HOME | DD

graemo In reply to ??? [2014-12-01 22:59:27 +0000 UTC]

no guide, sorry
but basically, all you need is to take apart an automatic macro tube, connect the opposing contacts with longer wire instead of the internal connections, and fix a filter thread to one end

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to hertbonfaroff [2008-12-22 20:00:50 +0000 UTC]

the point is to be able to control the aperture
on the canon EF system, you can only set it on the camera body, so you need the electronic connection

there is a low tech trick to lock any aperture setting in the lens when taking it off the body (mount lens normally, set aperture, push dof previev button, take of the lens with the preview button still pushed) but in the field that's too much hassle when chasing nervous bugs

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to EdwinBont [2005-11-15 00:45:26 +0000 UTC]

haha, now that's a nice bastard
and seems to work pretty well, are those full frames in your gallery?

but i'm not sure if you need to make an inversion adapter like mine, i don't think it will give you more magnificaton than you already have
i built this thing before i had my 100mm macro lens, but now i only use the 100mm plus extension tubes
and the inverted 17-40mm lens i used is of course not as sharp as the macro
do you know how much magnification you can get with your setup?
i think i'll try it myself and compare

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EdwinBont In reply to graemo [2005-11-15 15:37:27 +0000 UTC]

Most of my pictures are full frame, some are cropped but only 20% or so.

When I use a 100mm macro + reversed 50.
Magnification is 2:1 when i set the 100mm to 1:3 (i get a bit of weird corners then)
And 3:1 when i set the 100mm to 1:1.
The downside is that the working distance is very small, less than an 2 cm.

I tried to handhold a 50mm reversed on my body just to see what happened.
At 2cm from the body, magnification is almost 1:1,5.
When i move it about 10-15cm away i get 3:1.
The good thing is that the working distance is about 5cm, much better then when i use the 100+50.
I am thinking of making a sort of zoomlens, using bellows or two tubes.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

graemo In reply to EdwinBont [2005-11-15 17:42:05 +0000 UTC]

i think the magnification with the 50mm inverted is about the same as with the 100mm macro lens used normally, and with the macro lens you should have a better working distance, and it's also even sharper than the 50mm
with 60mm extension tubes i get 2:1
and i also want to use it with a bellows, but since an automatic bellows for the EF mount costs 500€ , i bought a manual bellows and another 12mm extension tube on ebay and will combine them into an automatic one myself (i just haven't started working on it yet)
i don't just attach my inversion adapter, because it's too thick, and i want the bellows as slim as possible when retracted
my only concern with a bellows is sensor dust, but i guess changing multiple extension tubes in the field all the time isn't much better

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to dallasgutauckis [2005-06-06 06:45:19 +0000 UTC]

good question, i don't really remember, but since the flash cleared the top of the lens without shadowing i'd say somewhere around 30-40mm

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

dallasgutauckis In reply to graemo [2005-06-07 07:05:10 +0000 UTC]

how do you get so close without them (your subjects) flying/going away?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

graemo In reply to dallasgutauckis [2005-06-07 14:39:09 +0000 UTC]

slowly

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to bzed [2004-09-06 22:09:41 +0000 UTC]

as far as i know, you can't buy it, because it's much easier to do with manual lenses

and you don't need one for your nikon, because with nikon you can set the aperture on the lens, and you habe to focus manually anyway, so you don't need any electronic contacts, a cheap mount-to-lens-thread adapter will do

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

bzed In reply to graemo [2004-09-06 22:59:06 +0000 UTC]

it's avaiable from Novofles...

you can't change the aperture on most of the new nikon lenes manually.... but I have an old one, too

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

graemo In reply to bzed [2004-09-07 11:06:27 +0000 UTC]

oh, i didn't know that, i coudn't find one when i searched the web back then
and their bellow look nice too

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

bzed In reply to graemo [2004-09-08 01:15:54 +0000 UTC]

yeah, afaik they make good stuff.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to RetaeaNicole [2004-08-25 15:09:09 +0000 UTC]

this setup isn't too heavy, since part of it are just hollow tubes without glass, the only heavy thing is the 17-40mm lens and this isn't too bad

yeah, i speak german, you don't have much choice when born in austria
but at least i can fully enjoy rammstein lyrics

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

RetaeaNicole In reply to graemo [2004-08-25 19:01:58 +0000 UTC]

ahhhh i see. alrighty.

lol that makes sense and indeed

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to Castigator [2004-08-19 11:01:32 +0000 UTC]

well, the idea is not new, most people just do it with manual lenses and don't need the cables and contacts
but since i have more and better EF lenses, i wanted to do this

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

nikhil In reply to nikhil [2004-08-19 09:34:49 +0000 UTC]

me too...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to nikhil [2004-08-18 15:51:48 +0000 UTC]

hehe, thanks
i'm glad that the work paid off

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to glenneroo [2004-08-04 16:16:53 +0000 UTC]

well, sometimes i spend more time on developing and making equipment, than on actually photographing (or whatever other hobby i'm making equipment for)
but it still pays

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to kristoff [2004-05-26 16:41:24 +0000 UTC]

huh, i don't think many people would want these...
manual lenses work just the same, i just happen to have much better and more different EF lenses than manual ones and don't want to carry even more of them just for the occasional macro use...
and should the thing brake somehow (although i strongly doubt it) and someone drops an expensive lens, it's me who's the bad guy...
i'm not an engineer even...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

graemo In reply to coxi [2004-05-26 15:41:29 +0000 UTC]

"ein tele aus lauter kleinen objektiven"

häh? ein tele?? lauter kleine objektive???
das ist kein tele, sondern ein makro, und ich hab nur ein objektiv verwendet... hab ich die beschreibung irgendwie versaut?

das geht zwar auch (man kann einen teleconverter aus 2 anderen objektiven bauen, dann hast insgesamt 3 O_o), das hab ich aber hier nicht gemacht...
außerdem geht da die lichtstärke ziemlich ein...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

coxi In reply to graemo [2004-05-26 15:45:12 +0000 UTC]

ne.. ich hab die größe gemeint.. oder das aussehen
es ist so lang wie ein tele-objektiv
und sieht aus wie viele kleine gläser übereinander.. ich hab ja ehrlich gesagt keine ahnung was das ist ^^

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

graemo In reply to coxi [2004-05-26 15:58:53 +0000 UTC]

ahso...
ich hab neulich das canon EF 400mm f/2.8 L IS USM in der auslage vom orator gesehen...
fuck, das ist ein riesending!!! um knackige 8000 ¤

👍: 0 ⏩: 0