|
|
|
|
Home > TME Community > Share Your Work > Macro > Rough "Writer"
TME Community
Rough "Writer"
Started March 16, 2009 @ 11:19am by Wes
|
Post Message |
Wes
Posts: 8,139 |
|
|
| Rough "Writer" | March 16, 2009 @ 11:19am | Wanted to see just how close I could get, so I threw everything (+1,+2, +4 closeups and the Nikon #6T) I had, onto the Nikon 105mm VR micro and here is the result:
Wes |
|
|
|
Last Edit: March 16, 2009 @ 2:35pm by Guest | |
|
|
|
| |
Flo
Posts: 15,844 |
|
|
| March 16, 2009 @ 2:12pm | Amazing what going stir crazy will do to people!
Wes, this must be only a millimeter of DOF - but we can still tell what the object is. I'd never think to do this, lol. Glad you did. Did it drive you crazy, tho, trying to get the tip in focus?
Now, if you have a long lens, you can get an adapter ring that will allow you to mount the 105 (reversed) onto the longer lens. But be sure to screw on all those magnifying lenses first! And then see what you'll get! For subject matter, I guess just put a thin layer of ordinary salt crystals on a piece of dark paper.
Flo - PPY
"May we live in peace without weeping. May our joy outline the lives we touch without ceasing. And may our love fill the world, angel wings beating." aziza
http://photos.tonebytone.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Wes
Posts: 8,139 |
|
|
| March 16, 2009 @ 5:58pm | Yes, it did drive me crazy, Flo. Thank goodness for the focus rail. I didn't even try for a better DOF on this one.
Wes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
JohnC
Posts: 763 |
|
|
| March 16, 2009 @ 10:55pm | How much closer were you able to get with all the close-up lenses than you could without?
The usual advice is to not use more than two diopter lenses, but that, I think, is mostly due to distortion around the edges.
Thanks!
John Cornicello
Seattle, wa
http://www.johncornicello.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Wes
Posts: 8,139 |
|
|
| March 17, 2009 @ 8:28am |
Quote (JohnC)
How much closer were you able to get with all the close-up lenses than you could without?
The usual advice is to not use more than two diopter lenses, but that, I think, is mostly due to distortion around the edges.
Thanks!
|
|
Somtimes, John, I just don't follow the rules, just to see for myself. I didn't even consider how close I could get without the added closeup lenses. With the 105mm micro lens, I assume that it would be a 1:1. This must be on the magnified side. I will have to go back to the drawing board.
Wes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
RickT
Posts: 1,694 |
|
|
| March 17, 2009 @ 10:05am | Crikey, Wes! This looks like "Lensbaby Looks through the Microscope". Is it about time to get some Nikon-compatible extension tubes or bellows, and skip the screw-on closeup filters? Then your only problem will be getting enough light on your subject  . And why do they call it "macro" when all the problems seem to deal with "micro" adjustments (e.g., your focusing rail)?
RickT
Boulder, Colorado
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rwteichler/
PPY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Wes
Posts: 8,139 |
|
|
| March 17, 2009 @ 10:57am |
Quote (JohnC)
How much closer were you able to get with all the close-up lenses than you could without?
The usual advice is to not use more than two diopter lenses, but that, I think, is mostly due to distortion around the edges.
Thanks!
|
|
Here is a small test, John. Actual numbers are approximate. I couldn't let your question go by:
Now I can have lunch.
Wes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Wes
Posts: 8,139 |
|
|
| March 17, 2009 @ 10:58am |
Quote (RickT)
Crikey, Wes! This looks like "Lensbaby Looks through the Microscope". Is it about time to get some Nikon-compatible extension tubes or bellows, and skip the screw-on closeup filters? Then your only problem will be getting enough light on your subject . And why do they call it "macro" when all the problems seem to deal with "micro" adjustments (e.g., your focusing rail)?
|
|
I do have the extension tubes, Rick but just hate to mess around with them. Probably wouldn't take any more time than what I am doing but it seems to more of a bother. If the gray and wet days continue, maybe I will check them out. Getting enough light is a problem but with the circular flash it isn't too bad.
Thanks
Wes |
|
|
|
Last Edit: March 17, 2009 @ 12:00pm by Guest | |
|
|
|
| |
Tom
Posts: 738 |
|
|
| March 17, 2009 @ 7:46pm | interesting concept. consider something like this but with paper underneath and the point is above a word and one letter is in focus.
notice I leave this for you to do without attempting it myself.
tell me what you think, change it and post it |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
JohnC
Posts: 763 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Flo
Posts: 15,844 |
|
|
| March 18, 2009 @ 8:56am |
Quote (Tom)
interesting concept. consider something like this but with paper underneath and the point is above a word and one letter is in focus.
notice I leave this for you to do without attempting it myself. |
|
Tom, you're just a big chicken! LOL. But, on 2nd thought, Wes, I think this is a great assignment for you! 
Flo - PPY
"May we live in peace without weeping. May our joy outline the lives we touch without ceasing. And may our love fill the world, angel wings beating." aziza
http://photos.tonebytone.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Wes
Posts: 8,139 |
|
|
| March 18, 2009 @ 9:34am | Nice suggestions, Tom. I will check my busy schedule and see what can be done.
Glad you asked John. Actually I learned something while answering your question.
Yes, Flo, Tom's suggestion is worth trying. One more day of rain and I will crazy enough to try anything 
If you noticed, the last one was almost impossible for me to get a focus on the tip, even with the focus rail. If I turned the 105mm around, I don't think I would have a chance and it would probably be very dark. At least it is when I turn the 50mm around and shoot with it. More time inside and I might try.
Wes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assignment
Community Assignment #53
Picture Window
Due Date: September 16, 2011 |
Have you heard about the Backyard Shots Photography Guide "Street Portraiture with CraigTanner"?
|
|
