done on a tripod with a macro focusing rail, and I'll try that later.

This also has the lens nearly covering the subject. Reversing should help with that, and it's something I'll play with later. I do have a BR2 reversing ring, which works with 52mm filter thread macro lenses.

_DSC5365.jpg


And here's the full unwieldy set-up

IMG_2976.jpeg
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.