Reversing Ring Instead Of A Macro Lens?

C

Chasing Myths

Messages
222
Edit My Images
No
I have just seen these and wondered how good they are? Is it worth spending lots of cash and getting a macro lens which I might only use twice or year, Or would a reversing ring be sufficent?

Cheers in advance(y):ty:
 
If your only going to use it once or twice a year, then a reversal ring should be more than adequate. Ive seem some great results from reversed lenses such as the 50mm f1.8. :)
 
Depth of field is tiny and focussing very difficult. You don't need one to prove that - just hold a lens to the front of the camera and look through the viewfinder. You can't take a picture like that but you can see how well it works... or doesn't :)
 
Ok, you are in the exact situation i have been in.

I've used the reversal rings for about 3 years with a 35-80 lens which gives me a magnification of 1.8:1 - which is almost twice the magnification of your standard macro lens.

In January this year, i bought a canon 100mm Macro lens and i've sold it since - preferring my old technique of the reversed lens, it's a lot cheaper and you can get a lot closer to your subject, without going into too much detail, read my comparison thread at http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=58519&highlight=underwhelmed then make your own mind up :)
 
That made very good reading, thanks mate(y)

I dont know what to do now, I havnt got a suitible lens by the look of your pictures to do the reverse ring:thinking: So would extension tubes be the better option:thinking:

The wife will go mad if I spend any (Noticible:D) Money:bonk:
 
What is a reverse ring? I am interested in Macro i have a Sigma 70-300mm macro lens but it doesnt seem to be that great at macro it might be just me. Looking at the thread above from wez130 he seems to get good results from his reverse ring process.
Is there something similiar available for the 400D??

Do Macro extension tubes do the same this as a reverse ring?
 
A reversing ring screws on the thread at the front of a lens then mounts to the camera body. So you end up with the lens on the camera but backwards.

extension tubes space the lens off the camera body.

As I said above you can see (but not use) the effect by just holding a lens in front of the camera body. Hold it on backwards to see what a reversing ring does or just hold it about an inch away from its normal mounting place to see what spacers will do.
 
Which do people find better out of the two?

I have seen pics in thread using the reverse ring way is there any pics that people have taking with say for example a flower with an 18-55mm lens then with an extension tube attached. Would like to see what the difference is.
 
Carpaddicted said:
That made very good reading, thanks mate(y)

I dont know what to do now, I haven't got a suitable lens by the look of your pictures to do the reverse ring:thinking: So would extension tubes be the better option:thinking:

The wife will go mad if I spend any (Noticible:D) Money:bonk:
Click to expand...

believe it or not,, the lens reverse technique would probably cost less than buying a set of decent extension tubes, you can get a 35-80 lens on ebay for about £25 and the lens revering adapter for £10
 
does the lens have to be a nikon?, id have thought thread size on the outside was the only deciding factor, since you have no other connections, unless im missing something:shrug:
 
how does a reversed lens affect the settings?
 
fletch5 said:
how does a reversed lens affect the settings?
Click to expand...

You're on full manual in everything - metering, focusing, etc.
I have a BR-2A reverse lens adapter. I've used it with my 18-55 kit Nikkor I got with my D50 and it's mostly useful at 50mm. It gives really neat magnification below the 55mm, but focusing is almost impossible. You move a couple of milimetres and the subject if (almost) completely out of focus.
Also, it's not very useful if the lens you use it with doesn't have an aperture ring or something similar that enables you to lock aperture without jamming the little aperture clutch like I have to do with the kit lens if I want to have some fun.
If you want to use a close-up screw-on lens like the Raynox or a Canon 500D, which I have, you better have a good lens to put it on. The 500D on my 70-300 mm Sigma APO DG macro degrades the optical quality by a lot, many of the shots I've taken with the combo just went straight to the bin.
 
Carpaddicted said:
I have just looked but cant find a 35-80mm for my D40 at that price:crying:

Will also have a look at the raynox
Click to expand...

It doesn't exist, its a funny Canon lens :D
Nikon have made 5 different 35-70's though.
The point is to choose a cheapy mid range zoom, might as well be manual focus since it'll be on backerds and won't af anyway, or even a fixed focal length.
 
Are extension tubes better than the reverse ring then? Can you get AF extension tubes will they still give as good a macro shot as a reverse ring?
 
hillwalkinggirl said:
Check out some of ajaphotogs pics. He uses the Raynox DCR 250 on lots of his photos and they are brilliant. You can still AF with the Raynox and auto meter, but best results are obtained if you MF.
Click to expand...

I've recently bought a Raynox 250 and am still getting used to it. The only drawback I can find is, if you are using it with a manual flash, the extra width the Raynox creates casts a shaddow at the bottom of the image.
 
it happens with a dedicated macro lens too in some cases, the distance between the lens and subject can get quite small causing an obstruction for flash, that's why you get dedicated macro flashes like the MR-14 flash ring.
 
Any one got pics of Close ups using the reverse ring process and using extension tubes? Would like to see what the difference is between the two.
 
Reversing rings are a cheap way into macro work. This photo was taken with an old 5 quid, 55mm M42 screw thread lens reversed on the front of my Fuji S5 Pro. Luckily the S5 Pro can auto expose even us the onboard flash through the lens (don't ask me how this is possible!)- but it makes things a lot easier:

Dscf2568.jpg


More reversing ring macros here:

http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/laser_jock99/Nature and Wildlife/BUTTERFLIES/
 
I've taken this as part of faffing about with the Raynox. It's one of the small batteries for watches etc. Even zooming in x2 the image is still clear and ungrainy. (If that's a word)
Since I can't yet afford (to ask the wife for) a new lens, his will have to do.

IMG_0702_edited-1.jpg
 
Wayned said:
I've recently bought a Raynox 250 and am still getting used to it. The only drawback I can find is, if you are using it with a manual flash, the extra width the Raynox creates casts a shaddow at the bottom of the image.
Click to expand...

It works best if you shoot from directly above, and if using onboard flash use a diffuser. There are lots on links on the forum on how to make one. I can't remember where they are at the moment but just do a search for diffuser of bounce card.
 
My reversing ring has just arrived, I have tried it but the camera keeps saying no lens attached:help:?

Any ideas?

Cheers in advance(y)
 
you in auto mode?

As for samples, here are a couple from my reversed lens setup....

fly2_filtered.jpg


tickcreature_filtered.jpg
 
I have just got it working in Manual, although........I have to say it is very difficult for me to focus on anything, no chance of me getting any shots like yours:crying:
 
How does the DoF button actually work? On my 400D when i push it in manual the flash just fires multiple times and cant see it do anything else.
 
mattchewone said:
How does the DoF button actually work? On my 400D when i push it in manual the flash just fires multiple times and cant see it do anything else.
Click to expand...

DoF preview button just does that, you press it and it sets the lens to the DoF you have set, i.e if you set F/11 on your camera and press it, the shutter will go smaller and you'll see if you look through the eyepiece it will be harder to see through, i's to give you an idea of your depth of field.

Carpaddicted said:
No it hasnt:crying:
Click to expand...

hmmm, in that case, you're buggered lol. You'll be able to get shots but the DoF will be minute (1mm ish) of focus, which will be alright for tiny insects but not for much bigger.
 
wez130 said:
hmmm, in that case, you're buggered lol. You'll be able to get shots but the DoF will be minute (1mm ish) of focus, which will be alright for tiny insects but not for much bigger.
Click to expand...

Bugger:shrug::crying:

Thanks for your help though mate(y), I will keep playing:bonk:

Edit: In that case would a macro lens be better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top