Macro: Reverse mount vs. Extension Tubes?

A

Andy_S

Messages
316
Edit My Images
Yes
Macro: Reverse mount vs. Extension Tubes?
Or both :)

Having learned about the reverse mount method this evening I've been having a go and loving it :) Just been holding the lens in place so far but have ordered an adaptor, (single and 2 lens versions.)
I had been considering a set of extension tubes but from searching it seems that reversing will give much better magnification.
How do the two methods compare, and how about combining them?
Any advice appreciated.
 
Personally I would go for some uber cheap macro extension tubes I have used the dirt cheap ebay ones that cost below £10 with my 50mm f/1.8 and have got some amazing results :thumbs:


279/365 by mwhcvt, on Flickr

Matt
MWHCVT
 
Extension tubes are easier to work with because you're camera can still communicate electronically with the lens (on tubes with contacts), letting you set aperture on the camera, plus the camera can keep the aperture wide open for a bright viewfinder image until the picture is taken.

Reversing tends to give higher magnification, but you lose all electronic control over the lens, and you will have to control aperture via the aperture ring on the lens (if the lens doesnt have an aperture ring, it'll be fixed at its default aperture value (wide open or stopped down to minimum aperture)). Also the lens will be stopped down all the time, making the viewfinder very dark.

If you want to go for really high mag then reversing will deliver more than extension tubes, but for ease of shooting (macro is often complicated enough already), a set of contact extension tubes would be better.

Just how much mag you gain from each method depends on exactly what kind of lens you're using it with.
 
Last edited:
I have a 52mm thread reversing ring.... Tried with 105mm with 50mm reversed.

Got more DoF but working distance halved when compared to the extensions tubes plus 105mm macro... This meant that the inner lens of the 50mm was around 5mm from the subject... Lighting then became a problem...


:) didn't play with it too much, but at a few quid to try, not too bad! :)
 
I've got a 100 f2.8 L macro and use tubes with that and the output is magnificent. On it's own the lens gives superb IQ and full 1:1 but with the full set of tubes the working distance gets very short but the image is massive.
I've recently got an MP-E65 which goes from 1:1 to a massive 5:1 which means you can get an eye of a needle looking about 2 feet long. This is a brilliant lens but virtually impossible to use outdoors in anything other than windless good weather. I am debating trading the lens on as I'm only using it indoors as an expensive toy at the moment.
 
Thank you for the replys :)
I have the reverse mounts and a set of basic tubes on order so will give them both a try.
Have been tempted by the tubes with the electrical contacts but will see how I get on with these first.
This is the best I got last night, table salt using the standard 18-55mm kit lens held on backwards. Needed to get a couple of desk lamps right up close to give enough light for me fo focus and flash for the final shot.


Salt crystals by Andy_S_C, on Flickr

Different lights played havock with the colour temps, but pretty much got that sorted in Lightroom.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top