reversed lens? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/24/2006 03:28:51 AM · #2

It's a good way to get really close ;) You use a reverse 50mm with another lens. Typically it's a 52 and a 58mm filter ring that you use. Using a 100mm macro which is 58 mm ring and your 50mm which is a 52mm ring.

Anyway, you can get these ;)

From this:

To this:

What you need:
1. macro coupler
2. lenses of course ;)

adyus

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

01/24/2006 04:00:31 AM · #3

I'm joining this thread with some questions, as I wanted to try this for a long time.

Rikki, what exactly is a macro coupler and how can I make one? I'll search around the (few) photo stores around and I couldn't find one.

Are you limited to the 50mm as the second lens? Must the first lens be a macro lens? What happens if you use a single handheld reversed lens held up to the mounting hole?

Also, how does focus (and zoom in case of zoom lenses) work if you turn the lens around? What's better, focusing the first lens then moving the camera, focusing the second or a combination of both?

I realize that's a pretty big batch of questions, but if anyone has any experience on this, I'd like to hear your methods. Please? :)

Rikki

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/24/2006 04:20:30 AM · #4

How To:

B&H Macro Couplers

Focusing is manually. You'll need lots of light to be able to get crisp shots. Lighting is essential. I use two 1000 watt halogen lamps. The focusing is for both until you get the sharpness and detail correct. It's tough but fun to experiment with ;)

01/24/2006 04:57:01 AM · #5

i was just trying the exact same thing the other day. i still need more practice.

if yorasocolov is able to do all of that and hand-hold the 50mm lens in front of the camera, he's more man than i. :)

01/24/2006 05:01:06 AM · #6

Originally posted by Rikki:

How To:

also, this is different than just reversing one 50mm lens. using a macro lens with a reversed 50mm gives you a MEGA macro, much like the stuff jacko is known for.

i don't have a macro lens, so i got the reversing ring (BR-2A for nikon) and can only do the reversed 50mm mounted directly onto the camera. B&H link to BR-2A

RichSeal

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

01/24/2006 05:22:58 AM · #7

Originally posted by muckpond:

Yes its different to a reversing ring I think. The reversing ring just allows you to reverse the lens to the body. With a coupling ring you put 1 lens on the body and use the ring to put another lens reverse onto the filter ring of the lens attached to the body. I'm not 100% sure what the difference in results will be, but I think you can get a greater magnification that way. My coupling ring should be arriving soon so I'll know more when I try it.

01/24/2006 05:27:21 AM · #8

just look at the difference in magnification here:

50mm reversed:

50mm reversed on mounted 105mm:

yowzah!

acrotide

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

01/24/2006 07:25:41 AM · #9

There is an article that I think I found from this site (not certain) that shows how to stack a reversed lens on anotehr lens using electrical tape.

I just tried it last night and the results were fairly decent. If I had a little more patience I may have been able to figure out a way to stop the camera from shaking and blurring my shots.

Here are a couple of examples of what I got. What you are looking at is a Canadian dime (same size as an American dime), so you can see I was able to get pretty close.

Shot 1 Shot 2

Again, the shots are blurry, but that is caused by the movement inside the camera at the time of the shot and not from me manually taking the shot (I used the timer so I wouldn't have to touch the camera).

Edit: Forgot to mention, I used my Canon 50mm 1.8 mounted on my 75-300mm.

Message edited by author 2006-01-24 07:28:00.

BobsterLobster

Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

01/24/2006 08:21:42 AM · #10

You can't link to files on your own computer.
Edit: or from Blogger!

Message edited by author 2006-01-24 08:34:39.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/24/2006 08:27:41 AM · #11

Originally posted by acrotide:

Shot 1 Shot 2

linkees no workee.

Nelzie

Canon EOS-30D

01/24/2006 08:42:45 AM · #12

I wouldn't reverse any pricey or important lenses...

The back element of a lense is typically a softer material and thus more prone to be easily damaged.

Apple iPhone

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Nikon

01/24/2006 08:49:03 AM · #13

its on his PAD for Monday, January 23,2006
//acrotidepad2006.blogspot.com/

Originally posted by muckpond:

Originally posted by acrotide:

Shot 1 Shot 2

linkees no workee.

acrotide

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

01/24/2006 08:52:26 AM · #14

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

You can't link to files on your own computer.
Edit: or from Blogger!

That's good to know for the future. And thanks Di for posting my blog.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/24/2006 08:54:11 AM · #15

There were some good comparisons of reversed lenses vs. extension tubes in THIS thread.

Apple iPhone

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Nikon

01/24/2006 08:55:12 AM · #16

you're welcome :)

Originally posted by acrotide:

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
You can't link to files on your own computer.
Edit: or from Blogger!

That's good to know for the future. And thanks Di for posting my blog.

Pixlmaker

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II

01/24/2006 12:46:08 PM · #17

Interesting topic, as I just got a reverse coupler AND a set of Kenko extension tubes (yeah!). I will be using the extension tubes a lot more for several reasons. I can get REALLY close macro with them. I've tried them with my 24-70mm lense and my 70-200. Both work amazingly well. The day I got them I was messing around with them and here are a couple shots:

There is almost no cropping on these, and I wasn't even close to maximum macro on either of them. The DOF is better than the reverse ring, and auto focusing works well.
The reverse ring gets you EXTREMELY close to the subject--you could almost rest something on the lens' glass and get a shot. However, with a 77mm coupler on my 70-200 with my 24-70 attached is ridiculously long, I'm afraid of hurting the glass on the reversed lense (as mentioned below), the DOF is miniscule, and I'm not about to go out and shoot bugs outside with what is essentially a $2400 macro lense. In all fairness, I haven't had a chance to do a ton of stuff with the reverse setup, and I plan on playing with it a lot more (these are just my initial thoughts after having them for a couple days). Just my $.02, but I would say go with the tubes.

Oh, and one more thing--auto focus works with the coupler. At least it does with my setup on the lense on the camera. You can leave the reversed lense alone, and just focus with the lense that's on the body of your camera.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 STM Lens

01/24/2006 02:31:42 PM · #18

Originally posted by Nelzie:

I wouldn't reverse any pricey or important lenses...

The back element of a lense is typically a softer material and thus more prone to be easily damaged.

Where did you hear that??

Refwhett

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

01/24/2006 02:42:01 PM · #19

Hey, greaet info here. Thanks for all the replies. I have to get me one of those coupling rings!

Nelzie

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/24/2006 02:58:13 PM · #20

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by Nelzie:
I wouldn't reverse any pricey or important lenses...

The back element of a lense is typically a softer material and thus more prone to be easily damaged.

Where did you hear that??

The instructor of a photography class.

Perhaps he is right. (I am not finding anything to verify that claim at the moment.)

Perhaps that was told to him as a reason to keep the back element of a lense cleaner and safer from dirt/scratches and he reasoned that answer.

I will see if I can locate more about this.

Moose101

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Canon

01/24/2006 03:46:33 PM · #21

I had these sitting around in my profile of the setup... in case anyone is interested but I use it for really close shots.

Here's a shot with it of a moth and a fly

amethyste

01/26/2006 03:51:12 AM · #22

I've had my share of trying to work with the reversed lens. I don't have a portfolio here, yet here are some of my photographs made with the reversed lens. I just hold the lens reversed to my body. You'll need some practise, but it's a great method.
//www.deviantart.com/view/27941112/
//www.deviantart.com/view/27666451/
//www.deviantart.com/view/28155783/
here they are in a little format:

RichSeal