www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Canon 35mm Macrophoto - questions
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Canon 35mm Macrophoto - questions
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Smokedaddy



Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 802
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 7:51 pm    Post subject: Canon 35mm Macrophoto - questions Reply with quote

For those of you in the know,

I just purchased this lens to be used on my Canon 50D (although I do have a Nikon D700 but would rather not use it for this). I'm interested in 2x to 3x magnification. I've never owned a bellows either, so I haven't a clue what to look for or what would be the best to purchase for my particular setup. I will be using it with my horizontal setup. Questions, specifically what do I need to buy to make this lens work on my 50D, meaning all components/accessories. Also what should I beware of if and when I purchase used on eBay (like what questions to ask regarding a particular bellows condition). If you have a picture of your setup configured for a Canon I'd like to see it too.

Thanks,
-JW:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ray_parkhurst



Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 1077
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You have a few options. If you are already mounting the camera on a copy stand/tripod/Stackshot, you can continue doing that by using extensions to set the magnification. This is a cheap way to go as well. I'd suggest the following:

Camera -> EOS-M42 adapter -> M42 helicoid -> extensions of various lengths -> M42-RMS adapter -> 35MP lens.

The above system can also work well for microscope objectives. Another advantage is you can achieve a shorter overall extension than with most (maybe all) bellows, so you can get to lower mags. It's tough to get to 2:1 with the 35MP with a bellows. Lowest I could get with a Pentax was 2.4:1. With the extension method you can get to perhaps 1.8:1 with the helicoid in place, or much lower without it but with less flexibility.

If you are interested in this path I can point you to the components needed for purchase on eBay.

If you go bellows route, I recommend the Pentax. The lineup is the same as above, except instead of the helicoid and extensions, you use the bellows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Smokedaddy



Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 802
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks RP,

I'd rather go with no bellows setup. Links would be appreciate. Like I said, for now somewhere in the 2x to 3x range (2x being my first choice).

-JW:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ray_parkhurst



Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 1077
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA

PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Smokedaddy wrote:
Thanks RP,

I'd rather go with no bellows setup. Links would be appreciate. Like I said, for now somewhere in the 2x to 3x range (2x being my first choice).

-JW:


Here are some examples of the components you need:

EOS adapter:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/For-Black-Aluminum-M42-Screw-Lens-to-Canon-EOS-EF-Camera-Mount-Adapter-Ring/301450391372?epid=1602570303&hash=item462fd7ef4c:g:VhQAAOSwmOJaHzW4:sc:ShippingMethodStandard!95051!US!-1

edited to add: the inner surfaces of the extensions may be a bit shiny, and this can cause contrast or hotspotting problems. You may need to make a tube of absorptive material like doodlebug or protostar or even just flat black card stock to fit inside the tubes to minimize reflections and maintain contrast. The bellows naturally takes care of this but extensions usually need additional assistance.

Helicoid:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/US-M42-M42-mount-lens-Adjustable-Focusing-Helicoid-Adapter-17mm-to-31mm-17-31mm/152748242838?hash=item2390813796:g:wmwAAOxy7MtRrbhp

Extensions:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Camrea-Macro-Extension-Tube-Ring-for-M42-42mm-Screw-Mount-3-Ring-Adapter-L8D/200747508262?hash=item2ebd7be226:m:moTY3KHp04n76JH9rAuSNrA

RMS adapter:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/US-Camera-Adapter-Ring-for-RMS-Royal-Microscopy-Society-Lens-to-M42-screw-Mount/182838822637?hash=item2a920b06ed:g:jjEAAOSwMvtZQjG1

I'd recommend buying two or even three sets of the extensions. Each set gives 49mm max in 7mm increments.

Note the helicoid gives fine control of extension length from 17mm to 31mm so you can set a precise magnification, but they are often a bit "wobbly", so you will generally not us it for focus stacking. Might be OK, but it's still better to use a stackshot or a manual rail for moving the whole system.

You can also just use the fixed extensions and no helicoid, but your precision in setting the magnification will not be as good. The 7mm increments of the extensions will give you magnification increments of 0.2, ie 1.9:1, 2.2:1, 2.4:1, etc when using your 35mm lens. If this is precise enough, then you don't even need the helicoid.

edited to add: the extensions may be too shiny on inner surfaces and can cause hotspotting or contrast problems. A sheet of protostar or even just flat black card stock from the stationery story will minimize this. Bellows are naturally built to handle this, but extensions may not be. Some are rough and non-reflective on inside but most are not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Smokedaddy



Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 802
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sweet, I ordered everything. Thanks for taking the time to lookup and post all the links Ray. I will be using this on my horizontal setup, with a few modifications of course (ignore those red tags)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1799
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, that is a good sturdy-looking set-up!
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
enricosavazzi



Joined: 21 Nov 2009
Posts: 861
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

An example of a subassembly, rather than a complete system. The RMS objectives are mounted on a modified Zeiss microscope head attached to a Nikon PN-11 extension ring. The ring is in turn attached to an Arca-compatible plate (for attachment to a stand with focuser) and a Nikon to Micro 4/3 adapter that also has a built-in, rather short helicoid to change magnification somewhat.


_________________
--ES
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1799
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Enrico, that's interesting. Is the Nikon-to-MFT helicoid fairly sturdy? If so, what brand is it? I have bad luck with helicoids which often are loose. Does it allow infinity focus when fully closed?
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
enricosavazzi



Joined: 21 Nov 2009
Posts: 861
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The helicoid is just ordinary Chinese quality (there are also "high quality" helicoids made in China, which are better and moderately more expensive - mainly because of the internal brass mechanics). However, the subassembly attaches to a stand by the 1/4-20 socket of the extension ring, so the helicoid only carries the weight of the camera body.

The Olympus OM Telescopic Auto Tube 65-116mm (once equipped with adapters at the front and rear) is also an alternative, and sturdier than Chinese helicoids: http://savazzi.net/photography/olympustelescopic.html
_________________
--ES
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dickb



Joined: 05 Jul 2010
Posts: 93

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

enricosavazzi wrote:
The Olympus OM Telescopic Auto Tube 65-116mm (once equipped with adapters at the front and rear) is also an alternative, and sturdier than Chinese helicoids: http://savazzi.net/photography/olympustelescopic.html


I agree, the Olympus 65-116 is very sturdy, but it can be inconvenient due to its long minimum length, especially with added adapters. Also I find it less convenient for small adjustments. One option I really like is a Vivitar Macro teleconverter in your favourite mount with the optics removed, very smooth focussing action. Or for shorter extensions, a Pentax M42 helicoid variable extension ring, but these are fairly hard to find.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smokedaddy



Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 802
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks to Ray for all the help on the components. This is my first test shot with the 35mm MP. This is a 10 image stack with the lens at 2x. This is a 100% crop on the date. Even though Rik has posted information on calculating the the approximate steps at a particular magnification I was still a little confused. I'm happy with the my first attempt.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18252
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Smokedaddy wrote:
Even though Rik has posted information on calculating the the approximate steps at a particular magnification I was still a little confused..

The image looks good.

Can you explain more about what is confusing for calculating step size?

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Smokedaddy



Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 802
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rjlittlefield wrote:
Smokedaddy wrote:
Even though Rik has posted information on calculating the the approximate steps at a particular magnification I was still a little confused..

The image looks good.

Can you explain more about what is confusing for calculating step size?

--Rik


Rik,

Your page, DOF Estimates For Macro/Micro (depth of field, step sizes) is laided out excellent. I am not complaining whatsoever, just confused and overwhelmed with all the information I have encountered here the last year. I suppose I am trying to do to many things at once.

Ballpark wise, should my step size be 0.079 mm (79 um) at 2x magnification at f/4 with my Canon 50D?

-JW:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18252
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 9:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Smokedaddy wrote:
Ballpark wise, should my step size be 0.079 mm (79 um) at 2x magnification at f/4 with my Canon 50D?

Yes, exactly. Table 2A, the 2X row, center bold entry because of APS-C sensor size.

I'm very sympathetic to the problem of information overload. If you have any good ideas for how to make things as simple as possible, but no simpler, please let me know.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Smokedaddy



Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 802
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rjlittlefield wrote:
Smokedaddy wrote:
Ballpark wise, should my step size be 0.079 mm (79 um) at 2x magnification at f/4 with my Canon 50D?

Yes, exactly. Table 2A, the 2X row, center bold entry because of APS-C sensor size.

I'm very sympathetic to the problem of information overload. If you have any good ideas for how to make things as simple as possible, but no simpler, please let me know.

--Rik


It's not a website issue, just me. I wasn't schooled in any of this so everything has been a struggle and still is. It's difficult to play catch up when you're 70 and have a ton of hobbies.

Another issue screwing me up was I purchased a Thorlabs single axis stage with 1" of travel and .5um graduations for my horizontal setup. The one I was using for this penny test. Instead I received one with 10um graduations (like a huge difference). <g> I wasn't paying attention and thinking I received the .5 version so none of this made any sense.

-JW:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group