| Moderated by: chrisbet, | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
|||||||
| Money, money, money - Page 2 | |
| Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Sun Jan 26th, 2014 06:36 |
|
11th Post |
jk
|
That lens is a very nice one. It is strange that Nikon dont have a similar offering. I guess they think that you should use a set of bellows instead. However that makes for a very large and unwieldy setup. Ed Constable also bought one of these lenses but I think he may have got a Canon body to go with it. 5X magnification is very significant for a 65mm lens. What sort of distances subject to end of lens do you need to get that to work ?
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jan 26th, 2014 11:21 |
|
12th Post |
amazing50
|
The minimum focusing distance is 24cm or about 9.5 inches but that is from the sensor so at 5x there won't be too much room from the front glass to the subject. Currently I'm using tubes and a bellows with a reversed 35mm lens to get about 4x and it often takes 15 seconds to steady for a shot with the cable release.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jan 26th, 2014 13:44 |
|
13th Post |
amazing50
|
Found this, looks like the scale on the lens gives the working distance At 3x it is 51mm or 2 inches. Room for my LED ring light ;~). Attachment: Canon MP-E 65mm F2.8 1-5X MF Lens.jpg (Downloaded 39 times)
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jan 26th, 2014 14:46 |
|
14th Post |
jk
|
That looks very nice. Let us know how you get on with it. And dont forget to post some photos.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sun Jan 26th, 2014 15:08 |
|
15th Post |
TomOC
|
Eric wrote:TomOC wrote: Wouldn't want to taint Fuji's concept of caring about the users and improving existing models just because they CAN...
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jan 27th, 2014 11:26 |
|
16th Post |
jk
|
Oh dear I'm not sure I should post this. but look here...... http://nikonrumors.com/2014/01/26/odd-ways-of-macro-photography.aspx/ Seems like the Canon could have been an expensive purchase. :-( 
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jan 27th, 2014 11:43 |
|
17th Post |
Robert
|
Oooo! I like that... Something to take to pieces, my buddy may have a lens with damaged front element, I like this idea. :thumbsup:
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jan 27th, 2014 16:20 |
|
18th Post |
amazing50
|
I tried this after seeing the article with an old 24-120 D lens that was too expensive to repair. It worked after removing the two front elements but needed to be reverse mounted. Goes from about 1/2x to 3x on the D600. Having problems with the f stop due to prior issues. Getting some more adaptor rings to mount a ring light for some sharpness tests. Looking forward to the Canon lens. It is a different range and probably much sharper and has VR. This is a good DIY conversion project IF you have a zoom lens of very low value, some skill at tinkering and a fair collection of salvaged camera parts and adapter rings. Once you remove the front elements reinstalling them in perfect alignment, dust and scratch free is difficult if your lens won't work as a macro. It is however an inexpensive way of getting into macro.
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jan 27th, 2014 17:30 |
|
19th Post |
Robert
|
amazing50 wrote:Looking forward to the Canon lens. It is a different range and probably much sharper and has VR. Does the Canon VR (IS?) work in macro use? According to Nikon the Nikkor 105 f2.8 VR Micro the VR doesn't work close up. I don't understand why, it would be very interesting to know if it's VR and close working that doesn't work or some characteristic of the Nikkor lens that causes the limitation.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Jan 27th, 2014 17:45 |
|
20th Post |
Eric
|
Robert wrote:amazing50 wrote: Strictly speaking, the paperwork that came with the 100vr said that VR performance diminished when approaching less than 18†(if my memory serves me correctly). It didn't actually say it 'didn't work'. I got sharper images when using a tripod than the VR ...but I guess that would always be better.
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| This is topic ID = 844 Current time is 20:41 | Page: 1 2 3 | |
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Totally Off Topic Stuff > Everything Else > Money, money, money | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0442 seconds (57% database + 43% PHP). 85 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0442 seconds (57% database + 43% PHP). 85 queries executed.