tienchieh

I am interested in learning how to use reverse mounting ring in macro shooting. Somebody please share your experience of using it, pros & cons? TIA!!

BassmanBruce Loc: Middle of the Mitten

No pro here, but when using one I found primes to be much better than zooms.30mm and 50mm gave nice results and with tubes and wide angles I could get over 4:1 magnification.
Dof becomes practically nonexistent!
It is a very inexpensive and fun way to try macro. All my lenses for this were Minolta, af and mf.
I use macro lenses now though, sometimes a bellows.
Have fun!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I did it with my FD system.
Prefer a macro lens which I bought shortly after using it.
I prefer diopter lenses screwed over the front.
Just not enough flexibility and too close for me.
DOF is as shallow as any way and image was good, just was a PITA.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

tienchieh I used the BR-2A Lens Reversing Ring - 52mm Thread... albeit it is not an ideal solution.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/37171-REG/Nikon_2657_BR_2A_Lens_Reversing_Ring.html

Since upgrading to the AF micro 200mm f/4D ED IF optic the BR-2A sits quietly in a drawer now.
If I can find it I'll sell it to you at a 25% mark down... although I should charge double since it's been on back order forever...

Does it work? Yes indeed but you are way closer than 1:1 depending on the optic...
The working distance is sadly the limitation here...

Best Advice? Save up the the AF micro 200mm f/4D ED IF which is an industry standard for compelling reasons. Funny how everyone one wants to get greater than 1:1 but sadly doesn't realize how frustrating it is lighting at that distance... Remember you'll have no auto exposure and no auto focus.

Don't even think of hanging long heavy glass on this...
I used it on a D3 which could handle it with a 50mm prime lens...
Hope this makes sense..

Please stay safe...
All the best on your journey tienchieh

Oh btw, this works marginally on a FX (full frame) though a serious challenge on DX which has a much dimmer viewfinder. While the D3 has a split prism viewfinder option prosumer bodies are not so lucky...

https://www.nikonimgsupport.com/eu/BV_article?articleNo=000005071&lang=en_GB

TreborLow

Depending on the physical structure of the lens, a reverse adapter is like a short extension tube. If the front element is set deeply into the lens barrel, it will have a greater effect. The lens must have manual control of the aperture. It is also better to have manual control of focusing. There will be no communications to the body. In some flat field settings it might produce a wider flat field of focus but it is usually only a slight advantage. For around $10 you can get a set of 3 manual extension tubes and have even greater flexibility. Again, manual control of the lens is needed. There are more expensive extension tubes that will maintain communication between camera and lens. Both types will accept any lens for your camera. The reverse adapter is only going to work on lenses with the same filter diameter. Diopter lenses allow all the body controls of your camera to still work. Inexpensive ones are single element and reasonable quality. Double elements cost more and are general sharper. Good luck and have fun!

Argus

Good video to start with: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT1fcwMu8jY

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

With what system do you propose doing this?

Modern electronically controlled lenses cannot be used in reverse (well, to be accurate, it might be possible... but typically isn't cheap or easy).

If you want to do reverse lens macro, you would be best getting a vintage lens that has a built-in mechanical control for the lens aperture. Usually that's a ring at the base of the lens that you twist to set to different lens apertures. I'd recommend a lens in the 50 to 135mm range of focal lengths.

You then will need to find a reversing ring that fits the lens' filter threads.

This will not have any electronic contacts to communicate with the camera, so you may need to set something in the camera's menu. Often they are designed to not trip the shutter when there is no lens installed, to prevent accidents. In one of my cameras, I had to "enable" a feature labelled "allow shutter to fire without lens". Check your manual or scroll through the camera's menu to see if you find something similar.

With this type of lens, you will have limited usable exposure modes. You cannot use any exposure mode where the camera would normally need to change the lens aperture. Of course you can use fully manual exposure, where you choose the shutter speed, lens aperture (set on the lens, now) and the ISO. You also can probably use "aperture priority" auto exposure. Here you choose the aperture (on the lens) and the ISO (in the camera), and leave it to the camera to select the shutter speed that it thinks will make a "correct" exposure. Assuming your camera has it, you also can use Auto ISO with M, which is another form of auto exposure. In this case you choose the aperture (on the lens), the shutter speed (in the camera) and the camera will choose an ISO that it thinks will make a correct exposure.

DO NOT use P (program) or shutter priority AE (S on Nikon, Sony & others or Tv on Canon). In both of these AE modes the camera needs to be able to adjust the aperture, which it cannot do with the reversed lens.

Also DO NOT use any "scene" modes like "sports", "landscape", "portrait", etc. And DON'T use the full "Auto" (point n shoot) mode, if your camera has it.

One problem with reversed lenses is that it can be difficult to shade the rear element (not the front element) of the lens from oblique light and it may not have anti-reflective coatings like the front element of many lenses have. On one lens, I solved this problem by using a rear lens cap, modified into a "lens hood" by removing the center of it completely.

Another possible problem is that some lenses have little buttons or levers that are moved to release the lens aperture only when the lens is mounted on a camera. Canon's earlier "FD" mount lenses "park" their aperture at f/5.6 when they are removed from the camera and there is no way to change it. There's a little tab or lever hiding in the mount that needs to be pressed to allow the aperture to be changed manually. When the lens is on a camera, no problemo... that little tab or lever is actuated and the lens works normally. A solution in this case was a special "rear lens cap" provided by Canon to repair techs, needed whenever they were working on FD lenses. It also is open on the bottom, so can serve as a hood on a reversed lens too. I was lucky to get one of these some years ago. They're quite rare!

Most other lens systems I'm aware of aren't a problem, but I'm certainly not familiar with all of them! I know Nikon F, Konica K/AR, Minolta MC and MD, Pentax screwmount and PK bayonet, and Olympus lenses are fine.

Another technique for macro on the cheap was to reverse mount one lens on another. It's most easily done when they have the same filter thread. At one time I used a 135mm lens and reversed a 28mm in front of it. If I recall correctly, they both used 55mm filters, so it was just a matter of getting a "reverse stacking" adapter that allowed them to screw together. The 28mm lens acted like a high quality "diopter" on the front of the 135mm.

I don't do any reversing or reverse stacking now. Both methods have a lot of limitations and are a bit of a pain, especially trying to do them on modern cameras. It made sense back in the days of film, when we could do both with lenses already in our camera bags. Today you pretty much have to buy a special lens or two, in order to use these techniques.

Much easier to just get a high quality diopter lens or, even better, a set of macro extension tubes. I have one diopter for use on one lens.... and several sets of extension tubes for use with virtually any lens ever made for my cameras. I always have some extension tubes with me. I occasionally get out the diopter for use with that one particular lens. High quality diopters ain't cheap. This one sold for around $140. That's a lot to spend to only use it on one lens! (I thought I'd use it on more, but there's some loss of image quality, even with a top of the line diopter).

If you consider macro extension tubes, the OEM tubes sold by the camera makers are very pricey, often sold individually or don't work with every lens. There are very good third party such as the Kenko ($130 for a set of three: 12mm, 20mm, 36mm that can be used singly or combined with each other). Nearly as good are similar sets offered by Viltrox, Opteka, Vello, Fotodiox and a few others (around $75). In some cases, those same manufacturers offer less expensive, more plasticky "economy" versions (around $50). I suppose those would be okay with really lightweight lenses and cameras, but I think it might be a lot better to spend a little more for the "better" ones.

AVOID the really cheap macro extension tubes... under $25... sometimes even less than $15 or under $10! These are "dumb" tubes without the electronic connections for the lens and camera to communicate. They simply won't work with many modern lenses... Or you have to do all sorts of complex work-arounds to use them. Not worth the savings.

If just starting out shooting macro on a tight budget, I might recommend looking for a vintage manual focus lens. There are lots of them around and sometimes they can be had pretty cheaply.

I picked up a Tamron SP 90mm f/2.5 lens from the 1980s at a local secondhand store for all of $20. It was in great shape with the original caps, lens hood and a matched "doubler". It is one of a number of interchangeable "Adaptall" mount lens Tamron sold in those days. The "SP" line were generally their best and most pro-oriented. Mine came with a Nikon F-mount on it, but I needed to fit it to a modern Canon camera. Turns out, Adaptall mounts are still being made for just about every camera system, so I ordered one from China. It cost $40, including shipping, and arrived in 4 days. It's a "chipped" adapter that sort of communicates with the camera (just lets it know there's a lens mounted, to avoid the problem mentioned above)... there are cheaper ones without the chip (about $25 or $30). $60 for a good macro lens, not bad! It's strictly manual (aperture and focus), so slower to work with. But works fine. (More recently I've adapted if for use on a mirrorless camera. There's an Adaptall for that, too! I have them for a bunch of different camera systems).

My $60 Tamron SP 90mm only does 1:2 or half life size on it's own... so for this shot I added a 20mm Kenko macro extension tube behind it....



These two shots of poppy buds show the difference between the lens with the 20mm extension tube and without it...



Here's the Tamron 90mm mounted on one of my DSLRs.... Alongside is an image showing the compact lens off the camera, with F-mount Adaptall next to it.... And the third images shows the lens along with some macro extension tubes...

tienchieh

Thanks for your detailed explanation of using reverse mounting ring. I am a newbie to photography and am just learning. I saw a video about this topic, hence, the question. I have a Canon 80D and my lenses are EF. Appreciation to other replies as well! Thanks, folks!

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

It's actually how I started in Macro photography. Extremely shallow depth of field and my working distance from end of lens to subject was about 1 1/2 inches. That said, once I learned/practiced and was able to nail the focus, moving up to a true macro lens was a breeze. I shoot Nikon, but reversed an old cannon 24 or 28mm I found at a thrift shop. Had less than $20 bucks invested. A fun way to learn, teaches patience, hand and eye coordination.

agillot

i did it for awhile with a 50mm pentax 1-7 on a nik D300 , fun to do , you focus by moving the camera , not using the focus ring , you need to shot at f 16 for dept of field , focus pic is dark at f 11 or 16 , you need a LOT of light .i think using extension tubes is easier .get the MIKE brand they work well and not pricey .

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Using the focusing of the lens, by itself , has a very limited range. A series of tubes can give more range , and a bellows is best for various extended ranging. Keeping extraneous light out of the lens can be a challenge.
.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

Epic write up Alan... very nicely illustrated...
Stellar that you showcased Canon which the OP uses...

You are a marvelous resource for others here on UHH...
Kudos for taking the time to the cover OP's in depth...

bleirer

The Meike extension tubes are inexpensive and fair quality. They carry the electronics from the lens to the camera. Divide the extension length by the lens focal length to get roughly the amount of magnification, add back in max magnification the lens started with. So adding a 25mm extension to a 50mm lens gets about .5x meaning one inch in the world is .5 inch on your sensor. If the lens had .15 to start you are up to .65x. This amount is good for flowers and bees but not tiny insects.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/macro-extension-tubes-closeup.htm

lsaguy Loc: Udall, KS, USA

Go to Allan Walls Photography on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d_0b2M5D-8

He has, as my Grandmother used to say, more ideas than Carter has pills.
Get an enlarger lens and turn it around. If you really want to go for bigger than 1:1 get an adapter and put on a 10 power microscope lens.

Rick

fetzler Loc: North West PA

This would be my least favorite way of taking macros. If you have a gelded lens you may have no aperture control without an extra accessory that may or may not be available for your camera.

1. A good macro lens is a pleasure to use.

2. Extension tubes work quite well with a variety of lenses. Here I prefer primes but modest telephoto zooms work OK.

3. Raynox lenses work well and can be combined with the above two choices for more magnification.