Extreme Macro - Test Subjects

[aravind raman]

Hi All,

 

Yesterday,i bought my self some lens reversal rings, to be used for my

50/24 mm lens with 70-300 G lens. Theoretically, i should be getting

magnifications upto 6 times with 50 and 12 with 24 mm lenses resp..

 

My question, is at such magnifications what type of objects to use for

testing the equipment. I would like to know this before i invest into

macro focussing rail systems and stuff like that..

 

I am also having problmes bringing the object into the frame for

focussing, i keep circling around the area.It extremely difficult to

find the object to focus upon.

 

Aravind

[lex_jenkins]

As I recall from my experiments with macrophotography the best subjects are inanimate. When I was a kid we photographed our stamp collections. Big thrill for a 13-year-old with a reversing ring.

 

I very seldom do macrophotography at greater than 1:1 magnification anymore. If I did I'd get a bellows system and/or a precision focusing rail and a rock solid tripod. As you've already discovered the slightest movement sends the view into dizzying spirals.

 

It might help to keep things a bit less ambitious for now and combine your prime lenses with the reversing rings, rather than using the zoom. I've gotten good results with an ordinary 50mm prime lens attached to the camera body and another 50mm or 35mm prime attached via reversing rings. The magnification is within reasonable range for manual adjustments (meaning, gently shoving the tripod into place) and the results can be very at the centers.

[vivek iyer]

Agree with Lex on the test subjects. Check out the examples I have.

 

None are "extreme"macros, though!

 

I was checking out a macro lens recently at >20X. Aphids make good test subjects for this.

[stemked]

If you get a little more interested in it I would really suggest getting a macro slider (several manufactures make them). You'll be surprised how difficult it is to focus when you get to the extremes.

 

Try insect wings, especially butterflies and moths. The anthers of many species of flowers can be pretty cool too.

[dan_fromm1]

If you want to know what your lenses can and can't do and how much stopping down from wide open gains/loses, there are few inexpensive substitutes for the USAF 1951 target. Edmund Optics sells a nice one for $US 115. See http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlinecatalog/DisplayProduct.cfm?productid=1790,

the one you want is probably their stock number NT38-257.

[arnabdas]

Try coins and currency.

[aravind raman]

Thanks for the replies everyone..

 

Its quite difficult to manually uges the position of the legs, just for focussing. To be frank is quite a daunting task..

 

Regarding the test subjects, thanks for the recommendations. I will definitely try to shoot some more currencies. I tried to shoot currencies and coins and at this magnifications i was getting only a character printed in it :)

 

Aravind

[joseph_wisniewski]

Chill a spider in the refrigerator for 1/2 hour. You'll have about 10 minutes of shooting before it revives...<div></div>

[dan_fromm1]

Three more thoughts.

 

Shooting much above 1:1 hand-held is a waste of time and, if you're shooting film, film and processing. If you're serious about working at the magnifications you can attain with the gear you've told us about -- no lower than 1.4:1 -- you're going to have to use a tripod and focusing rail or something similar. For shooting dead subjects in the home, I use an old enlarger converted into a copy stand. In the field, hand-held up to 1:1 with 35 mm, on tripod with 2 axis rail above 1:1 with 35 mm and at all magnifications with 2x3.

 

If you want to know what your lens, as opposed to you and your lens, can do, good motion control is a must. Even though not all of the respondents here favor use of electronic flash when taking real serious pictures, flash is a great aid when trying lenses out. When used in conjunction with a focusing rail and solid support -- tripod, copy stand -- it elminates most problems of controlling motion.

 

I was serious when I suggested using a USAF 1951 target. It has several advantages over any old convenient finely detailed object, e.g., a coin or bank note. It has a range of scales of detail, so will show, usually, what a lens can and can't resolve. If the lens resolves better than 228 lp/mm in the target, the cheap Edmund USAF 1951 on glass won't help you find its limit, but in my experience its a rare lens that does that well. It has an odd number of bars. Three (3). This allows easy differentiation between spurious resolution and true resolution. And it has pairs of bars oriented orthogonal to each other. This allows quick diagnosis of astigmatism.

 

Good luck, have fun, keep at it,

[lancemcvay]

I just got a reversing ring in the mail, too. I used a 50mm mounted backwards on a 100mm macro. Found plenty of inspiration in the <a href="http://sacredartichoke.com/coppermine/thumbnails.php?album=32"target="new">produce section of the supermarket</a>

<p>

I do share your frustrations with focusing. I'm going to have to get some sort of rail or slider if I'm going to keep this up.

<p>

<center>

 

 

<img src="http://sacredartichoke.com/coppermine/albums/07-02-2005/IMG_8175.jpg"><br><p><i>Oyster Mushroom</i></center>

[johnb]

Aravindhan TS,<br>

You could try something simple like I did.<br>

I took this shot with a Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro with a 12mm extension and a Canon 2X TC<br>

<br>

<center>UnNatural Light<br><A href="http://photography.firstchurchofthestreets.com/macro/natural_backlight.htm" title="Click to Open Photo Spec page Photo copyright ? 2005 John Bauer" target="_blank"><img src="http://photography.firstchurchofthestreets.com/macro/natural_backlight.jpg" alt="Click to see Photo Specs Photo copyright ? 2005 John Bauer" style="WIDTH: 500px; HEIGHT: 333px"><br>

EF 100mm f/2.8 macro w/12mm extension and 2X TC<br>

click for specs

</A></center>

<br><br>

It's a piece of beef jerky with a flashlite behind it.<br>

No macro rail just a tripod.

[sean de merchant httpw]

Myself, I want a macro focusing rail for using a reversed lens, but I do not have one. So I typically substitute using a flash for the tripod and rail (I do use the tripod too). As the flash duration is typically shorter than the fastest shutter speed on a camera you get sharp shots (no camera shake) if they are in focus. Then shoot a lot handheld to get one in focus.

 

As for test subjects, make a killing jar (a glass jar with methyl alcohol soaked paper at the bottom) and capture yourself an insect or two. Then pose them using pins. This will get you a stationary subject with lots of little details.

 

Another good subject is flowers. Whether you are looking at pollen spattered across a detail of a blossom or are actually seeing detail in a 2 mm wide blossom, they will make stationary subjects too.

 

some thoughts,

 

Sean

[aravind raman]

Thanks Sean,

 

I will definitely try some flowers and try to get a few shots..

 

Will post them.. as soos as i get my hand on the scans.

 

Aravind