Close-up shot

You would be better off taking the achromat out of your letus, sticking it straight on the front of your camera and using that, rather than using the adapter and 35mm lens. You dont really need the DOF and film look for a shot like that and you can get very close in with an adapter achromat....
 
Mj882,

if you want that exact framing, the 105 couldnt get THAT close due to its 1.2-34 MOD. What I did to get in that close to the sample you posted is ADDED a +3 close up filter on the front of the 105.

Or even a 50mm with a stack of 2 +3 close up filters will do the trick. But the 105 with a +3 close up will give you same framing as your sample.

Peter, I wouldnt recommend removing your adapter on the set and using just the achromat as it takes time to set it back up. When youve got paid talent I guess its safer and faster to use the 105 on the adapter as its faster to switch lenses than taking off and on the 35 mm adapter on set.

Ted
 
teddybear said:
Mj882,

if you want that exact framing, the 105 couldnt get THAT close due to its 1.2-34 MOD. What I did to get in that close to the sample you posted is ADDED a +3 close up filter on the front of the 105.

Or even a 50mm with a stack of 2 +3 close up filters will do the trick. But the 105 with a +3 close up will give you same framing as your sample.

Peter, I wouldnt recommend removing your adapter on the set and using just the achromat as it takes time to set it back up. When youve got paid talent I guess its safer and faster to use the 105 on the adapter as its faster to switch lenses than taking off and on the 35 mm adapter on set.

Ted
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree, I don't want to put myself under that sort of pressure on set by removing the adapter and using the achromat.

So the 105 alone won't produce that type of shot, what filters would you recommend specifically?
 
For your sake, I actually tested my lenses on my eyeball just now. No kidding. The 105mm by itself can give you a slightly wider frame, check if that will work for you but for an almost exact frame as the one you showed I added a cokin +3 close up filter on the front thread of the 105 lens.and got me the same effect. Made me get some eyedrops as i saw my eyeball was red on the monitor. No kidding.

Also tested a 50mm lens but needed to stack 2 pieces of +3 close up filters to get almost the same effect, but the 105mm with 1 close up was the closest almost identical frame.

Also tested my 80-200 since its also macro but didnt work.

So there you go.

Good luck.
 
if its a 52mm thread it should fit. But i keep several sizes, I just used a 55mm thread closeups and taped it on the front of the 105. These are very light filters and weigh just like UV filters.
P series are bigger i think. Look over at cokin website to get the product code number.
 
if you cant find cokin filters at 52 or 55mm try sunpak close up filters. I have those too, they come in a pack of 1pc. +1, 1pc +2, & 1pc +4. Combining +1 & +2 gives same effect as a single +3.

Its a neat set and can come in handy for adding close up capability to your still lenses.
 
Instead of taking that razor-sharp Nikon glass image and muddying it up with stacks of cheesy closeup filters (eek!) wouldn't it be better to just add air to the optical path? Specifically, an extension tube between the lens and the mount on the adapter. In the Canon FD world the 100mm macro lens comes with a 50mm extension tube for getting that close. (And the 50mm macro comes with a 25mm extension tube for replicating what you get with the 100mm macro, if you only want to own one lens.) I have to assume Nikon provides something similar? Or heck, use an aftermarket extension tube, since there isn't any optical quality to be concerned with.

If you really want to get crazy on the macro stuff, get an extension bellows, which allows you to dial in the amount of magnification-via-extension.

Duncan
 
Mj882 said:
Hey Duncan,

Why extension tubes over close-up filters as suggested by teddybear?
Click to expand...

Every piece of glass you add to the optical path is another potential spot for glare, reflection, distortion, chromatic aberration, and just plain old de-sharpening. No knock on the likes of Tiffen (they make some fine high-end products for the movie industry) but there is simply no way their consumer-grade products like close-up filters can touch the optical quality of your average Nikkor lens... and the Micro-Nikkors are way above average when it comes to flatness of field and sharpness!

So closeup filters, while they will give you a magnified image, can do nothing but degrade the image in every other aspect.

An extension tube, on the other hand, adds nothing to the optical path but air. All you are doing is radically shifting the focal point of the lens, in order to be able to focus almost right in front of the lens, at the expense of all those other distances like "3 feet" or "infinity." Since that is exactly what you want to accomplish in this case, why not do it in the way that doesn't touch the razor-sharp image coming through the legendary Micro-Nikkor?

Note that you could even use extension tubes with non-macro lenses and as long as you aren't trying to focus on something completely parallel to the film plane and edge-to-edge sharp, you'll probably get away with it just fine. (The example shot of an eye from an angle would do just fine with a regular lens and an extension tube.)

Closeup filters are for solving this problem on non-interchangeable-lens cameras, or for doing it when low cost is the overriding factor instead of quality. On ebay, used or off-brand extension tubes are not bank-breaking purchases, so you should be able to do it the quality way for not much money at all.

Duncan
 
el presidente said:
I have fd macro bellows and you can do that shot and much more.
Click to expand...

I love my FD auto-bellows!

You can get close, as in this shot of a diesel fuel injector:

injector_tip_2.jpg




Or you can get really really close!

injector_tip_1.jpg



...or anywhere in between.

It'd be a tad ungainly hanging off the front of a video camera with an adapter, but certainly not unusable.


Duncan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top