No tape, please!

3M Photo Mount Spray Adhesive is what I've always used. It is an acid-free solution, it's cheap ($13 a can) and it works extremely well. Use it in an open garage or a very well ventilated area with no wind. Follow directions precisely.

CODA cold mounting works great, but can be expensive.

http://www.codamount.com

Traditional Dry Mount Adhesive works well, if you use one designated specifically as safe for foam boards, and use a temperature-controlled heat press.

B&H and other major photo supply houses carry dry mounting supplies.

I'm a lucky but disappointed person...(my D7200 is kaputt...waiting it gets repaired but this seems to happen perhaps in 2022!)

Disappointed because I don't understand how a macro lens works.
Lucky because recently, a friend made me a superb gift: she (Elizabeth) gave me her old Nikon D70 (full operationnel!sensor about 16 mm x 24 mm) with the lens TAMRON 90mm macro, bla bla bla.

1) She knows how I'm feeling bad without my D7200.
2) She is now using a "microfourthird" camera with a 200-400 mm lens because it is much lighter = so, she did'nt use her Nikon gear for years any more...so "weg damit".

Well...this is my very first Macro Lens! This lens has a good reputation
This evening I wanted to try that lens.
I figured out the minimal focus distance to be about 44cm...say 17 inches.
The lens is labeled "MACRO 1:1"...
Then I thought, if focused at mini distance (17"), any 24 mm long object would completely fill the 24 mm lenght of the sensor!
To see exactly what happens and to check the effectiv magnification ratio, I decided to take a picture of a "measuring tape" at the minimum possible focusing distance.

Guess what?
I expected to get 24 or 25 mm of this "millimetric ribbon" on the picture...
NOT AT ALL...I got much more...71 mm !
See the picture I took.

I can't tell this picture is a macro. At the best it's a close-up.
Certainly somewhere is anything wrong.
But what?
Does somebody knows how to handle that lens?
I just want to know what to do in order to fill the frame with a subject measuring 24 mm x16mm.
In advance many thanks for Your help!

Taking a walk this morning, I was intrigued with this moss hanging from a California Live Oak. It is a totally ugly mass of intertwined strands.

Using a modified Sony A6300 with one of my favorite lenses for doing mono imaging - the legacy Vivitar 55mm f2.8 macro lens made by Komine. This is a very sharp lens and just a joy to use with this camera in mono.

First image is the before, taken at f5.6, which is the sweet spot for this lens.

Second image is the after result. I have discovered that using Gigapixel AI and resizing just a little, and this case was 1.2x, has quite an effect on sharpness. I started with the RAW file and used monochrome2DNG to produce a mono DNG file. Now Gigapixel will not accept a mono DNG file, so I imported into Lightroom and then told it to edit in Gigapixel AI. And I used the "very compressed" model as the mono file doesn't seem to be bothered with this approach.

Third image is a side-by-side with original on the left and the Gigapixel AI result on the right. With a mono image, there is no demosaicing done to the image. And because of that, there is not much chance of artifacts. And I also used a red filter, so there wasn't much chance of CA forming. And since it was a mono sensor, all the pixels participated.

I'm having as much fun with this modified camera as I used to have many years ago shooting in Tri-X. Actually more fun than Tri-X.

I would like the collective opinion of this community for an interpretation of NIB before I take the seller to task. I purchased a camera from a seller on eBay and it was advertised as NIB. I expected to get a brand new unused camera with all cables and documentation in the manufacturer's original packaging. What I received is a camera with a filter on the lens that was overly tightened, a charger, and a battery. Admittedly, the camera was in pristine condition. However, the charger clearly was previously used since it had many scuff marks on it. There was no documentation and no cables. Furthermore, none of the Nikon original packaging was included. I intend to notify the seller that he misrepresented the offering but before I do so, I want to know how the community interprets NIB. Thanks for your input.

I'm puzzled by your question and some of the responses. Was the camera and filter colder than 37 degrees when you took them outside? Did your glasses fog when you went outside? Just based on the science fog forms (condenses) on surfaces colder than the dew point of moisture in the air. It doesn't form on surfaces warmer than the air temperature. If that were the case coffee mugs would sweat rather then iced tea glasses. I'd bet you wouldn't have seen any fog on the camera lens or filter if you'd started shooting immediately when you went outside. If the humidity increased after you were out there a while and the temperature of your gear was now colder than the dew point you'd get fog. Fog/dew forms on the coldest relative surfaces. In this case your filter may have been colder than your camera which you had in your hands and there are electronics inside. I'm also going to guess your glasses and your camera glass would have fogged up when you went back inside