Views on the Fotodiox Macro Bellows for EOS Cameras

[milan_moudgill]

<p>Hi folks,<br>

I want to do some macro work off a 5D MkII…</p>

<p>Stumbled upon the Fotodiox Macro Bellows:<br>

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=501<br>

… which is on offer for $50. (150mm max extension)</p>

<p>On the other end I plan on using the MP-E 65 lens, and see if I can invert it using their Fotodiox Macro Reversing Ring for 58mm thread:<br>

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=156<br>

…available for $15</p>

<p>Just wondering if anyone out there has any experience with these products? Any advice and tips? (I am not looking for tilt/shift features.<br>

Compared to some the other systems out there it seems quite cheap, but does that come at the price of performance, or quality?<br>

Any advice will be hugely appreciated…<br>

Thanks in advance,<br>

Milan</p>

 

[carnagex_carnagex]

<p>Problem with those products is there is no way to control your aperture, as there is no communication from your body to your lens.<br>

(novoflex makes one the does though, but the price is kinda high:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/197081-REG/Novoflex_BALCAN_AF_Auto_Bellows_for_Canon.html )</p>

[paul_russell1]

<p>The MP-E has a 5x lifesize magnification, at 21MP...<br>

Is it maybe a microscope you need?<br>

I would use the lens as is and crop. Fine focusing through a dark viewfinder.... <br>

You will probably need to employ focus stacking, as such I would want to see the bellows first, would you mount the bellows on a tripod and hang the body and lens off it? Would you mount the camera and hang the lens and bellows off it? Is it going to be well enough made not to flex or fail between shots?<br>

You have a very serious camera and a very serious lens. Okay the novoflex bellows aren't cheap, but they would appear to be the right tool for the job. It's seems almost sacreligious to put $50 bellows in between.<br>

If you can't run to the bellows then why not get extension tubes? Most type will retain aperture communication.<br>

If you are okay with the MPE lens on it's own then I would suggest the manfrotto 454 focus plate as a better way of moving the camera marginal distances. </p>

[milan_moudgill]

<p>Ah, maybe I do need a microscope? Will look into that separately.<br>

Ever since the post, I have been looking at options… I own a Nikon PB6, and it seems I can attach the 5D to the bellows through an adapter (why indeed go for a $50 bellows…!)<br>

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=123<br>

and reverse the MP-E on the other side through an adapter…<br>

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=154</p>

<p>So Paul the bellows will be on a tripod.<br>

I am looking at (correct me if I am wrong) shooting without a ring flash, as the working distance will be too small to get a ring flash to throw such a wide spread of light… the idea is to hook up daylight balanced continuous lights on either side of the lens, much in the manner of a copy stand.<br>

What am I losing with foregoing aperture control? I will manually open the aperture to focus, and then stop down when shooting? <br>

Let me know if I am off-track!<br>

Thanks,<br>

Milan</p>

 

[scott_ferris]

<p>The MP-E is not a good choice for reversal. It is effectively a variable extension tube set with a short focus 65mm lens at the end. It offers no advantages, and several disadvantages, over many other lenses if used as suggested.</p>

<p>If you need +5x life size then you are looking at some very special gear. What are the specs of the subject, size, location etc and we can help more.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Regardless of the 5X scale issue, many times it's just easier to use bellows with old, but good, manual focus, even pre-set, lenses, reversed or not. That way you can usually control focus and aperture more easily than with EF lenses. Heck, this is one place where you can even put FD lenses to good use reversed or with a non-lensed (or removable lens) adapter.</p>

[paul_russell1]

<blockquote>

<p>I will manually open the aperture to focus, and then stop down when shooting?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Not on an EF lens. No aperture ring. The communication with the body is to actually operate the electronic aperture, via the camera body only.<br>

If not controlled you are resigned to shooting wide open, which at 5x plus bellows, makes depth field in the micrometers.<br>

The MP-E lens is Canons solution to the bellows issue, so that you won't need them.</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>You would not want to reverse the MP-E 65 lens anyhow, since it is already designed to work at magnifications above ×1. If ×5 is not quite enough, add one or more extension tubes. If ×5 is nowhere near enough, you are into even more specialist equipment, as other posters have said. You could look out for a Canon 20mm macro lens head, made originally (alongside a 35mm) for use on Canon bellows with the FD system. A suitable combination of bellows and adapters would make that work fine – all manual, of course, but in this case that's not a problem – and you should be able to get to about ×10 or a bit more fairly readily.</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>If you own a PB-6, then ignore the Photodiox bellows. The PB-6 has geared knobs for the front standard, rear standard, and rail. That means you can set magnification using a combination of front and rear standard, then achieve focus using the rail.</p>

<p>And, for a focus stack, you can use "bellows draw", step back through the subject by moving the rear standard forward, for a parallax free stack that will be "fringe free" after the stack runs.</p>

<p>As so many people mentioned, the MP-E65 is not suitable for reversing.You can reverse a 24mm FD, Nikon, or Pentax wide, which will get you up close to 10X on the PB-6. That gets you going cheaply. The working distance is over 40mm from the rear element of the lens (even at 10x magnification) so it's easy to maneuver lights.</p>

<p>Or invest in those 20mm or 35mm macros that Robin mentioned, if you want better optcial quality (sharper, better contrast). I'd say a 20mm is more useful than a 35. The 35 will only get you up to about 7x, it's too much like the MP-E65 that you already have (although it is much easier to light the subject when you're working around the tiny front of the 35mm, rather than the enormous front of the MP-E65). The 20mm goes up to 15x. Personally, I use a 25mm Zeiss Luminar for that magnification range, on a Nikon PB-4 bellows, with either a 5D II or a D90. (There's no such thing as brand loyalty in macro).</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>Oh, and if you want a taste of higher magnification, the MP-E65 will work surprisingly well on a Kenko PRO-300 1.4x teleconverter. That will get it up to 7x, while keeping it fairly stable. To get to 7x with extension tubes requires 130mm of extension, that's a lot of tubes to stack, very wobbly and hard to maneuver.</p>

[milan_moudgill]

<p>Hey, really appreciate your patient responses.<br>

So, its quite clear that the MP-E 65 is not for the setup in question – specially since I cannot stop down the lens manually. That, and as pointed out, its design makes it unsuitable for reversal. Advice well taken.<br>

Frankly the reversal was being considered since I had no idea of how else to connect a Canon lens to the F mount on the end of the PB6 bellows. Reversal rings are available, to mesh with the F mount, but I am not aware of a Canon-lens-to-Nikon-body convertor.<br>

Also, from the posts, I would rather stick to a solution with the PB6, since I own one, and since its mounting rail is useful for achieving focus, sturdiness, et all – rather than the Fotodiox bellows. Again, agreed.<br>

It seems that the suggested solutions are to go with:<br>

1. "Canon 20mm macro head", in reverse,<br>

2. or work with a Nikkor macro (I have the 60 macro, with reversal rings). <br>

3. Totally think afresh… and consider a microscope for 10x<br>

Joseph, any advice on where to get the 25mm Zeiss Luminar, or the Canon 20mm macro?<br>

Thanks for all the inputs!<br>

Milan</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>Milan, you're obsessed with reversing lenses! The Canon 20mm is designed to work at magnifications above ×1 and does not need/want reversing. I seem to remeber (not confident of this) that it is actually LTM and would be used on Canon bellows with an FD/FL to LTM adapter, so you would just need a Nikon to LTM adapter. Your biggest problem is going to be to find the Canon 20mm lens, but there are alternatives.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>You can't reverse the <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/fdmacro/2035macro.htm">20 or 35 mm macro lenses from Canon</a>. And you don't need to. I have the 35mm (in a loft in the UK!) I have used it with two bellows connected to each other, it gives huge magnification, very dim viewing and incredibly narrow DoF. Any more magnification than that and you really do need a microscope. Last time I saw one on eBay it was around $200, you need the mounting plate and they don't come with one.</p>

<p>What is the size of your intended subjects?</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>Milan, I acquired my set of Luminars (16mm f2.5, 25mm f3.5, 40mm f4, and 63mm f4.5) as an exercise in plain dumb luck. Two eBay deals, one purchase from a Photo.net member, and one purchase from an online store before "Luminar mania" swept the photographic community and you could get them for sane prices. The 25mm and 40mm come up on eBay pretty regularly, and you'll see them for about $300-400. I think the 25mm is a better "starting point" for you, to pick up where your MP-E65 leaves off. There's some guy "Kevin" with an eBay store who tries to sell them at 2-4x the going rate, avoid him.</p>

<p>Other good ones to look for include the</p>

<ul>

<li>25mm f2 or f2.5 Leitz Photar, which goes for about $500, because Leitz is "collectible", and because it's faster, especially the f2</li>

<li>20mm f3.5 Canon, which goes for $200-300, because it's not as collectible, and because it's slower.</li>

<li>19mm f2.8 Makro-Nikkor, about $400</li>

<li>28mm f1.8 Ultra-Micro Nikkor, the king of macro, I've seen them go over $1,000</li>

<li>20mm f2 Olympus Zuiko Macro, about $300, despute being so fast, because you have to deal with the Oly mount, and rigging an adapter.</li>

<li>20mm f3.5 Olympus Zuiko MC Macro, about $300</li>

</ul>

<p>And, if you don't mind the lack of an aperture control, a lot of 10x microscope objectives are essentially 20mm fast macro lenses, although they lack aperture controls. Aperture controls aren't all that necessary, because if you extend a 25mm f3.5 Luminar far enough to get 5x magnification, you're now at an effective f21 with the lens wide open to f3.5, and an effective f38 at 10x and the limit of the bellows.</p>

<p>That's why the f2.0 lenses are so sought after, because they are effective f22 at 10x, noticeably sharper than f2.8 or 3.5 lenses. So, a Nikon "M Plan 10x" microscope objective that's equal to a 21.2mm f1.9 lens is a real gem, and I often use that objective on my PB-4 bellows. And the Nikon "CF N Plan Achro" has a real cult following among macro shooters, used on a bellows. There's a reason that so many of these classic macro lenses have RMS microscope threads. This sort of macro is the "crossover" point between regular lenses and microscope objectives, the Photars and Luminars and Makro Nikkors and Canon MacroPhoto lenses are hybrids, part microscope objective, part macro lens.</p>

<p>Oh, and just for your amusement, because there's more than one person talking microscopes in this thread, here's a "macroscope", a stand for a camera with a bellows, a focusing stage (a 6 inch lab jack also works great as a stage). That's either the 25mm or the 40mm Luminar mounted. And the subject was a snowflake. I enjoy carpentry ;)</p><div></div>

[w_t1]

<p>ok Joseph...how the heck do you keep a snowflake frozen long enough to get a pic...and arent those usually shot on black velvet....</p>

<p>I'm with JDM's suggestion, keep your nikon bellows. I use Canon FD autobellows with adapter, use all my eos bodies with my old FD lenses....sweet setup, although I'd love to have the Novoflex bellow$</p>

<p>I read all that reversing ring stuff from one of John Shaw's nature photo books in the early 80's, but have never been motivated to try it. Plus, you got a few pixels on the 5d2 to play with.</p>

<p>Tom</p>

<p> </p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>WT, that's my screen porch. It's at full outside, Michigan in February temperatures. I put everything but the camera's battery outside, let it sit for a couple of hours, go out, put a battery in the camera, and have some fun until my feet or fingers get too cold.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>and arent those usually shot on black velvet</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Look between the two film cans, right at the base of the cans, there's the black velvet, a 2 in square, all I need for these pictures. The snowflakes are on the microscope slide, the velvet below the slide forms a "black hole" backdrop. The snowflakes need to be flat, because the DOF is so insanely shallow.</p>

<p>I sometimes use black velvet for the "landing pad" when I gather flakes, then move them to the slide with a tiny paint brush. It's a technique I've seen other flakeographers use. Sometimes, I just set out a tray loaded with a dozen slides, bring it back in out of the snow, look around with a loupe for cool flakes, and load the slide at that position.</p>

<p>John Shaw is an amazing photographer, and an excellent writer. He knows more about stalking small subjects than I ever will. But one thing he got totally wrong was the stuff on coupling and reversing lenses. When you put a long lens on the camera, and reverse a short lens on the front, the front lens is not a "diopter", it's the most important part of the process. You've built an "infinity coupled microscope", and the front lens is the "main" lens. It's the one you control the aperture on, and the one that has to be chosen carefully. Master that concept, and reversed lens work is fun, and surprisingly high quality.</p><div></div>

[w_t1]

<p>Joseph, nice stuff, thanks for the detailed reply. Never heard the term "flakeographer" but your setup makes sense in Michigan, doesn't get too cold around here (pac northwest), I'd have to rent a grocery store's walk-in freezer to do that kind of work.</p>

<p>I will make a note to re-examine Shaw's info on reversing lenses, keeping your points in mind. The highest I go now is the canon fd 35mm bellows only lens on the fd autobellows which gets well above 1x magnification.</p>

<p>thanks again<br>

tom</p>