Back for another bash

cadman342001 · Post by **cadman342001** » Sun Jan 25, 2015 9:57 pm

Here's the new and hopefully improved current set up:

D800
Nippon Kogaku 200mm f4 pre-Ai mf "tube" lens with a reversed Nippon Kogaku 50mm f1.4 gives me 4X yes ?

on a Proxxon K70 + arca swiss type connection to camera with a wired remote shutter

Subject on 55mm micro mf lens

Lighting - 2 Yongnuo YN-560-III triggered with YN-560-TX on camera

Polystyrene fruit box based on the styrofoam cooler box design off this site pdf.

_DSC9912 by AndyMacDougallPhotography, on Flickr

_DSC9911 by AndyMacDougallPhotography, on Flickr

_DSC9910 by AndyMacDougallPhotography, on Flickr

_DSC9909 by AndyMacDougallPhotography, on Flickr

and the results (had this beetle knocking about in an old pill bottle for ages, gave him a bath but couldn't wait for him to dry out fully. My bad)

50 shot stack, ISO100, 1/160, f8, RAW, both flashes on 1/8th power, exported to full size jpegs and stacked in Zerene stacker.

2015-01-25-18.10.23_ZS_PMax by AndyMacDougallPhotography, on Flickr

and approx. 100% crop

100%crop by AndyMacDougallPhotography, on Flickr

I'm pretty happy with the light, the proxxon is a huge improvement over my previous monfrotto and el cheapo chinese rails but has a bit of sideways slop so may have a look at the adjustment screws ?

I also plan to paint that piece of wood and clamp the end of the lens as it is currently sitting on a plastic specimen pot !

What else could I do improve the results - larger aperture say f4 or f5.6 ? I'm maybe thinking that diffraction may be creeping in at f8 on my D800 set up at 4X ?

Andy

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sun Jan 25, 2015 10:19 pm

Andy, welcome back!

Nippon Kogaku 200mm f4 pre-Ai mf "tube" lens with a reversed Nippon Kogaku 50mm f1.4 gives me 4X yes ?

Yes.

What else could I do improve the results - larger aperture say f4 or f5.6 ? I'm maybe thinking that diffraction may be creeping in at f8 on my D800 set up at 4X ?

When you say "f8", is that on the front lens or the rear?

If "f8" is on the front, then yes, you're into diffraction territory because with this setup, that turns into effective f/32 back at the camera. You would probably do a little better at f/5.6, but wider than that is doubtful because 50 mm f/1.4 lenses tend to develop significant aberrations out there. You would have to test to be sure.

If "f8" is on the rear, then most likely you'd do better by switching to stopping the front. See FAQ: Stopping down a lens combo for discussion why.

--Rik

cadman342001 · Post by **cadman342001** » Sun Jan 25, 2015 10:27 pm

Thanks Rik, yeah the 200/4 is wide open and focussed at infinity, the 50/1.4 is at f8 and focussed at MFD

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sun Jan 25, 2015 10:59 pm

cadman342001 wrote:Thanks Rik, yeah the 200/4 is wide open and focussed at infinity, the 50/1.4 is at f8 and focussed at MFD

OK, thanks. Focus setting on the 50/1.4 probably doesn't matter. At least on the lenses I have like that, the optics including filter mount is a solid block of stuff that focuses by moving with respect to the lens mount. When reversed, turning the focus ring simply moves the lens mount, which then isn't connected to anything, while the block of optics stays fixed with respect to the reversing adapter. In the unlikely event that the 50/1.4 does have moving elements, then in theory you'd be better off to set it to infinity focus so as to match the 200/4.

Your setup and image look good, by the way. More support is always better, but those flashes will freeze out a lot of vibration and I don't see the sort of elongated highlights that I'd expect to see if you were having troubles with motion blur.

--Rik

cadman342001 · Post by **cadman342001** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:45 am

Got ya re: mfd > infinity on the 50. I'll check that.

Chris S. · Post by **Chris S.** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 1:59 am

There’s a lot to like on your setup, Andy.

Nice to see Sam Droege’s polystyrene cooler method implemented on this forum. Your result looks great, and you surely didn’t have to spend a bunch of time fiddling with the lights with this approach. And you’ve given yourself a fair amount of capability without spending a ton of money (although the D800 body isn’t exactly cheap). I do find myself wondering if there is a StackShot in your future?

You would probably do a little better at f/5.6, but wider than that is doubtful because 50 mm f/1.4 lenses tend to develop significant aberrations out there. You would have to test to be sure.

Agreed that you’d have to test to be sure. My f/1.4 and f/1.2 lenses’ aberrations seem pretty well tamed by f/4—though I’ve never used either of them for a macro lens-stack. I’d definitely try f/4 through f/8, in half-step increments. Remember that you don't need to shoot a whole bug to test this. I'd suggest printing very small type (4pt or so) on an office printer, and gluing a small piece of this to something flat, such as a microscope slide. You'll still want to take a shallow stack of it to rule out focusing and alignment errors. (At higher magnifications, one finds that laser print is not nearly flat enough to shoot without stacking, but I don't think you'd be encountering that here.)

Cheers,

--Chris

cadman342001 · Post by **cadman342001** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 6:51 am

Cheers Chris, yeah I'm pretty pleased with the results so far, especially with such a shiny beetle.

What would be a better option than the 50 ? the 28/3.5 mf lens is pretty good the right way round but would obviously increase the magnification or perhaps I should get one of the Raynox lenses (cheap which is good)

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:28 am

If I were in your shoes, I'd think about keeping the current setup for 4X and spending the next bit of cash on a 10X infinity objective to get equally good results with smaller subjects. You're already at the point where you have to pixel-peep to see any issues with this image. Does it really matter if the image is a bit sharper when you look that close?

--Rik

cadman342001 · Post by **cadman342001** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 6:39 pm

rjlittlefield wrote:If I were in your shoes, I'd think about keeping the current setup for 4X and spending the next bit of cash on a 10X infinity objective to get equally good results with smaller subjects. You're already at the point where you have to pixel-peep to see any issues with this image. Does it really matter if the image is a bit sharper when you look that close?

--Rik

You can add "mind reading" to your resume Rik

The 10X infinity objective is indeed my next step.

So, having done 3 hours of reading here about adding one to the front of my 200mm, I'm planning on the Nikon DFI BE Plan Achromat objective, Part No. MRN70100

If I have digested the reading material correctly then I'll also need this adapter

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/200750438193 ... EBIDX%3AIT

Will that objective and the 200/4 play nicely together on full frame ?

Oh, and I'll also need an unexpected cash windfall to pay for them

Not a problem with it not being in stock, no rush as I'm having too much fun already anyways !

and Chris, I'd love a stackshot but I'd need to win the Lotto first, in fact I'd need to start DOING the Lotto first.

I'm a basically unemployed structural drafter with a start up photography business so don't have any income per se !

I am however stuck in Cairns, world heritage rainforest, Great Barrier Reef on my doorstep, Daintree/Cape Tribulation just up the road so I can't really complain and it's the Wet Season here so lots of strange bugs about at the moment (all year really)

Andy

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:49 pm

cadman342001 wrote: I'm planning on the Nikon DFI BE Plan Achromat objective, Part No. MRN70100

If I have digested the reading material correctly then I'll also need this adapter

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/200750438193 ... EBIDX%3AIT

Yes, that's the correct adapter. The objective is "CFI", by the way.

Will that objective and the 200/4 play nicely together on full frame ?

I don't remember. The issue will be vignetting. I suggest Google-searching the forum on site:photomacrography.net nikon 200mm tube lens vignetting and see if you can make an exact match to the lens you're using.

If that lens gives too much vignetting then the cheapest commonly available "known good" tube lens is a reversed Raynox 150 used as shown at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 195#143195, except to avoid vignetting on full frame you'll need to mount the objective closer to the Raynox by replacing the long cone adapter with a short 42mm tube.

Given the budget issues, maybe it's not such a bad thing to just crop off dark corners. Most of the high mag pictures you see are made with smaller sensors anyway, and the D800 packs 15 megapixels even in DX mode.

--Rik

cadman342001 · Post by **cadman342001** » Tue Jan 27, 2015 12:05 am

Thanks so much for all the help Rik,

I'll try the 200f4, flat adapter and objective (when I get one) and see how that goes and then look into the Raynox.

Good to see the use of El cheapo tubes too, I have a set that were $4, just need another 6 sets by the look of the photo in the link. I have a set of "proper" Nikon mf ext. tubes too, and a camera to M42 convertor (no chip) ring so I'm well on the way if it goes the way of the raynox.

Thanks

Andy

Chris S. · Post by **Chris S.** » Tue Jan 27, 2015 12:30 am

cadman342001 wrote:Good to see the use of El cheapo tubes too, I have a set that were $4, just need another 6 sets by the look of the photo in the link.

Andy, if I were looking at running such a number of extension tubes, I'd strongly consider something like a piece of PVC plumbing pipe, instead. Cheaper and much stronger, since you'd be eliminating a lot of joints. You'd need to line it with something black and non-reflective, such as dark felt (I use Prostar Flocking material, but suspect that black felt from the craft store might work well, too, at less cost.). And you'd need to epoxy a lens or body mount at each end--but this shouldn't be too hard.

By the way, I was wondering about your pre-AI 200mm Nikkor. Did you have it AI'd to fit your D800, or did you do the modifications yourself? If the latter, how hard to you feel the process was, and how do you find it worked out?

Cheers,

--Chris

cadman342001 · Post by **cadman342001** » Wed Jan 28, 2015 7:38 am

Hey Chris,

I do them all myself. IIRC it was easy, 10 min job at most, works a treat.

Tools - set of needle files, set of good jewellers screwdrivers.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Wed Jan 28, 2015 4:48 pm

Chris S. wrote:
cadman342001 wrote:Good to see the use of El cheapo tubes too, I have a set that were $4, just need another 6 sets by the look of the photo in the link.
Andy, if I were looking at running such a number of extension tubes, I'd strongly consider something like a piece of PVC plumbing pipe, instead. Cheaper and much stronger, since you'd be eliminating a lot of joints. You'd need to line it with something black and non-reflective, such as dark felt (I use Prostar Flocking material, but suspect that black felt from the craft store might work well, too, at less cost.). And you'd need to epoxy a lens or body mount at each end--but this shouldn't be too hard.

As usual, there are some tradeoffs. You'll have to find appropriate size PVC, cut it to proper length with precisely square ends, buy an appropriate epoxy (the remains of which will probably spoil before you have another use for it), wrestle with getting a long tube flocked, and when you're done you'll have a fixed-length tube. Or you can buy a few more of those $4 sets, flock the tube sections individually, and screw them together in various combinations if you want to tweak the magnification a bit or switch between DCR-150 and DCR-250. No tools required, other than scissors to cut the flocking.

As for which way I'd go, well, my basement is loaded with PVC and machines to make adapters with it, but for this job I use M42 tubes.

--Rik

Chris S. · Post by **Chris S.** » Wed Jan 28, 2015 10:26 pm

cadman342001 wrote:Hey Chris,

I do them all myself. IIRC it was easy, 10 min job at most, works a treat.

Tools - set of needle files, set of good jewelers screwdrivers.

Thanks, Andy. I have an unconverted pre-AI lens that I was wondering whether to send out or do myself. Sounds as if I should roll up my sleeves and start filing.

rjlittlefield wrote:As usual, there are some tradeoffs. You'll have to find appropriate size PVC, cut it to proper length with precisely square ends. . .

Different strokes for different folks. My local hardware store has a wide variety of pipe and will cut it to size for free. They use a high-quality pipe cutter, so the ends are square and do not even require deburring. They do charge me for the whole foot, even if I only need, say, 175mm. But the usual cost is about a dollar.

. . . buy an appropriate epoxy (the remains of which will probably spoil before you have another use for it). . .

Mason Williams said, “There are no empty Tabasco Sauce bottles.” But I’ve seen quite a few of them. Similarly, I’ve never had two-part epoxy go bad, but I use it at minimum once a month, and usually more often. I never buy the single plunger applicators, which raise the specter of the epoxy and hardener both being present in the mixing tube. To me, epoxy is a basic and integral shop supply in the macro studio. Without it, how does one quickly create subject-holders as needs occur?

. . .wrestle with getting a long tube flocked

I don’t see what is hard about this. With Protostar at least, flocking even a long tube is trivially easy. Just cut the material to fit, roll it into a smaller diameter than the tube, and peel back only a small strip of the throw-away material that covers the self-adhesive back. Insert the rolled-up Protostar into the PVC tube, and stick that half-inch of exposed adhesive down firmly. Now unroll the rest of the Protostar tube, a bit at a time, peeling and sticking as you go. Easy.

. . . and when you're done you'll have a fixed-length tube.

Yes, exactly! A nice, sturdy tube of just the length you need, whenever you need it. One piece, not several pieces. If you need a few different lengths, make a set, and end your days of fiddling.

Individual preferences certainly vary!

--Chris