arlon

<p>Before I spent $277 for a filter, I'd buy a camera already converted off of ebay or simply find a cheap used d70 and have it converted. I used the Hoya filter for a brief time but the issues with slow shutters and focus adjustment (no AF) was just maddening. I had to use a tripod everywhere I went and then if there was a breeze everything was blurry. Then I had a used D70 converted which was perfect. I simply carried it to the park in a fanny pack and when something that I thought would look good in IR showed up I just swapped cameras and took the picture. AF was adjusted by lifepixel to IR, AF works perfectly and shutter speeds are normal.. The converted camera was just so much better. That camera was stolen on a trip to Tulsa OK and I replaced it with an already converted D100 I got pretty cheap on Ebay. I prefered the D70 but the D100 has been a fine camera for IR too. When my D800 arrives, I may have my D90 converted..</p>

<p> </p>

<p>In the same boat with a preordered D800 and probably don't have 2 lenses that are worthy. I do like old MF lenses and have quite a few of them to try. Was intrigued to read the post commenting on the PC lenses. I have one of the old 35mm PC lenses but don't have a clue how to really use it. Maybe I'll start trying to learn. <br>

I shoot a lot of landscapes with a D700 and usually use a 28-300mm VR lens. I seem to shoot a lot more at the 28mm end. Sometimes I think I'd be better served just using one of the old MF 28mm F2.8 lenses I have. Some of the cheaper ones have been big surprises on the D700, maybe there will be some surprises for the D800 too. One of my favorites is a 28mm f2.8 Vivitar close focus I got for $35. Can't wait to get the D800 in my hands to see what some of these vintage lenses will do. Maybe I won't have to spend another $3k for a few lenses. </p>

Outside, a monopod can be pretty useful. Sb-800 in fp mode will let you use high shutter speeds with most Nikons. If you happen to have a d50 laying around it will flash sync with about any old flash at at any shutter speed (electronic shutter). Use a monopod to get close to steady and the flash and Fstop to do the rest.

 

I've even used a 2x tele behind a bellows and 55mm micro lens for some pretty decent magnification.

There is a point of no return though...

Just make a cardboard snoot for the sb-800. You can make a very decent macro snoot out of a toothpaste box or something similar. All you need is something to channel the light and reflect it down on your subject. A little blue (removeable) masking tape is all you need to keep it on the flash.

Just testing if ubb works here..

http://www.pbase.com/arlon/image/92346818/large.jpg

You might consider simply using a "3/4T" nikon adapter on your kit lens. They are quite remarkable. Not to be confused with the other cheap diopters out there. I use a 3T or 4T (52mm filter thread) on my 18-55 kit lens quite often. I also have 55mm, 105mm, 200mm micros, 105mm Dine macro and 90mm tamron 2.5 macro. None of them are substantially better in image quality than the kit lens and a $35 diopter (at least for internet displays). Examples from 3T and 18-55 kit lens at http://www.pbase.com/arlon/1855_kit_lens_macro&page=all These where shot with a 3T and onboard flash.

 

Another consideration is using the freeware "CombineZM" that stacks several images to increase DOF. It adds the in focus portion of several images. Look at http://www.pbase.com/arlon/focus_experiment&page=all to see the 11 individual frames that went into the image below..

 

 

Large: http://www.pbase.com/arlon/image/92346818/original.jpg

Small: http://www.pbase.com/arlon/image/92346818/medium.jpg

This is just a response I coppied from another forum on the same question.

 

Just C/P form another forum..

 

Actually this was pretty simple.

 

First I got a plastic water bottle and made a pin hole in it (tiny, took 3 tries) to be my milk "dripper". Suspended over the sink from an expandable curtain rod stuck between the cabinets.

 

Receiver was a black ceramic cereal bowl set on top of a tupperware container to get the edge above the sink. I hung a black towel on the wall behind the sink (wife hasn' found that yet). I then floated a piece of black construction foam (that real thin stuff you get in sheets at hobby lobby) on the the water in the bowl. Foam was a good splash target. Made a few drops and stuck a straight pin into the foam for my focus target, set the focus, removed the pin. Liquid type/depth makes a big difference in how the drop/splash looks. Experiment.. Red splash was just food coloring in the milk.

 

Set the camera (on tripod directly in front) level just below the rim of the bowl. Used a remote flash on the left side (setting on another tupperware container in the other sink and slightly BELOW the bowl) triggered with an optical slave. Another flash shooting straight up (bounced off the ceiling to keep it from exposing the container) to trigger the remote flash .

 

I used a 200mm macro lens (to get back far enough to avoid splashing the lens to bad)and shot most of them at f22 (to underexpose everything but the drop) with the flashes in manual mode at 1/16 power (shortest flash duration). Shutter speed doesn't matter as it's the flash duration that's freezing the drop. If you get the shutter too slow and aperture to wide, you'll start geting fuzzy images as it exposes the shot without the flash. Get a good rhythm going and you can get a pretty good successful capture ratio going.

 

For water I just used the kitchen faucet..

 

The "off camera flash" is a cheap vivitar hotshoe flash of unknown compatability I got of ebay for $8 delivered. Just a junker. Trigger is from a $5 IR remote flash trigger. It will trigger any hotshoe from any flash on a camera. I mask the camera flash with a piece of old exposed film. It's dark enough to kill the flash contribution on the subject but passes IR to the trigger. My entire setup less the camera cost less then $25. It's more about being creative than rich..

 

Look at ebay item # 150215008874 ($10 delivered). That's what I use to trigger my flashes. I have several of them.. I use ANY cheap hotshoe flash I can find. They never come in contact with the camera so it doesn't matter what they where made for. JUST DON'T STICK A RANDOM FLASH ON YOUR CAMERA.

 

I've also used a 110v remote flash (self contained remote trigger and flash all in one) that you just stick into a clamp-on light and plug into the wall. It's a flash that's built like a light bulb and fired by the on camera flash (IR, no cords). They are great handy flash accessories and they are so cheap ($20 delivered) you can afford several of them (ebay number 360013881942).

 

Hope this helps. It really is very easy to do..

I've used an acromatic type close-up filter on a number of lenses. I've even used them on the cheapest of kit lenses with excellent results. I think any as long as they are acromatic, they would give decent results. Skip the single lens cheapies..

 

To the post above.. I like the filters because when on a hike, they fit in my pocket and an extra lense doesn't. I have a jillion lenses but I don't always want to carry a handful of them everywhere I go. Edward, get over it. Not everyone needs to or wants to carry a camera bag everywhere they go. Sometimes I don't even carry a DSLR and still get some nice shots.. OH, and when you stick the filter on your 60mm micro, you get REALLY close. I probably use the filters more on macro lenses more than anything else..

 

Here's a gallery with some examples of a nikon 3t filter on an 18-55 kit lens. Surely the conon 500 series on the lens you're talking about would blow these completely away..

 

http://www.pbase.com/arlon/1855_kit_lens_macro

I like shooting these as a winter diversion and was curious what and how others

might be doing for the same? I seem to have settled on my old 200mm micro to

keep far enough back to keep from getting the lens splashed. Usually set up in

the sink with a remote flash. Remote flash on the D200 in a semi dark room to

keep ambient light from exposing the drop seems to stop motion pretty well.

 

I use a plastic bottle with a pin hole to drip from. Works great with milk and

food coloring. What other ideas are out there?

 

A few examples out here..

http://www.pbase.com/arlon/favorite_drops

You might try using a nikon 3-4t diopter lens on your 18-55 kit lens. My 18-55 kit lens has bested several lenses of supposed higher quality (I have more than a few lenses). Here are a few shots from an 18-55 kit with a $40 3T added..

http://www.pbase.com/arlon/1855_kit_lens_macro

The T-series diopters are VERY good. I have 3-6T's and they work very well, essentially no light loss and if there is loss of sharpness anywhere but the extreme edges, I can't detect it. I've used these diopters with everything from the 105mm Dine to a cheap plastic 80-300 "G" lens. Results will surprise you. Bang for the buck, the 3/4T lenses are hard to beat. Here are some samples of a 3T on an 18-55 "kit" lens. http://www.pbase.com/arlon/1855_kit_lens_macro

There are some examples in the bug and flower galleries too but there really isn't any way to tell between "diopter" shots and straight lens or extension tube shots. That's a good thing to me.

The big VR is decently sharp for a zoom, slow to focus, very slow, needs a lot of light. Useless for moving subjects unless in broad daylight. It's only virtue is being able to carry one lens when you know you are going to need several focal lengths. If you need really sharp images or images of moving objects, I'd go for the fixed 300. I use a 300 f2.8 a lot more than the zoom. The zoom is handy for hiking or bike riding if you can deal with the weight. It's a fairly heavy lens too. If I could only keep one, it'd be the 300 without a second thought. VR lenses also seem to break when you need them the most..

I've used a very similar set up and had decent results with it. I even started my stack with a 2x teleconverter (used because the bellows won't clear to mount drectly on the D50/200), added the bellows, used a cheap reverse adapter, added the 55mm micro. Not near 10x but I got pollen grains to look like rice and was able to do it handheld. Film would have been much harder because of the difficulty in guessing an exposure and taking a dozen shots before hitting the focus right. My whole "super macro" setup cost less than $100..

 

picture on this thread: http://www.macrophotography.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1004<div></div>

I played with a 200mm f4, 135mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4 and 1.8 lenses. Looks promising at the moment. I had some very good shots with a 135 and 50mm "E" lenses. These where $35 ebay lenses and the coupler was less than $10 delivered. So for about $80 I can have a very capable macro set up. I did notice that opening the back lens and stopping down the front lens made much better pictures but was much harder to focus (I was hand holding, be easier when I have time to set up a tripod).

and finally they lilly the anther was on..

try this with the correct image..<div></div>

the anther:<div></div>

I'm not new to getting magnification, just getting it with a stack of lenses. I have Nikon auto bellows, half a dozen enlarger lenses and such. I might take a rainy weekend and see just what I can get. I reversed a lens on the bellows and turned pollen into what looks like rice. I haven't tried a stacked lens on a bellows yet? I guess I'm going to have to do the combo thing just to see how it compares. I'm just looking for ways for people to get quality magnification from their cameras without breaking the bank doing it.

 

There just seems to be a number of paths to the same destination. I just feel like I need to try them all. Have the nikon diopters so I can incorporate them too. Thanks for the ideas. Arlon

 

See if I can get the pollen grains on a lilly anther to post,,<div></div>

I have a bunch of old nikon lenses and a lens coupler and was going to try

stacking them in a trial and error fashion. Any thought on what stack might

work best or is there something online that already gets into this issue?

Generalities? Use matched lenses or any combo, faster lens in the back or

front? longer lens in the back or front?

 

I was planning to start the stack with the 55 f1.2 on the camera stopped down

to 1.4/1.8 and add other lenses from there..

 

Has anyone used a zoom for the reversed lens and use the zoom for focusing?

Seems like it may be the perfect solution for a wider range of focus if it

works at all.

Lense possibles (all 52mm filter ring, manual lenses):

 

200mm f4

200mm f4 micro

135mm f2.8

105mm f4

85mm f2.8

55mm f3.5 micro (6 or 7 of these)

55mm f1.2

50mm f1.8

50mm f1.4 (several)

35mm f2.8

28mm f3.5

24mm f2.8

 

and a few short zooms and others I'm forgetting at the moment.

May have an even number of diaphram blades but I still like the old 300mm tamron lenses. At least the subject is in focus! LOL

Here's a "stand off" shot from an old manual 300mm lens. It's not perfect but it's an idea of what you can do with just a telephoto lens and a MONOPOD.

 

http://www.pbase.com/image/79907780

I mostly use a D50 and a 105mm dine lens for my macro stuff. It isn't perfect but the D50 is my prefered platform for the Dine lens. I have a D200 and just can't get the sharp images from it that I get from the D50. You surely don't need a D200 to use a manual lens. Best teacher is shutter time. Get out and start changing parameters until you get a feel for what works. After 8mo of owning a digital camera, I'm getting pretty good at getting exposure right on the first try just from experience. Look in these two galleries for some examples.

 

http://www.pbase.com/arlon/bugs

 

http://www.pbase.com/arlon/flowers

 

All of the pictures in these two galleries are shot with manual lenses (obviously not all Dine 105) and mostly on my D50. Your issue seems to be more manual than dine specific. Also consider shooting RAW so you have a little more range to play with adjusting exposure later. What ever you do, just do more of it. If you don't want to use a flash, GET A MONOPOD! They can be VERY useful for tragets a little further from the lens.

I did a lot of "fiddling" with the camera and was able to get a few excellent shots. I was on auto sharpening and +1 and even +2 seemd to help. Also I assume the resolution makes camera shake way more obvious. Tripod, remote release, mirror up, very careful focus gave soem decent pictures. Still got more "throw backs" than I'm used too but the potential is there. I did play with the diopter and seemd to get best results one click off of max. I was doing macro shots of a scale at f3.5 to bring DOF to a minimum the checking the sharpest position on the scale to see if that was what I was focusing on. It was dead on. I took it to the park and ran into several other d200 owners there and all seemed to have similar experience with this camera. All where ready to toss it into the creek until they finally got all the onboard shooting parameters, equipment (better tripod, remote release, flashes, etc.) and technique down. I guess I was just expecting magic without the effort.. Arlon

Thanks for the comments. I'll do a bit more experimenting this afternoon when I get home.

I have uncorrected vision and can not adjust the diopter control enough for a

perfectly clear view finder image. I have to crank the diopter adjustment to

the max neg. value. Is there some coarse adjustment for this? My d50 adjustment

was right in the middle of the range. I think this is costing me image clarity

as I can not focus properly.

 

Also does anyone know if the D200 has issues with higher F stops diffractions?

I'm mostly shooting macro and used f16 on a dine 105mm for my best clarity/DOF

compromise on the D50. Using the same settings and lens on the d200, images are

much "softer". Cranking down to f8, I get much better clarity but DOF is gone.

I hate to pay $1400 for a camera that I can't shoot at f11-16 on an f4-32

lens.. Is it just the added pixels causing it to "LOOK" softer by seeing more?

Maybe it's an issue with the diopter adjustment and what looks like it's

focused isn't??

 

Grabbing at anything. I'm pretty frusterated with this d200 right now..