Two lenses, one cool shot

Brad Grimmett · April 29, 2008

if it was just a matter getting very close to a tiny subject without using a macro try inverting a 25mm lens or even wider. the wider you go the stronger the magnification.

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean using a wider lens as the front element of this setup, or do you mean a 25mm by itself?

Ollie Bartlett · April 29, 2008

ive never even seen a digi-prime in the flesh so forgive me for asking but was this neccessary because they have no macro focus function.

on another note, i just tried to recreate the setup, or at least the basic principles of it in the kit room i call my home 40 hours a week, using a hj22 and an inverted j9 on a digi beta. although i could get things in close focus, i only ever achieved a small portholed image in the centre of the monitor, and im wondering why this is.

if my understanding is correct, and its a big if, then i should be able to set the hj22 to 100mm (ish) and the j9 to its maximum focal length of 48 to achieve the approximately same effect as the 100mm / 50mm combo that was mentioned... so why so much such a small picture, when in the flickr photos you guys clearly achieved a full screen image.

is this something to do with me using zoom lenses, or am i just overlooking something glaringly obvious?

ollie

boy yniguez · April 30, 2008

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean using a wider lens as the front element of this setup, or do you mean a 25mm by itself?

hi, brad!

sorry, i was not too clear about my reply but what i meant was that it was totally unnecessary to stack two lenses together as mounting a wide-angle lens backwards wherein the front element is towards the mount and the rear element is pointing at the subject creates a much higher magnification and a sharper rendition compared to a regular lens pulled away from the camera body with several extension tubes. of course to date i don't know of any accessory for film cameras to facilitate that but we've successfully mounted a backward-mounted lens with lots of gaffers tape (sorry, in the philippines we need to improvise a lot). since a wider lens covers a wider field of view, a backward-mounted wider lens projects a bigger image on the film plane thus creating a larger magnification. in still photography i have an adaptor ring with a nikon mount on one side and a 52mm thread on the other such that you can screw on a regular nikon lens (pre-digital) backwards. my attached photo was created with such contraption! i hope i've made in clearer to you and thanks for the reply!

chuck colburn · April 30, 2008

hi, brad!
sorry, i was not too clear about my reply but what i meant was that it was totally unnecessary to stack two lenses together as mounting a wide-angle lens backwards wherein the front element is towards the mount and the rear element is pointing at the subject creates a much higher magnification and a sharper rendition compared to a regular lens pulled away from the camera body with several extension tubes. of course to date i don't know of any accessory for film cameras to facilitate that but we've successfully mounted a backward-mounted lens with lots of gaffers tape (sorry, in the philippines we need to improvise a lot). since a wider lens covers a wider field of view, a backward-mounted wider lens projects a bigger image on the film plane thus creating a larger magnification. in still photography i have an adaptor ring with a nikon mount on one side and a 52mm thread on the other such that you can screw on a regular nikon lens (pre-digital) backwards. my attached photo was created with such contraption! i hope i've made in clearer to you and thanks for the reply!

If you are going to use just one lens in reverse you get a reversing ring and either extension tubes or a bellows unit.

boy yniguez · April 30, 2008

If you are going to use just one lens in reverse you get a reversing ring and either extension tubes or a bellows unit.

like i mentioned earlier there's no need for extension tubes or bellows thus no need for compensations on exposures!

David Auner aac · May 1, 2008

Has anyone done a shot like this before? I'd never heard of this technique, but it was pretty cool and worked great for what we were doing. It looked so cool in fact that the whole cast and crew was crowded around the monitor looking at what we were shooting.

That's some that is done quite often in still micro/macro photography. Check out Bjørn Rørslett's site and see what he does at times ;)

http://www.naturfotograf.com

Cheers, Dave

chuck colburn · May 1, 2008

That's some that is done quite often in still micro/macro photography. Check out Bjørn Rørslett's site and see what he does at times ;)

http://www.naturfotograf.com

Cheers, Dave

Morning Dave,

Great site for Nikon lens info mayby not the latest but very in depth. The part about telextenders is really great. I've told people for years it's best to keep to the manufactures recommended model of ext. for a given lens. This is not to say that you can't use an off brand unit with whatever lens it's just that sometimes the lens maker has designed a given unit to perform best with a given or series of lenses. Anyhow great site.

thanks.

Chuck

Brad Grimmett · May 5, 2008

is this something to do with me using zoom lenses, or am i just overlooking something glaringly obvious?

ollie

I would guess that that's the case. I've never tried this technique with zooms though, so I'm not 100% sure. Try it again with primes and it should work.

Brad Grimmett · May 5, 2008

i hope i've made in clearer to you and thanks for the reply!

Thanks for the info Boy. I'll try that sometime.

boy yniguez · May 5, 2008

Thanks for the info Boy. I'll try that sometime.

you're welcome, brad!

i found a photo of an upsidedown cockroach with its legs pointing up taken with an ordinary 24mm lens mounted backwards on a nikon D40. note the eyes, the globes at the bottom of the frame.

for a larger size of this photo check http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2266/170467...52cb8759c_b.jpg