fetzler Loc: North West PA

Macro photographs can be made by lens reversing but, in my opinion, this just a PIA and there are better ways

1. Macro lenses are the easiest and most flexible way.
2. Extension tubes and bellows are pretty good.
3. Quality close up lenses like those made by Raynox can be quite useful. Cheap ones are very bad optically.
4. the use of microscope lenses and enlarging lenses on bellows can very useful particularly at higher magnifications.

Remember depth of field is determined by magnification and the effective aperture. Higher magnification produces less depth of field. It should also be remembered that diffraction increases as the aperture gets smaller. As magnification increases focus stacking becomes imperative. I have a Laowa super macro lens that can go up to 5x. f 2.8 and 4 (the effective apertures are actually much smaller) are the most used apertures as diffraction becomes a problem. Focus stacking is necessary.

Bill_de Loc: US

No you don't! As I pointed out above they make adapters that go on the rear of the lens to adjust the aperture.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413614-REG/fotodiox_reverse_aperture_control_nikg_aperture_control_52mm_filter.html

---

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

It is possible your cameras are designed to not take images "when no lens is mounted". The camera can't detect that a lens is installed, when it's reversed like that. There may be a setting in the menu that "allow shutter release without lens".

Is yours an AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8"G"? If so, it cannot be used with a typical reverse adapter alone. The G and E Nikkors have no means of adjusting the lens aperture, except via the controls on the camera body. "D" type Nikkors have an aperture control ring right on the lens itself, near the base.

It also is possible the cameras actually are taking images, but because the lens aperture isn't being controlled, they are either so drastically over- or under-exposed they don't look like images.

There is a device that allows you to control the aperture of a G type lens, when reversed: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413614-REG/fotodiox_reverse_aperture_control_nikg_aperture_control_52mm_filter.html/overview

Bill_de Loc: US

Cool! Same one I linked to on page one. We should ask B&H to give us a commission.

---

Mark Sturtevant Loc: Grand Blanc, MI

Aside from that, you will want to have the lens stop down the aperture to f/11 or even smaller, so to have some more depth of focus. Even then, its pretty shallow. For Canon dslr cameras, there is a trick to get a lens to stop down to a set aperture while it sits on the camera, and you can then detach the lens and mount it in reverse while it holds that aperture. I don't know what the procedure would be for Nikon, but it should be easy to look it up.
For this variation of doing macro, an olde manual prime lens is a more convenient choice since you can focus and compose while wide open, and then close down the aperture to shoot. Then it also does not matter what brand of lens it is. I have an excellent but not expensive manual Pentax 35 mm that I can use on my Canon dslr.

User ID

It certainly *does* matter what brand of lens you reverse mount. Some, like OM, FD or most M42 do not stop down. When you set a smaller stop nothing happens.

Fact is that in 2022 reverse mounting is no longer the really simple, convenient, inexpensive, easy to tote macro solution that it once was. Admit its obsolete and just ignore it. It was pretty limited and clunky even back in its hayday. No loss.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Actually, many m42 lenses have an auto/manual slide switch that when in manual position allow you to control the aperture. I have many of these m42 lenses, all of the ones I have can do this. This includes many Asahi Pentax Takumar lenses, and other m42 lenses too.

And I have a set of Minolta Rokkors with MC/MD mounts, and they are all great lenses for reversing too.

And reversing a lens is not obsolete. It still works as good as it ever did as long as you can control the aperture. But personally, I prefer to use macro lenses. I have 6 of them.

One additional point to make is that there is a limited range of suitable focal lengths of lenses that will work reversed. 28mm thru 50mm (maybe even 58mm) work great, but there is a point where the focal point moves inside the lens, and you can't use a lens in the reverse direction. You can also use extension tubes with a reversed lens for even more magnification (and of course even less light).

https://makrodunyasi.com/en/reverse-lens-macro-photography/

augieg27 Loc: Central California

This has been quite a leaning conversation for me, and I appreciate your input.
But after experimenting for a while I realized it is not worthwhile.
Thank you all for your comments and suggestions.
Augie

User ID

It appears that we pretty much agree about a nearly irrelevant method. Your details are correct and those describes the situation and how its obsolete.

Acoarst that will likely never rule out its application an amusing diversion for the hobbyist and tinkerer.

If the user of a modern camera hasta carry a Rokkor or similar reversible lens rather than just a tiny ring of aluminum, then that same user is way better off to carry a cheap fully manual macro lens instead of some otherwise useless non native normal lens just cuz it reverses.

Whatz more, you can even reverse the cheap macro if need be !

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Yes, I prefer to use a macro lens. But I proven to myself that I can make le s reversal work. And actually, I don't find it difficult to do.

But I wonder at what focal length to dial into the camera when reversing the lens? If I reverse a 50mm lens, I doubt selecting 50mm on the camera is the optimum choice. The reversed lens is producing a magnified image and perhaps something more than 50mm should be dialed in for IBIS?

And adding an extension tube compounds the problem. I have seen no attempt at providing a solution on the internet.

Similar problem exists when using a macro lens in that as you go towards 1:1, the lens gets a lot longer, and optimum FL to dial into the camera has to change. And add an extension tube, and it becomes worse.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

In doing some Googling on what to set IBIS FL to when doing macro, I haven't found anything official. But I did find other discussions specifying that others have gotten better results when they multiply the FL by 2 for 1:1 or 4 for 2:1 but only 1 for 1:2.

Haven't tried it yet.

User ID

Those are excellent approximations.

Be aware that setting IS for too long a FL is detrimental. Since youre dealing with approximations, set the IS for only 85 to 90% of the estimated FL.

If you can get your mix of gear to land at exactly 1:1 then you can find the optical center of the lens and use it for all other measurements.

At 1:1 the optical center will lay exactly halfway between the sensor plane and the focus point on the subject. You can mark that center. It never changes. For any magnification, the effective FL is simply the distance from the sensor to that center.

Purists may point out its not necessarily "the teue optical center". No matter, Its the one you want for purpose of making measurements.