Macro Bodgification

I wanted to take some high magnification macro photos, but unfortunately I don't currently have a macro lens to hand (thinking about a Pentax/Samsung 100mm - but would probably have to sell my Sigma 50-150mm to fund any LBA impulses I have).

Anywho, I rummaged through my box of camera cast offs and came across a set of jessops PK extension tubes, a set of M42 extension tubes, and M42 to pk adapter and a 35mm f/3.5 kenlock M42 manual focus lens. I assembled these with the 35mm lens reversed onto the end of all the stacked tubes, and here are the results...

1.link to flickr post



2.link to flickr post



3.link to flickr post



4.link to flickr post



5.link to flickr post



6.link to flickr post



And the contraption that made it all possible



What does everyone think? and is a dedicated macro lens worth trading in my 50-150mm (as I only really use it in low light conditions approx 10% of my shots).

Thanks in advance all!

(p.s. I put the links to the flickr post in-case anyone wants to view the full size 14mp versions, didnt want to post 6 large images all in one post!)

That is the weirdest contraption I have ever seen.....but it works!
I love images 1 and 6

In my opinion, I would go for a dedicated macro lens but if it means selling a lens that you rely on then no. Yes your homemade lens is odd in looks but the results are amazing.

Looking at the images again, I actually like them all.

I doubt it if you will be taken seriously if you took that you on the field and I can imagine that even on a tripod that will be hard to hold still with the sellotape holding it together, but you obviously get the results.

I'm not sure if people will agree with what I have said, but it's down to your preference, that's what counts!

Paul

Depends on whether macro will take up more than 10% of your shots I suppose. What focal length do you use most on your 50-150 ? There are Macro lenses at differing lengths right through that range & all are f2.8 so if you can lose the zoom flexibility then you may not lose that full 10% of low light stuff.

It's amazing what you can bodge tgether, but a dedicated Macro will be a tad more compact

edit: those images are better than 1:1 too, so don't throw away those pk extension tubes if you want to get this close !

They are very good. I like the 1st and 4th best. I'd just get some proper step down rings or reverse adapter and connect up what you've got or get a bellows which gives you a lot of control over the lens and camera. A macro lens on it's own isn't enough you also need a rack and pinion focus rail (not needed with a bellows, it's usually built in). If you do get a bellows a reversed enlarging lens gives extra options.

shim

Thanks for the kind comments on the photos Paul; you'll be surprised to learn that all the above shots where hand-held with my bodged macro lens and shot with a shutter speed of 1/180th - the flash was manually set to fire from 1/2 up to 1/8 power and adjusted as required.

To be fair, I don't rely on the Sigma 50-150mm, its just nice to have that f/2.8 at 150mm when needed... And the sellotape is pretty damn strong!

I'd say I use the 50-150mm between 100-150mm at f/2.8 - I have a 50mm f/1.7 to cover the mid-tele end, hence why I was thinking about a 100mm Pentax macro - I'm sure my leg-zoom can cover that extra 50mm

True, I'm not sure how to calculate the exact ration - I took a shot of a tape measure and was only able to fit 4mm across the frame. Anyone have the mathematical skills to work that one out?

(edit: typo)

Nice pics number 1 for me Love the sellotape

Lovely shots, certainly number one.

you can reverse mount the 35mm also anto another lens and use extension tubes on that lens aswell to get more magnification

I've used the Da 40 infront of the 100mm macro, so I got 1:2.5 in the end

On your advice shim, I've just picked up a set of bellows from ebay including a bonus 55mm Rikenon f/2 lens and reverse k mount adapter.. I'll give it all a whirl as soon as it arrives!

And thanks to everyone for all the great feedback,

Brian.

It can amaze you just what you get when macro or close up. I've two macro lens, a reversed 50mm, plus a 2x and its fun just experimenting. It depends just how much satisfaction you get from macro. I feel its a harder discipline than landscape etc and a long learning curve to get those really special shots. Will upload my shot of sunlight through a spiders web for you to see.

You can do a lot with just the reverse adapter and lens. F2 Rikenons are supposed to be quite good.

shim

Is the IQ any better on the 55mm f2 Rikenon than the f1.7 50mm I already own?
And for reversing, am I better of using a longer or shorter focal length prime lens?

Cheers!

Brian.

I've got the f/1.7 and I'm not that impressed. I've not got the f/2 but is is supposed to be good so try the f/2 first. A lot of Rikenon lenses have dis-coloured coatings (my f/1.4)which causes a heavy purple cast. Leaving the lens in the sun can repair this to a certain extent. So it's really a case of try what you've got. 50-55mm is OK for a bellows.

shim

I did read somewhere a 28mm is the best length for reversing when doing macro?

I have tried a number of lenses reversed and the one I found that gave the best results is the pentax Takumar SMC 1.8 55mm, Its a screw mount but who cares you don't use that end anyway