Reverse Ring Macro Photography

Velmahr

Well-known member
Messages
128
Reaction score
17
So I just got a new DSLR and I have a Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens. I want to do macro photography and I want the highest magnification possible. Would it be wise to buy a 1:1 macro lens, use a reverse ring on my sigma lens, use a reverse ring on a MACRO lens, or buy something with 5x magnification like the Canon MP-e 65. I heard that using shorter focal lengths with a reverse ring also increases magnification.

Let me know what you think.
 
So I just got a new DSLR and I have a Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens. I want to do macro photography and I want the highest magnification possible. Would it be wise to buy a 1:1 macro lens, use a reverse ring on my sigma lens, use a reverse ring on a MACRO lens, or buy something with 5x magnification like the Canon MP-e 65. I heard that using shorter focal lengths with a reverse ring also increases magnification.

Let me know what you think.
If (as it seems) you are new to macro I'd suggest steering well clear of the MP-e 65 until you have plenty of experience. High magnification macro is not easy.

For the other options I'd suggest a 'real' macro lens. That means a lens that you use in place of your 35mm and that can focus down as far as 1:1. something in the 90-110 mm range is generally useful but you haven't said what you want to shoot so maybe a different focal length would be better for you.

Reversing rings, close-up lenses (e.g. Raynox 250) and other options all have their roles, but for a beginner a proper macro lens is the easiest and generally best choice.

These were all shot at around 1:1 magnification, so if you need much higher magnifications I suggest you give more details of what you are trying to do.























--
Albert
(The one in France)
Every photograph is an abstraction from reality.
 
I endorse everything Albert has said. Using reverse rings is awkward and Raynox-type filters are OK but not brilliant.

I'll add one thing to what Albert says - if you want something bigger than 1:1 you can get it using extension tubes and/or rear tele-converters (but make sure you get automatic versions, not the vey cheap manual ones that are easier to find).

This is about 2.6:1 magnification using a 100mm macro lens, 65mm extension tubes and 2X TC.

If you look closely you'll see softness at top right. That's because the depth of field you get at such close range is tiny - not even enough for this flat piece of silk. For anything not dead flat you'll need to learn focus stacking, which is another reason to avoid super-magnification until you've got more experience.

134758378.jpg




--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
[email protected]
 
So I just got a new DSLR and I have a Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens. I want to do macro photography and I want the highest magnification possible. Would it be wise to buy a 1:1 macro lens, use a reverse ring on my sigma lens, use a reverse ring on a MACRO lens, or buy something with 5x magnification like the Canon MP-e 65. I heard that using shorter focal lengths with a reverse ring also increases magnification.

Let me know what you think.
you're better off getting a used real 1:1 macro lens (Canon, Tamron, Sigma, etc)

reversing rings are difficult to adjust the settings (aperture/shutter) and have a tendency to get stuck on the mount - major hassle!
 
So I just got a new DSLR and I have a Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens. I want to do macro photography and I want the highest magnification possible. Would it be wise to buy a 1:1 macro lens, use a reverse ring on my sigma lens, use a reverse ring on a MACRO lens, or buy something with 5x magnification like the Canon MP-e 65. I heard that using shorter focal lengths with a reverse ring also increases magnification.

Let me know what you think.
I think you don't have a clue, which is OK. There was a time when each of us didn't have a clue [like when I was 14 and knew everything]. ;-)

Albert and Gerry spoke the truth, but they didn't explain why.

When you put a lens on a reversing ring, it doesn't connect to the electronics in the body, thus, it won't focus and there is no control of the aperture. You can't just manually focus [assuming the lens has a manual focus ring] because that just moves the outside case in and out and doesn't do diddly with the optical elements, which are rigidly attached to the body via that reversing ring. SO, you have to focus by either moving the entire camera or moving the subject. Since the magnification ratios are high w/ macrophotography, that means that TINY movements affect large changes to the focus position. Serious photographers who do this, put either the camera on a focusing slide or put the subject on a focusing slide or BOTH!

The aperture has to be operated manually. Most lenses have a tab that protrudes into the body and is operated by a small solenoid. This solenoid is normally "off" and when you attach a lens, the aperture is opened fully [to make the image in the VF bright]. When you set an aperture [like f/8] the lens aperture does not change until you take a picture. Then the solenoid in the body releases the tab and a spring in the lens shuts the aperture to the preset aperture [like f/8]. When you reverse the lens, nothing operates the tab! You have to do that w/ your finger or a rubber band. :-( Even worse, if you have a lens that does not have an aperture control ring, there is no way to control the aperture when the lens is reversed!

Alternately, you can get a bellows attachment and put the reversed lens on it. That will let you move the lens relative to the body and focus with the knobs on the bellows unit. BUT, since the bellows has a non-trivial depth, the lens can never be close to the body. This means that the MINIMUM mag ratio will be high. This the bellows solution only works for quite high mag ratios. Kinda specialized.

Adapter lenses that screw/clamp onto the front of a lens to allow [make] it focus closer, work just like reading glasses for humans. If those corrective lenses have only one element, they only have decent IQ if the diopter rating is small. If you want a larger amount of focus correction, you must get a lens with 2-3 elements and it must be an "achromat" in order to not introduce lots of chromatic aberrations [coma]. These corrective lenses [often called "filters"] are NOT cheap. Good ones cost several hundred $. Here is a list of most of these achromatic closeup lenses:


Which brings us to a dedicated macro lens. They will allow [usually] up to a 1:1 reproduction ratio. They will AF on your body. The aperture will work just like all your other lenses, even if that aperture is set electronically bu the body.

Used macro lenses are reasonably priced. Get one. :-)
 
I endorse everything Albert has said. Using reverse rings is awkward and Raynox-type filters are OK but not brilliant.
They are very good value for a starter, but certainly a true macro prime lens is better.

Reversing a lens is seldom helpful.
I'll add one thing to what Albert says - if you want something bigger than 1:1 you can get it using extension tubes and/or rear tele-converters (but make sure you get automatic versions, not the vey cheap manual ones that are easier to find).

This is about 2.6:1 magnification using a 100mm macro lens, 65mm extension tubes and 2X TC.

If you look closely you'll see softness at top right. That's because the depth of field you get at such close range is tiny - not even enough for this flat piece of silk. For anything not dead flat you'll need to learn focus stacking, which is another reason to avoid super-magnification until you've got more experience.

134758378.jpg


--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]
 
So I just got a new DSLR and I have a Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens. I want to do macro photography and I want the highest magnification possible. Would it be wise to buy a 1:1 macro lens, use a reverse ring on my sigma lens, use a reverse ring on a MACRO lens, or buy something with 5x magnification like the Canon MP-e 65. I heard that using shorter focal lengths with a reverse ring also increases magnification.

Let me know what you think.
I think you don't have a clue, which is OK. There was a time when each of us didn't have a clue [like when I was 14 and knew everything]. ;-)

Albert and Gerry spoke the truth, but they didn't explain why.

When you put a lens on a reversing ring, it doesn't connect to the electronics in the body, thus, it won't focus and there is no control of the aperture. You can't just manually focus [assuming the lens has a manual focus ring] because that just moves the outside case in and out and doesn't do diddly with the optical elements, which are rigidly attached to the body via that reversing ring. SO, you have to focus by either moving the entire camera or moving the subject. Since the magnification ratios are high w/ macrophotography, that means that TINY movements affect large changes to the focus position. Serious photographers who do this, put either the camera on a focusing slide or put the subject on a focusing slide or BOTH!

The aperture has to be operated manually. Most lenses have a tab that protrudes into the body and is operated by a small solenoid. This solenoid is normally "off" and when you attach a lens, the aperture is opened fully [to make the image in the VF bright]. When you set an aperture [like f/8] the lens aperture does not change until you take a picture. Then the solenoid in the body releases the tab and a spring in the lens shuts the aperture to the preset aperture [like f/8]. When you reverse the lens, nothing operates the tab! You have to do that w/ your finger or a rubber band. :-( Even worse, if you have a lens that does not have an aperture control ring, there is no way to control the aperture when the lens is reversed!

Alternately, you can get a bellows attachment and put the reversed lens on it. That will let you move the lens relative to the body and focus with the knobs on the bellows unit. BUT, since the bellows has a non-trivial depth, the lens can never be close to the body. This means that the MINIMUM mag ratio will be high. This the bellows solution only works for quite high mag ratios. Kinda specialized.

Adapter lenses that screw/clamp onto the front of a lens to allow [make] it focus closer, work just like reading glasses for humans. If those corrective lenses have only one element, they only have decent IQ if the diopter rating is small. If you want a larger amount of focus correction, you must get a lens with 2-3 elements and it must be an "achromat" in order to not introduce lots of chromatic aberrations [coma]. These corrective lenses [often called "filters"] are NOT cheap. Good ones cost several hundred $. Here is a list of most of these achromatic closeup lenses:

http://www.1derful.info/Data/CloseUpLenses.pdf

Which brings us to a dedicated macro lens. They will allow [usually] up to a 1:1 reproduction ratio. They will AF on your body. The aperture will work just like all your other lenses, even if that aperture is set electronically bu the body.

Used macro lenses are reasonably priced. Get one. :-)

--
Advertising is the science of bypassing the intelligence of humans long enough to get money from them.
Thanks for the reply. I will definetley be getting a true macro lens now after I've read your post and others. I suppose that a specialty lens like the mpe-65 wouldn't be great for casual shooting either, and I'm on a limited budget, so a cheap macro lens would also serve me well as a portrait lens. Thanks again for the tips and information!
 
Thanks for the reply. I will definetley be getting a true macro lens now after I've read your post and others. I suppose that a specialty lens like the mpe-65 wouldn't be great for casual shooting either, and I'm on a limited budget, so a cheap macro lens would also serve me well as a portrait lens. Thanks again for the tips and information!
Yes, the MPE-65 is a great lens, but it is VERY specialized. Put that one on your bucket list.
 
Thanks for the reply. I will definetley be getting a true macro lens now after I've read your post and others. I suppose that a specialty lens like the mpe-65 wouldn't be great for casual shooting either, and I'm on a limited budget, so a cheap macro lens would also serve me well as a portrait lens.
If you only want to shoot macro upto lifesize, AND have a good portrait lens then do go with a 'real' macro lens.

However, don't dismiss the idea of lens reversing based on (with respect to otherwise good tips) naysaying.

Besides, there's more consideration needed to both your budget and what you intend to shoot. Exactly how much macro do you need?

Quick to reiterate what Chuxter highlights: it is a bad working combination to reverse a lens without an aperture ring. There are work arounds, usually involving blue tac! - but it's awkward.

Reversing a lens WITH an aperture ring is a good idea. It's cheap plus you can get really, really high magnification. And when it comes to lens choice the world is your oyster: Just choose the correct reversing mount and buy any old lens (with corresponding filter thread) for ANY mount - pentax, nikon, tamron adapt-all - Whatever you want. Scour ebay for cheap old high quality glass, perhaps find something for a couple dollars with a stuck focus ring (at high macro you focus by moving the lens) reverse it - Presto! High quality high magnification macro on a budget!

Yes, you'll be 'limited' to full manual operation - But that's usually the best way to work in macro anyway. It's not like you can't instantly check your settings and adjust .

Macro is a great way for someone "who doesn't have a clue" (not my words!) to experiment and innovate, thus learn about optics. Reversing, extending, even making your own - There are so many paths and all cross, so you can't go wrong. Don't be put off ANY of the routes. Experiment and have fun!
 
So I just got a new DSLR and I have a Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens. I want to do macro photography and I want the highest magnification possible. Would it be wise to buy a 1:1 macro lens, use a reverse ring on my sigma lens, use a reverse ring on a MACRO lens, or buy something with 5x magnification like the Canon MP-e 65. I heard that using shorter focal lengths with a reverse ring also increases magnification.

Let me know what you think.
I think you don't have a clue, which is OK. There was a time when each of us didn't have a clue [like when I was 14 and knew everything]. ;-)

Albert and Gerry spoke the truth, but they didn't explain why.

When you put a lens on a reversing ring, it doesn't connect to the electronics in the body, thus, it won't focus and there is no control of the aperture. You can't just manually focus [assuming the lens has a manual focus ring] because that just moves the outside case in and out and doesn't do diddly with the optical elements, which are rigidly attached to the body via that reversing ring. SO, you have to focus by either moving the entire camera or moving the subject. Since the magnification ratios are high w/ macrophotography, that means that TINY movements affect large changes to the focus position. Serious photographers who do this, put either the camera on a focusing slide or put the subject on a focusing slide or BOTH!

The aperture has to be operated manually. Most lenses have a tab that protrudes into the body and is operated by a small solenoid. This solenoid is normally "off" and when you attach a lens, the aperture is opened fully [to make the image in the VF bright]. When you set an aperture [like f/8] the lens aperture does not change until you take a picture. Then the solenoid in the body releases the tab and a spring in the lens shuts the aperture to the preset aperture [like f/8]. When you reverse the lens, nothing operates the tab! You have to do that w/ your finger or a rubber band. :-( Even worse, if you have a lens that does not have an aperture control ring, there is no way to control the aperture when the lens is reversed!

Alternately, you can get a bellows attachment and put the reversed lens on it. That will let you move the lens relative to the body and focus with the knobs on the bellows unit. BUT, since the bellows has a non-trivial depth, the lens can never be close to the body. This means that the MINIMUM mag ratio will be high. This the bellows solution only works for quite high mag ratios. Kinda specialized.

Adapter lenses that screw/clamp onto the front of a lens to allow [make] it focus closer, work just like reading glasses for humans. If those corrective lenses have only one element, they only have decent IQ if the diopter rating is small. If you want a larger amount of focus correction, you must get a lens with 2-3 elements and it must be an "achromat" in order to not introduce lots of chromatic aberrations [coma]. These corrective lenses [often called "filters"] are NOT cheap. Good ones cost several hundred $. Here is a list of most of these achromatic closeup lenses:

http://www.1derful.info/Data/CloseUpLenses.pdf

Which brings us to a dedicated macro lens. They will allow [usually] up to a 1:1 reproduction ratio. They will AF on your body. The aperture will work just like all your other lenses, even if that aperture is set electronically bu the body.

Used macro lenses are reasonably priced. Get one. :-)
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top