File :-(, x, )
reversed lens to EF mount Anonymous
i am looking for a ghetto ass macro solution and want to flip my 50mm or 18-55 kit lens on my Canon body

but holding it by hand isn't a real solution, googled around and Nikon seems to make this reversed lens adapter thing

but i can't find any for a Canon EF mount

also, i thought it would be cheaper, the Nikon one is fucking $30 and correct me if i'm wrong but isn't it just a piece of plastic with no electronics? what the hell
>> Anonymous
1.-cut a hole in your body cap
2.-glue a cheap uv filter to te body cap
3.-????
4.-PROFIT
>> Anonymous
don't have UV filters, lol :/
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
They should not be that expensive. One end of the adapter is your chosen mount (male Canon EF in your case), and the other is a male filter mount in the filter size of your chosen lens. The thing in your picture looks like a female F mount, which wouldn't be needed for anything of the sort.
>> Anonymous
>>220178

oh well, that was a link i found on another forum

i would be buying on B&H and searching for "canon reversed" doesn't give me anything good

i see some for FD mount, one for EF but it's $500 and a $1,400 video camera
>> Anonymous
>>220171


I'm gunna try this, but what do you say is the best way to cut out the center of the body cap? It's made of some thick-ass plastic.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OP here, found this on ebay but B&H doesn't have it i don't think

it's like $5 but i can't buy from ebay :/

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.5Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern802Focal Length (35mm Equiv)67 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2006:03:02 16:29:14Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNot DefinedExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, Auto, Return DetectedFocal Length45.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height531RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
>>220192
not op but if i wanted to get an adapter like that would i want to get a 52 mm or a 55mm for my 18-55?
>> Anonymous
>>22019958?
>> Anonymous
>>220192
Be prepared for a really small dof.
When you reverse your lens, you get the lowest aperture, for that lens. Sometimes though, you can trick it, by pressing the dof preview button, then pull your lens off.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>220408Be prepared for a really small dof.

OP here, would it make a difference if i put a lens the normal way and then reverse another one, like in the picture

then i could control aperture on my mounted lens and the other one would be wide open, would that make a difference?

anyway, my current equipment is 18-55 (58mm Ø), 50mm (52mm Ø) and 75-300 (58mm Ø)

i would mount any of these on my body and reverse either of the following:

nikon series e 28mm 2.8 and series e 50mm 1.8 (both 52mm Ø)

so i think i can just get the 52mm to 58mm male to male ring, it's like $5 or something

which lens combination would give the best magnification ratio?
>> Anonymous
$30 and you're already pissed about price? Really, get out of photography.
>> ilkore
>>220422
that's what i was doing, in those other shots i posted. i use my canon 50mm 1.4 (58mm), to my sigma 105mm 2.8 (58mm). I just use masking tape to stick 'em together... it works good enough.. though i usually don't leave it like that for long.

i would go camera >> 50mm >> reversed 28mm, and see what happens.

part of the problem, is you need lens's that have a really large minimum apertures, i'd suggest trying out the 75-300 (on 300), to the reversed 18-55 (on 18)... you probably won't be able to stop down that much, without vignetting... but, you'll be fucking microscopic. just try to find subjects that are pretty flat.. lots of ordinary things turn into craziness, when you get that close.
>> Anonymous
http://www.pennergame.de/change_please/2357002/

Help me to become a powerful Penner !!!!!!!!!!OLIOLOLOIOLOIOLOILOILOILOILOOILOIL
>> Anonymous
>>220571

i see, so telephoto on the camera and short lens reversed gives the best magnification?

also, correct me if i'm wrong but this will give me macro range magnification right? except the big difference is this kind of ghetto setup, i'm RIGHT ON TOP of the subject whereas a dedicated macro lens, i have a good working distance?
>> ilkore
>>220585
macro is 1:1 so, youre actually going to be beyond that.. youre going to be micro... you get to tell people you do micrography.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>220171


OK so I did this and it works very well. Pic related. Next post is an example macro shot I just took using it.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.Camera ModelE-510Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Color Filter Array Pattern702Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:07:09 17:46:25Exposure Time1/4 secF-Numberf/5.2Exposure ProgramCreativeISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.2Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, AutoFocal Length32.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width806Image Height558RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.Camera ModelE-510Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Color Filter Array Pattern642Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:07:09 17:53:58Exposure Time8 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width912Image Height684RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessSoft
>> Pentard !pjwjmEQ1RM
>>220701

WTF surface is that stuff on?
EET EEZ SO FUZZY!
>> Anonymous
>>220716

It's a fleece blanket I put on the table.
>> Anonymous
so, before i hit the buy button

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/102220-REG/General_Brand__52mm_to_58mm_Macro.html

this is perfect for me right? all my lenses are either 52mm or 58mm
>> sage
yeah that should be fine
>> Anonymous
>>220608
You dont know what you're talking about. Magnifications even as large as 20:1 are still considered as macro.
>> M?e?e?s?e??? !iZn5BCIpug
>>221207
Wikipedia says different, you don't know what you're talking about.
>> Anonymous
i think he meant, macro is life size, 1:1 and that with the setup, you would be going beyond macro
>> ilkore
     File :-(, x)
>>221207
>>221208

we're actually both right, and both wrong.

that's why the subject is so fucked up.

nobody in the real world would fault you for calling your 20:1 photograph, macro. but, macro does mean that the object youre photographing is "close," to the same size, as it appears on the film/sensor. what "close" means, is up to interpretation.

in the macrophotography wikipedia article, they mention and show examples of the canon mpe-65, which is made to go well beyond 1:1

but, if you move away from the photography aspect, macroscopic is what you can view with your naked eye... that is, without the aid of external optics. anytime that you need to use optics to see something, that you otherwise wouldnt be able to see: youre now in the microscopic world.

pic related