stacking close-up lenses on the H2

I'd like to buy my friend the SONY closeup lens for her H2. Somewhere here....quite a while back, I recall reading about stacking closeup lenses to achieve even closer macro shots. Can someone refresh my memory on how this is done and what other lenses are good choices to use with the SONY lens? I seem to recall a Canon lens being talked about.
--
Geoff

http://brownie.zenfolio.com/

See this section of the White Paper. About 2/3rds of the way down check the section titled "Combination (Stacks)".

http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper/whitepaper/part13.htm

Dave

Geoff_B said:

I'd like to buy my friend the SONY closeup lens for her H2. Somewhere
here....quite a while back, I recall reading about stacking closeup
lenses to achieve even closer macro shots. Can someone refresh my
memory on how this is done and what other lenses are good choices to
use with the SONY lens? I seem to recall a Canon lens being talked
about.
--
Geoff

http://brownie.zenfolio.com/

Click to expand...

Not terribly complicated - assuming the CU lens has a front thread - you simply screw several together in sequence.

This does a couple things good and bad:

(1) it gives the the combined magnification of all of the CU lenses and a reduced working distance so a better macro experience.

(2) it gives you the combined image degradation and edge softness of all of the CU lenses together in one image - so it's recommended to at least start with quality CU lenses in the first place.

And of course with increased magnification and a closer working distance comes a greatly reduced DOF so accurate focusing will become a whole new experience. Manual focusing works best, preferably using a focusing rail if you plan on using software to stack images.

BG

stacked combination Sony M3358 + B&W nl2 which makes 5.3.Diopter.

worke well on my H1 so this combination will do well on the H2 too, i never use manual focussing because auto does the job just fine the DOF is real thin ...so stable hands or a tripod do wonders.

some examples made with this combination all handhold and auto focus.







--

• living in harmony with nature and other beings...will create an better world for all * marti58 -2006

http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/worldwidefriendship/

Marti58 said:

stacked combination Sony M3358 + B&W nl2 which makes 5.3.Diopter.
worke well on my H1 so this combination will do well on the H2 too, i
never use manual focussing because auto does the job just fine the
DOF is real thin ...so stable hands or a tripod do wonders.

Click to expand...

Marti; You mentioned the DOF is thin. And I see your choice of f/8.0 tends to help in that regard.

The DOF I'm getting with just the H1 + M3358 (f/8.0 - ISO 64) tends to look quite a bit thinner than your shots. Could the additional (stacked) lens have anything to do with that?

Dave

Marti, I forgot to ask...

I noticed from the EXIF data in your photos that you don't seem to be using a large focal length. In fact you didn't zoom in very much at all. If I'm reading that correctly, then is the combined diopters allowing you to shoot at a wider angle and therefore getting your deeper DOF?

Dave

for my kind of shooting i mostly zoom 3X MAX......F8 is most used by me.

well the EXIF will reveal my most used settings and will be mostly simulair the only thing i often change is ....the ISO value and Exposure time and W/B according circumstances.

more shots with this combo .... http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/sets/72157607022331307/

cheers Marti

--

• living in harmony with nature and other beings...will create an better world for all * marti58 -2006

http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/worldwidefriendship/

Very nice set of shots indeed Marti. Thanks for pointing to them.

I'll have to back off on the zoom a bit to get a bit 'thicker' DOF methinks. Additional diopters would probably help there as well.

Thanks
Dave

Hi guys - I understand that an H2 gives more DOF to start off with than an R1, simply because of the sensor size, but thought I’d mention this anyway.

I guess when I tried to push the limits of the R1, I actually went so far as to mount a couple Sony close up lenses behind their tele-extender to see if it impacted anything and it really didn’t seem to. Personally I found that although there is usually a difference in DOF between different focal lengths, the situation seems to be a little different with macro photography. Basically what I found was that for the same image magnification, I got approximately the same DOF regardless of focal length. But you'll definately need a tripod.

So to me the advantage of using Manual focus was that I could progressively focus on an image and then had the option of stacking two or more of the results to give more DOF. And if you want to do something similar, this is one example where Manual focus would actually be faster and more accurate than Auto.

There are a variety of ways to do this including some pretty sophisticated programs that can stack a dozen or more images, or hard blending as few as two, but this link should be enough to give you the general idea.

http://www.graficaobscura.com/depth/index.html

BG

I have stacked 2 3358 on my H5 many times and with insects always hand held.

Example



--

Marion
Email [email protected]

web site

http://www.pbase.com/stf

I think this is the second reference to taking more than one expose vis-a-vis macro shots to get a 'thicker' DOF. I was kind of taken aback for a minute. I understand multiple exposures as they relate to HDR stuff. But not as it relates to increasing a DOF.

Could someone explain this technique to me please? I'm a long time sufferer of the 'skinny DOF syndrome' when looking at my thin macro shots. When I read something about a multiple exposure technique that could vault me into the league of pro's (Marti & R2D2 eat your heart out) I get a warm and fuzzy expectation.

Please elucidate. Or am I perhaps asking for something akin to disclosing the Mason's secret handshake?

Dave

You too Marion.

Dave

Those are REAL nice shots Marti O:...I use a binocular lens from a pair I got cheep at a pone shop..Cut and made to fit with or without the DH1758 lens..Works ok for me..

With H5



With H5 Micro



With binocular lens H5



With binocular lens with DH1758 stacked



My H5 setup



--
Jeff

H2
H5

DavePlugh said:

I think this is the second reference to taking more than one expose
vis-a-vis macro shots to get a 'thicker' DOF. I was kind of taken
aback for a minute. I understand multiple exposures as they relate to
HDR stuff. But not as it relates to increasing a DOF.

Could someone explain this technique to me please? I'm a long time
sufferer of the 'skinny DOF syndrome' when looking at my thin macro
shots. When I read something about a multiple exposure technique that
could vault me into the league of pro's (Marti & R2D2 eat your heart
out) I get a warm and fuzzy expectation.

Please elucidate. Or am I perhaps asking for something akin to
disclosing the Mason's secret handshake?

Dave

Click to expand...

I never thought about this. And thanks to all for helping me out.

Yeah, I never gave much thought to using multiple exposures with different focus points and blending them. With a tripod and a stationary subject, it seems like it could be done.

Maybe?

--
Geoff

http://brownie.zenfolio.com/

--

Marion
Email [email protected]

web site

http://www.pbase.com/stf

--

Marion
Email [email protected]

web site

http://www.pbase.com/stf

DavePlugh said:

I think this is the second reference to taking more than one expose
vis-a-vis macro shots to get a 'thicker' DOF. I was kind of taken
aback for a minute. I understand multiple exposures as they relate to
HDR stuff. But not as it relates to increasing a DOF.

Could someone explain this technique to me please? I'm a long time
sufferer of the 'skinny DOF syndrome' when looking at my thin macro
shots. When I read something about a multiple exposure technique that
could vault me into the league of pro's (Marti & R2D2 eat your heart
out) I get a warm and fuzzy expectation.

Please elucidate. Or am I perhaps asking for something akin to
disclosing the Mason's secret handshake?

Dave

Click to expand...

Hi Dave - you're probably already familiar with the concept of bracketing shots to get a range of exposures - the concept is essentially the same. If you used a focusing rail and set up a shot so that the very first elements of your subject are in focus, and took a picture, and then focused ahead another 1/2 cm and took another shot, and then focused ahead another 1/2 cm and took a third shot - you could combine the results and would have already extended your total DOF by 1 cm.

When your DOF is measured in cm - that can make a big difference. When the DOF is measured in mm or microns - there really isn't much choice and combining a dozen images or more is pretty common when using an electron microscope.

The issue in real life is that living things move, so you need to plan ahead and sometimes be happy with one or two extra frames. But not everything moves fast, and that snail of Marti's would have been a prime candidate. One shot with the eyes in perfect focus, and then another 1 cm back and a third 2 cm back and the whole image would have been crisp.

OK an experiment from this summer - three images hand held. This was an experiment so its value as a photograph was never the issue.

The actual DOF of the R1 can be pretty dismal at times:



But combining three images changes a lot:



It can be a little extra work and not every ocassion wil be an opportunity - you'll have to decide how much effort the shot is worth.If you want to do a complex sequence than a tripod, focusing rail and software will help a lot.

BG