Close-focusing with a non-macro lens

[joel_collins]

I recently bought a Sinar F1 and a Nikon 210mm/5.6 lens. I realize that the Nikon lens is not a macro, but how close can I focus it before I exceed its limits and enter the macro realm? I'd like to do table-top photography of items that are 5-10 inches in size (for example, a computer mouse). Thanks for your help.

[n_dhananjay3]

Magnification is a function of focal length and bellows draw. For 1:1

or 1X, you need to be able to extend the lens to about twice its

focal length (with your lens, you need to get about 420mm between

film and lens nodal point). If you're looking at photographing

objects about 5 to 10 inches in size, thats about 0.5X to 1X (which

isn't horribly unamanageable magnification). Assuming you have

sufficient bellows, you can get the magnification you want. Regarding

quality, you're likely to hear differing opinions. The Nikon is not a

true macro lens (which proably have flatter fields etc). However,

given that photographing 3 dimensional objects often involves

stopping down for depth of field, diffraction rapidly becomes a

formidable factor (especially since effective f-stop is even smaller

with the bellows extension). This means that lenses are diffraction

limited fairly frequently. I'm quite happy with regular lenses at

this range of magnifications. If a flat field is an issue, you can

try using your enlarging lens. However, others may be more discerning

in their demands and might demand a true macro lens. Good luck. DJ

[bob_salomon3]

greater then 1:10 a macro lens will be noticeably superior.

[yong_ran_zhu]

Is it possible to use close-up lens? Actually I have the same question

to ask.

Thanks!

[bob_salomon3]

Not if you want a professional quality image. Even multi element

close up lenses are no where near as good as a true macro

lens.

 

<p>

 

But they may make an acceptable image for you depending on

how critical you are and the effect you are after.

 

<p>

 

But not if it is edge to edge critical results.

[david4]

I have found the Rodenstock Apo-Ronar 300 mm, Nikkor 200 mm M-lens, and Schneider 210 G-Claron obviously superior for 1:1 to 1:10 images compared to what can be attained with the N-Sironar 210 mm lens. I do not know whether a true 120 mm or 180 mm macro lens would ensure even a better 1:1 image.

[david richhart]

Joel...like you, I read the answers to the question that you posted.

<p>

Then I look at the photographs of Edward Weston. <p>

No hi-tech lenses, no fancy lab, no zone system... <p>

And again I look at the photographs of Edward Weston...

[joel_collins]

Thanks for that perspective, Dave... (And, of course, thanks to all

the others that posted an answer.)

[jeremy_tavan1]

Although a true macro lens may well provide superior results, I have

had wonderful results using my 180mm APO Sironar S at 1:1 or

thereabouts. It is extraordinarily sharp, resolving every tiny little

hair on the edge of wheat husks, for example. I have not felt any

need for a dedicated macro lens at 1:1, though for extreme

magnification I have considered getting a Zeiss Luminar or similar.