Please pardon the long post. I am doing both field and studio macro work on plants and insects (live and dried) and would like to be able to get to about 4X. Here is what I currently have and what skills I know I need to expand upon as I head down this road. I’ve had experience with Olympus bellows & lenses so I’m not completely starting from ground zero jut pretty close to it.
Nikon D90 body (I know, no MLU)
Micro-Nikkors AF 200 f4D IF-ED & AF 60 f2.8D lenses
Nikon PB-6 bellows (arriving tomorrow)
SB-600 X2 flashes on off camera brackets with diffusers
A Gitzo 1570M pan/tilt head on either a Gitzo Compact Studex (field) or Gitzo Studex Performance (studio).
Appropriate RSS screw clamps and Wimberley plates.
Remote release for the D90
Here is what I know I’m going to need:
Right angle finder (probably a DR-6)
Nikon adapters BR-2A, BR-5, BR-6 (BR-3?)
More experience with the CZ stacking software and other stacking options and Photoshop CS4.
Here is what I think I may want/need:
A 62 to 62 reverse adapter to try reversing the 60 on the 200 for ~3X field work (not sure about this one).
A 28mm lens to get me to the 4X mark, like a used Nikkor 28 f3.5 or f2.8 AI, AIS or AF-D version since I do not currently have any wide angle general use lenses right now.
Should I consider a lens in the 50mm range like an El-Nikkor 50 f2.8 or a standard 50mm f2/1.8/1.4?
Focusing rail for non-bellows field work?
Your thoughts?
Scott
Macro Rig Expansion Needs Inputs Please
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
I would say definitely get an El-Nikkor 50mm f2.8 for use with the bellows
4x in the field on live subjects is going to be difficult if that is what you want to do. The Canon MPE65 seems great as do Raynox convertors on fixed lens cameras.
Andrew
4x in the field on live subjects is going to be difficult if that is what you want to do. The Canon MPE65 seems great as do Raynox convertors on fixed lens cameras.
Andrew
rgds, Andrew
"Is that an accurate dictionary ? Charlie Eppes
"Is that an accurate dictionary ? Charlie Eppes
You've got the guts there for both field and studio macro - for outdoor bug work consider an auto-tube or two with the 60mm lens, normally mounted. If you can arrange your flash heads near to the end of the lens that is ideal.
For indoor studio stuff, are you sure you only want 4x? And how much do you want to spend on glass? (On the cheap end, add a short/medium extension tube and a reversing ring to your bellows and put the 60mm lens on the front reversed.)
What a lot of us do is move from a tripod to a more specialised camera/subject mounting arrangement, if you take a quick look around the equipment forum you'll find lots of examples. My current setup has the camera mounted on a Nikon multiphot stand, which is basically a massive copy stand (as I only have the stand, not the original microscope arrangement). Below this sits an old Olympus microscope base with it's head sawn off. The subject is mounted on the stage, usually on a slide, the stage fine focus control is used for focussing/stacking.
Having mentioned that, with the range of stuff you have, I'd suggest you might as well start off with what you actually have. Mount the camera on the bellows and put the 60mm lens on the front of the bellows mounted normally. Mount the whole bellows/camera/lens onto your tripod, which should be setup to be as stable as possible - legs not extended and spread fairly wide. Weigh down the tripod if you can.
Then find some way of putting a test subject in front of the lens, and run some tests. You might be able to do the stack with the focus ring on the lens, or you might be able to use the focus rail on the bellows (Assuming that model bellows has one). Or a possible third option, if the rear standard on that bellows moves then you could focus by moving this.
Test this setup at maximum magnification, I'd imagine it would be a bit over 3:1 but not quite 4:1. Not sure how well that lens will do pushed to that magnification, it may be better off reversed so a cheap reversing ring should definitely be somewhere near the top of your shopping list..
Not having MLU may be an issue at higher magnification but I suspect you'd be able to get around it at 4:1 with good flashes and the camera well locked down.
If this doesn't turn out the quality you are after there are plenty of discussions about glass in this specific forum, and I expect others will be along with recommendations later!
For indoor studio stuff, are you sure you only want 4x? And how much do you want to spend on glass? (On the cheap end, add a short/medium extension tube and a reversing ring to your bellows and put the 60mm lens on the front reversed.)
What a lot of us do is move from a tripod to a more specialised camera/subject mounting arrangement, if you take a quick look around the equipment forum you'll find lots of examples. My current setup has the camera mounted on a Nikon multiphot stand, which is basically a massive copy stand (as I only have the stand, not the original microscope arrangement). Below this sits an old Olympus microscope base with it's head sawn off. The subject is mounted on the stage, usually on a slide, the stage fine focus control is used for focussing/stacking.
Having mentioned that, with the range of stuff you have, I'd suggest you might as well start off with what you actually have. Mount the camera on the bellows and put the 60mm lens on the front of the bellows mounted normally. Mount the whole bellows/camera/lens onto your tripod, which should be setup to be as stable as possible - legs not extended and spread fairly wide. Weigh down the tripod if you can.
Then find some way of putting a test subject in front of the lens, and run some tests. You might be able to do the stack with the focus ring on the lens, or you might be able to use the focus rail on the bellows (Assuming that model bellows has one). Or a possible third option, if the rear standard on that bellows moves then you could focus by moving this.
Test this setup at maximum magnification, I'd imagine it would be a bit over 3:1 but not quite 4:1. Not sure how well that lens will do pushed to that magnification, it may be better off reversed so a cheap reversing ring should definitely be somewhere near the top of your shopping list..
Not having MLU may be an issue at higher magnification but I suspect you'd be able to get around it at 4:1 with good flashes and the camera well locked down.
If this doesn't turn out the quality you are after there are plenty of discussions about glass in this specific forum, and I expect others will be along with recommendations later!
Last edited by lauriek on Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
augusthouse
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:39 am
- Location: New South Wales Australia
Scott,
The EL-Nikkor 2.8/50mm should be reverse mounted by attaching an adapter or step ring via the 40.5mm filter thread on the front of the lens. It will also appreciate a small lens shade to counter flare (a DIY job will suffice).
Craig
The EL-Nikkor 2.8/50mm should be reverse mounted by attaching an adapter or step ring via the 40.5mm filter thread on the front of the lens. It will also appreciate a small lens shade to counter flare (a DIY job will suffice).
Craig
To use a classic quote from 'Antz' - "I almost know exactly what I'm doing!"
Hi Scott,
I also made the mistake of buying the D90 instead of one of the 'professional' level/spec cameras such as the D200/D300.
I haven't been faced with any MLU problems yet, but my biggest oversight was that the D90 and similar 'level' cameras don't allow you to manually input aperture info when using non-auto extension tubes in front of your lens. You can manually step down apertures on lenses with an aperture ring, but the D90 won't be able to meter for exposure. . . . huge mistake on my part and one that I will someday rectify with a pre-loved D200.
Bruce
I also made the mistake of buying the D90 instead of one of the 'professional' level/spec cameras such as the D200/D300.
I haven't been faced with any MLU problems yet, but my biggest oversight was that the D90 and similar 'level' cameras don't allow you to manually input aperture info when using non-auto extension tubes in front of your lens. You can manually step down apertures on lenses with an aperture ring, but the D90 won't be able to meter for exposure. . . . huge mistake on my part and one that I will someday rectify with a pre-loved D200.
Bruce
Working distance is typically around 50-70mm from the screw shoulder so there is no problem with adding a hood and then a diffuser enclosure. It's one of the nice things about this lens/configuration.booter wrote:Andrew- I will get one, they appear to be available and I have found good information on the forum on how to mount it. Thank you.
Craig-Good tip on the lens hood, I expect the working distance and flash could be an issue. I'll work something up.
Scott
I actually tried to code a working distance calculator into the my webpage calculator http://www.tirpor.com/macro/macro_DOF.htm but it doesn't seem to match the simple theory very well . Basic Gaussian equation would be 1/f = 1/s + 1/i where f is focal length, s is distance to subject and i is distance to image but the lens isn't "simple" enough
Using a Newtonian equation and calculating from the actual image planes gets me within a couple of mm but now it is lens dependent. To show that I need to code so you pick a specific lens rather than a focal length. The problem is that these are not really simple lenses.
Last edited by AndrewC on Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
rgds, Andrew
"Is that an accurate dictionary ? Charlie Eppes
"Is that an accurate dictionary ? Charlie Eppes
Hi BAT,
I'm with you on the aperture/exposure challenge with the D90. At least in the digital world test exposures and review of the histogram is much quicker than having to wait until the film is processed to see if your bracketing worked!! I made the decision to spend money on good glass and then see where the body technology goes. Thanks!
Scott
I'm with you on the aperture/exposure challenge with the D90. At least in the digital world test exposures and review of the histogram is much quicker than having to wait until the film is processed to see if your bracketing worked!! I made the decision to spend money on good glass and then see where the body technology goes. Thanks!
Scott
