Turn a Photographic camera Lense into a Close-Up Lense with Field glasses
This post deals mainly with:
- macro
BY JFITZPATRICK AT 01/13/08 02:33 PM
Some other super duper inexpensive and effectual way to pip macro is to change by reversal a standard 50mm lens. Reversing ring sets can cost up to USD 50, but here is a cheapo way to get your own for under USD 10:
Some other great fast one is to use up a 50mm lens and “stack” it with a male/male thread transcriber (usually about USD 10-13) on the front of some other lens. Like so:
The best thing about the above two fast one is that you don’t need to have a novel and super expensive lens. A trade name new modern 50mm lens from Nikon for illustration will run you USD 100 (the Nikon 1.8 50mm is a treasure by the way) but you can only as easy pick up an older E serial 50mm lens on ebay for under USD 30. I have a few egg laying around only for this kind of thing.
Happy shot =)
BY TAMAR AT 01/13/08 06:51 PM
BY RY_RY AT 01/13/08 08:21 PM
tamar: Genuinely? A converse lens is broken than a consecrate macro lens? OMG! Overly bad your DoF is 1-2mm and your lens is only a duet cm away from the subject. No portrayals? No having the whole flower in focus? 
Get an echt macro lens and you will be astounded. Research the Tamron 90/2.5 Macro. Purchase one for USD 100. Own maybe the crisp lens of all time created for consumer photography. Love the bokeh that shoots down any plastic crap lens produced today. Call back that everything you position in front of/slow the lens degrades IQ.
BY KUYMAN AT 01/13/08 09:32 PM
@RY_RY: What you articulated made utterly no sense. Wherefore would you be occupying a portraiture with a macro lens at all? Wherefore would you essay to get the whole flower even in the flesh if you’re making a macro pipped? What you’re proposing is horrid. The Tamron you’re talking about can’t maintain a wax light to any halfway origin Nikon lens and with the high speed of the 1.8/50mm Nikkor lens on a black eye ring, I’d bet the mental images are importantly sharper than anything got by Tamron that costs 100 dollars. Tamron’s lens systems just aren’t that crisp or that high quality.
BY PIACULUM AT 01/13/08 09:57 PM
kuyman: Used up the language right extinct of my mouth.
BY William Franklin Graham.REEDS AT 01/13/08 10:21 PM
Scarperring 2K, FF and Google Subscriber embedded in GMail via BetterGmail (older): Enter Gives for Google Subscriber. Select the problematical feed, seek to travel off it via keys or mouse. You can’t. Click gives, the provenders reload, but the clause remains unread.
BY TAMAR AT 01/14/08 05:51 AM
ry_ry: I own a 105VR to a fault. 
If you want something in extremal detail, a changing by reversal ring + lens makes something very elaborate. Sure, you’re giving DOF for it (and that’s an understatement), but it still plant quite good.
BY RY_RY AT 01/14/08 06:29 PM
kuyman: Umm…because I can? Because it’s one less lens I need to purchase/carry? Because I can pip normally then go as close as 1:2 the next sec? Because I don’t have to bank my lens to a Chinese piece of metal dealt for USD 20? Is this thing on?
If I want an itty itty petal of a bloom for a picture show, I’ll throw my TC on and do some 1:1, or pose some extenstion tubes on my Tak 135 and do great than 1:1.
High speed has small to do with marco, simply FYI. You’d bet the Tamron is worse, and you’d misplace. There’s a ground this 1970s lens still costs more than the Nikon 50. You don’t realise a Lope de Vega fetching the like price as an 08 Civil, right?
BTW…you’re equation Tamron today (garbage) to time of origin Tamron (better than most OEM lens and inexpensive). Lol you’ve never shot an older Tam earlier, have you? If it can’t AF it’s crap, right? I own 1 AF lens between my 3 SLRs and wouldn’t have it any former way.
tamar: For detail, yes, the changing by reversal ring makes offer unusual detail. It’s only the DoF that’s so hard to get spot-on when subjects are locomoting 
For a budget, it’s a full way to go. But I was simply trying to state there are early options on a budget.
Keep on with the prime lens systems, that’s the way to be 
:D
BY TAMAR AT 01/14/08 08:52 PM
Yea, I like my primes, though I eventually have a doing work 18-200VR and wow….
BY KUYMAN AT 01/15/08 05:49 PM
@RY_RY: Over again, I’m but not acquiring what you’re locution here. You talk about being on a budget with the two lens systems and then talk about how outstanding your 110 bucks Tamron is… And spell we’re talking about budget, I want to cite that high speed is broken in the retentive run when you want better pictures, even macro instructions. Have you understood the monetary value on an origin macro light ring?
I’m bad, but there’s no 110 bucks Tamron lens that is fabricated today that will get the quality of mental image as from couple of Nikkor lens systems hacked unitedly.
And “Call up that everything you pose in front of/slow the lens degrades IQ.” doesn’t get any sense when you ulterior go on to speak about (in your next post) about using a tele extender to occupy closer pictures.
BY
AT 02/04/08 09:57 AM