Starting out in photomacrography - noob questions and help

Starting out in microscopy? Post images and ask questions relating to the microscope and get answers from our more advanced users on the subject.

Moderators: ChrisR, Chris S., Pau, rjlittlefield

hayath
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Bangalore, India

Starting out in photomacrography - noob questions and help

Post by hayath »

Hello,
Been doing some macro upto 1:1 for some time now and intend to really dive in to see the beauty in the small world :)

From all the lovely documented discussions here, I could gather one would need
A) Tube lens - would the Canon 55-250mm suffice?
B) Infinity corrected objective - CncScope 4x
http://www.ebay.com/itm/320601555906#ht_1512wt_952

Would this be ok to mount on the Canon 250mm? (since there was no mention on the site if it was infinity corrected)

C) Adapter to mount the objective in front of the lens like Rik mentioned in the FAQ section.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-CFI-M25-m ... 285wt_1270

Found this here on the site, but would love a link to Ebay with the actual adapter (the Canon 250 has a 58mm dia)

Would love to hear inputs/tips on these :)

TIA!

Cheers,
Hayath

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 5130
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

- No, the linked objective is finite, corrected for 160mm tube lengh (160/0.17). It isn't adequate for use with tube lenses. It would be adequate for use with bellows or extension tubes at a distance of 150mm of the camera sensor.

- No again, the linked adapter is for 25mm thread objectives while the objective linked has RMS mount, much smaller
Pau

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8557
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

Also, there's a big "gap" between 1x and 4x, in terms of interesting things.
A reversed enlarger lens such as the El Nikkor 50mmf/2.8 you'll have read about, works pretty well in that range - taking over from whatever you use for 1:1.
Again, you'd need bellows/tubes, so it would be good to go that route.

hayath
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Bangalore, India

Post by hayath »

Thank you pau and Chris for the answers/responses :)

So a4x infinity corrected objective and an Eos to Rms mount adapter is what i should be looking for?

Any known links would be great!

Cheers,
Hayath

SteveGreen1953
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 11:26 am
Location: Sycamore, IL USA

Post by SteveGreen1953 »

Cnscope sells this metallurgical 4x infinity objective: http://www.ebay.com/itm/220915001309?ss ... 1438.l2649.

Then you just need a way to mount it on your 55-250. Couldn’t find a 58mm to RMS so here is a 52mm to RMS: http://www.ebay.com/itm/RMS-8-microscop ... 2ebda89731 and a 58mm to 52mm step down: http://www.ebay.com/itm/58-mm-52-mm-Ste ... 589400050f.

hayath
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Bangalore, India

Post by hayath »

Thanks a ton Steve, sure helps :)

ChrisLilley
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 6:12 am
Location: Nice, France (I'm British)

Post by ChrisLilley »

hayath wrote: So a4x infinity corrected objective and an Eos to Rms mount adapter is what i should be looking for?
Not an EOS to RMS adapter. The objective does not mount directly to your camera, it mounts to the front of whatever you are using as a tube lens. So you need to know the filter thread of the front of your lens. Suppose that was 72mm, you would need an RMS to 72mm adapter (or more likely an RMS to 52mm adapter and then a 52 to 72 adapter).

hayath
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Bangalore, India

Post by hayath »

ChrisLilley wrote:
hayath wrote: So a4x infinity corrected objective and an Eos to Rms mount adapter is what i should be looking for?
Not an EOS to RMS adapter. The objective does not mount directly to your camera, it mounts to the front of whatever you are using as a tube lens. So you need to know the filter thread of the front of your lens. Suppose that was 72mm, you would need an RMS to 72mm adapter (or more likely an RMS to 52mm adapter and then a 52 to 72 adapter).
Thank you, I meant the filter on the lens (typed that in perhaps when watching the non-infinity corrected image from Rik)

hayath
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Bangalore, India

Post by hayath »

A few more questions to ask (in order of importance), sorry if I'm pushing the resistance to noobs :)

Question 1: The current set of ETs are about 80mm (physical). Would someone having the RMS to M42 "Cone" give me the physical length of it please? Would like to know if it would give me 150mm in total with the ETs.

Question 2: Reversing a Soligor 28mm f2.8 on the current ETs gives me around 4x. Would the objective give me better optics and IQ?

Question 3: With an infinity corrected objective, does the tube lens need to be stopped down?

Question 4:Would bellows be better or would I be better off looking at infinite objectives to mount on existing tube lenses

Anyone who's used Bellows for the extension with an objective here, any tips would be highly appreciated.

BTW, contemplating/rationlalizing getting this
http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-macro-be ... 322&sr=8-1

Appreciate all the help and tips :)

Cheers,
Hayath

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 5130
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

2- In general I think so, but I'm not sure. It will be dependent of the quality of your Soligor (reversed wide angle lens?) and the objective.

3- No, if you do stop the tube lens at some point it will vignette, and you aren't going to get better sharpnes nor DOF.

4- Both approaches work fine with the adequate good objectives.

- the linked bellows is new and very cheap but it laks some desirable features like movable tripod mount, focusing rail and maybe rotating mount and doesn't look very solid. I prefer a good old one from camera manufactures with the adequate adapter for the EOS camera.
Last edited by Pau on Thu May 31, 2012 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pau

SteveGreen1953
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 11:26 am
Location: Sycamore, IL USA

Post by SteveGreen1953 »

My RMS to M42 cone adaptor adds a shade over 52mm of length.

Edited to add: I strongly agree with Pau about the bellows, particularly about the tripod mount and focus rail. I purchased a used Canon FD auto unit on ebay and am very happy with the choice. I see that all of the current listings are a bit (in my opinion) over-priced, but if you watch you should be able to pick one up for less than $100 USD.

hayath
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Bangalore, India

Post by hayath »

Pau wrote:2- In general I think so, but I'm not sure. It will be dependent of the quality of your Soligor (reversed wide angle lens?) and the objective.

3- No, if you do stop the tube lens at some point it will vignette, and you aren't going to get better sharpnes nor DOF.

4- Both approaches work fine with the adequate good objectives.

- the linked bellows is new and very cheap but it laks some desirable features like movable tripod mount, focusing rail and maybe rotating mount and doesn't look very solid. I prefer a good old one from camera manufactures with the adequate adapter for the EOS camera.
Thank you Pau, truly value that response :)
SteveGreen1953 wrote:My RMS to M42 cone adaptor adds a shade over 52mm of length.

Edited to add: I strongly agree with Pau about the bellows, particularly about the tripod mount and focus rail. I purchased a used Canon FD auto unit on ebay and am very happy with the choice. I see that all of the current listings are a bit (in my opinion) over-priced, but if you watch you should be able to pick one up for less than $100 USD.
Thanks Steve! So I guess the 150mm length would not be reached :(

From the kind tips I guess getting hold of good bellows is a must - will plan and purchase, without rushing into it :)

The forum rocks!

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 20975
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

hayath wrote:
SteveGreen1953 wrote:My RMS to M42 cone adaptor adds a shade over 52mm of length.
Thanks Steve! So I guess the 150mm length would not be reached :(
The 150 mm total extension will be reached with no problem, assuming that "The current set of ETs are about 80mm (physical)" means the tubes themselves.

Remember that the 150 mm total extension is measured from the sensor to the objective. This includes the flange focal distance, which is listed as 44 mm for modern Canons. See first image at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=12147 for illustration.

With the cone, your current extension tubes, and the flange focal distance, you will have a total of 52 + 80 + 44 = 176 mm to work with. Looks like you'll won't even need to use all the tubes.

--Rik

SteveGreen1953
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 11:26 am
Location: Sycamore, IL USA

Post by SteveGreen1953 »

Don't overlook M42 extension tubes such as these that can be had for very little money: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Macro-extension ... 27bdb02968

You will also need an EOS to M42 adaptor such as this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/EMF-AF-Confirm- ... 1c1d148a23 :D

hayath
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Bangalore, India

Post by hayath »

Thanks much Rik for that very calming clarification :)
Thank you Steve for the links, but I already have the Fotodiox extension tubes. The M42 to EOS adapter is what I'd need.

"Yet another question" - Happened to read that the RMS to M42 cone causes some light issues which affects IQ -> contrast
Would that be true? If yes, any way of handling that?

Cheers again :)
Hayath

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic