Getting Screwed by Nikon! (50mm f/1.4 VR)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 3, 2007.

  1. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 3, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    banjo Guest

    i can not get your picture to load rita.
    banjo, Feb 3, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Works ok for me - looks good sharpness wise - a little CA at top, but
    nice elsewhere *except* there is so little depth of field it looks
    completely unnatural - more like you photoshopped the blur in (not
    that I would ever suggest that - it just *looks* like it!)

    What will you be using it for? I think if that is any guide, your
    subjects will have to be rather flat..
    mark.thomas.7, Feb 4, 2007
  4. Yep! I've noticed the CA or purple fringing as well. Nope, no Photoshop on
    this. Yes, the DoF is mind numbingly thin, but I'm sure it is normal for
    that level of magnification.
    Small moving insect an 1/8" or less in size. Both lenses were set to
    maximum close focus for testing purposes, so I can adjust the magnification
    down a bit when out in the field.

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 4, 2007
  5. Good luck! Be interested to see what results. Tried this sort of
    stuff once with a similar setup (50 rev. on a 135), but I didn't get
    anything I'd be proud to showoff, and just never got into macro...

    Perhaps that's because you need a good subject, good light, suitable
    background (this is much harder than it sounds unless you do it in a
    studio environment), everything in focus, enough (or the right amount)
    of depth of field, no subject or camera movement, often in awkward

    Nup, it's just all too hard for a lazy sob like me. (O;
    mark.thomas.7, Feb 4, 2007
  6. Can u explain plse. Your description refers to a dual lens combo. Did you
    simply reverse mount the 50mm to the VR to enable extreme close-up work?
    This is particularly relevant to myself at the moment because having
    recently gone digital, and therefore autofocus, I was thinking of parting,
    reluctantly, with my old friends the manual Nikon 55mm f3.5 macro and 35mm
    f1.4 lenses.
    Pardon my ignorance in advance if I have misunderstood you.
    George Campbell, Feb 4, 2007
  7. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Cgiorgio Guest

    It is an old trick to use an inverted lens as a macro lens. Inverted lenses
    make excellent macro lenses, they are corrected for infinity when the light
    rays pass them in the normal direction, when inverted they become corrected
    for closeups. Problem is: Coupling rings (male/male) from filter thread to
    filter thread are very difficult to find, I had actually one made on a lathe
    because I could not find a source. The "macro lens" used must have a wide
    opening in order to avoid vignetting. You only use the diafragm on the main
    lens, so it does not matter if the diafragm on the "macro lens" works or
    not. Commercial macro lenses are usually specified in diopters. A 50 mm lens
    is equal to 20 diopters, a 35 mm lens 28.5 diopters. Your 35 mm could be
    used but only for very small objects. Lighting may be a bit difficult with
    the 35 mm lens as the lens , your 55mm f3.5 macro may just not be wide
    enough open .
    Cgiorgio, Feb 4, 2007
  8. Thanks. Seriously, you ought to revisit macro and give it a try again.
    That's the challenge and the fun part, getting the shot. As magnification
    increases it gets more difficult, but this doesn't mean that it's
    impossible. Just ask Bret about the MP-E 65.
    Not really.

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 4, 2007
  9. Yes. The simple solution is to get a 52mm reversing ring and a stepping
    ring of the proper size for your main lens. In this case the 105mm VR is
    62mm. A 52/62 stepping ring and reversing ring are shown in this picture.
    Well, I wouldn't part with the 35/1.4 even if it didn't work for this
    particular task.

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 4, 2007
  10. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Paul Rubin Guest


    I think B&H also has them.
    Paul Rubin, Feb 4, 2007
  11. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Bob Salomon Guest

    Bob Salomon, Feb 4, 2007
  12. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    George Kerby Guest

    George Kerby, Feb 4, 2007
  13. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Mike Fields Guest

    Pocket - must have kept her screw in her pocket ... :)
    Mike Fields, Feb 4, 2007
  14. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    George Kerby Guest

    *Really* think so?
    George Kerby, Feb 4, 2007
  15. Very impressive. What do you figure the final magnification of the combo is?

    For that sort of thing, I wonder if a macro lens even serves much purpose. I
    did some macro stuff many years ago with a 50 reversed on a 135, when I was
    using screw-mount lenses. Happily, those stayed wide open when off the
    camera, eliminating the diaphragm actuator nuisance on the secondary lens.
    That was a lot of fun.

    You've stirred my juices with those photos. Now maybe I'll start looking for
    some old screw-mount lens (they must be dirt cheap now) -- I think I still
    have the reversing adapter around here somewhere, and suitable step-up
    or -down rings should be no problem.

    I'd like to stay all-Nikon of course, and have a 50/1.8 that might work
    (I'll try it and see), but what do you use to hold the actuator in the open
    position? I assume that's what that stuff on your 50/1.4 lens mount is

    Neil Harrington, Feb 5, 2007
  16. At a quick glance it looks like I'm getting 3:1. I'll have to whip out he
    old micrometer to see exactly how wide the drywall screw actually is.
    I guess any good prime will do. I just decided to use the 105s more for
    convenience since I can just add the 50/1.4 on if I need more magnification.
    Definitely go for it. You'll have fun.
    Huh? I just set the aperture to f/1.4 and everything stays wide open on its
    own. This is an AI lens.

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 5, 2007
  17. Please. Tell me you don't mean fixed focal length when you say "prime."
    Please. Please.

    I'm planning on using a zoom as the prime lens, in any case.


    I've never done that, and I understand things get somewhat weird and
    unpredictable when using a zoom behind a reversed lens. But that should just
    add to the fun.

    Makes sense.

    I will, absolutely.

    That must be the difference. My D and G lenses stop down when off the
    camera. I don't have anything in the Nikon line any earlier than those, so
    just assumed they all did the same.

    Good to know, though, so thanks. I'll shop around for some Nikon glass
    that's older. Worth adding to the collection anyway.

    Neil Harrington, Feb 6, 2007
  18. On your D lens just unlock aperture ring lock and move the ring to its
    wide-open position and your set. You're screwed on the G unless you want to
    make something to pull the lever on the back of the lens.

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 6, 2007
  19. Aha! I never thought of that. Still learning about Nikons and their ways.

    Yep, but now that I know, that won't be necessary. I can use the 50/1.8D
    reversed on the front and one of the G zooms on the camera, as soon as I get
    a 52mm reversing ring. I'll let you know how (and if) this works.

    Thanks again!

    Neil Harrington, Feb 6, 2007
  20. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Bruce Patis Guest

    I have a few Canon FD (non-autofocus) lenses from my film SLR. I'd
    like to use the 50/1.4 reversed on the front of a Sony
    (Konica-Minolta) lens. I tried a reversing step-up ring with matching
    filter threads. Everything fits ok, but I have the problem that the
    50/1.4 won't open past f/8 when off the original Canon camera. The
    external release button on the manual aperture ring works and allows
    the ring to rotate through all positions, even all the way to an
    indicated f/1.4, but the diaphragm stops opening when that ring
    reaches f/8. The levers on the rear of the lens move a little when
    pushed with my finger, but each hits some kind of internal stop before
    reaching the full length of its slot. One lever has a spring return
    and the other does not. In any case, their limited movements did not
    change the aperture and I didn't want to force the levers. As a
    result, the bright 50/f1.4 becomes a dim f/8 maximum.

    Does anyone know how to safely unlock the manual aperture adjustment
    on a Canon FD lens when off-camera? I wouldn't mind making something
    to hold the levers if they did something useful. In fact, I was
    thinking of making some sort of protector to fit over them so they
    wouldn't accidentally poke what I was photographing if I got too close
    to it..

    Bruce Patis, Feb 27, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.