A longer focal length lens would increase the working distance but would
require a longer extension to keep the same magnification. Someone
earlier mentioned use of close-up lenses to increase the magnification
but close-up lenses operate by shortening the effective focal length of
the lens combination and would be counter productive to increasing
working distance.
Chuck Norcutt
om2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Cool.
>
> How could you increase the working distance? Have you tried it with
> something longer like a 90 or 135? Would a true macro lens like the OM 20
> or 35 be better?
>
> Are you SURE that it was 1/10 mm? That seems impossibly close to actually
> use.
>
> Skip
>
>
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Dan Mitchell danmitchell@xxxxxxxx
> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 21:55:06 -0700
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] Stupid macro tricks
>
>
> I was curious, and decided to stack all the various bits of extension
> tubes and whatnot I had together to see what I could get. Equipment used
> for these shots:
>
> E-330 -> OM bellows -> OM auto extension tube-> 7+14+25mm manual
> extension tubes -> Miranda 28/2.8 lens; E-330 on-body flash used to
> trigger an FL-50 on an optical slave, and a bunch of manual fiddling to
> get exposure right.
>
> Subject: a Leatherman micra, the 1mm scale edge. These are uncropped;
> this is the full image, just scaled for web consumption.
>
> http://www.danielmitchell.net/sgal/galleries/E330/Stupid%20macro%20tricks/le
> atherman_closeup.jpg
>
> http://www.danielmitchell.net/sgal/galleries/E330/Stupid%20macro%20tricks/le
> atherman_closeup_1.jpg
>
>
> The distance between the two notches is 1mm, so total distance across
> the image is probably ~1.3mm. Working distance is probably somewhere
> around .1mm. That's why I'm using the Miranda lens -- it's thin enough
> that I the subject didn't need to be inside the front element, and also
> if I'm going to be pressing metal against the front element of a lens,
> I'd rather it wasn't a lens I cared about too much.
>
> Yes, technically, these leave something to be desired -- I should
> probably have used a third hand or something to hold the subject in
> place; the depth of field is insanely small, and this lens isn't really
> meant to be used close up. However, I was surprised I got anything at
> all, to be honest..
>
> Now, I'm sure someone out there on the list must have two sets of
> bellows, at which point you could use a 65-116 tube to join them
> together (possibly even just manual tubes, I'm not sure how much you'd
> need to stretch). And I forgot all about reversing the lens until just
> now, too.
>
> Also, theoretically, you could try gutting a 2x converter and sticking
> the ends on a long bit of black PVC pipe, but I think making sure
> everything lined up properly would be a big pain there.
>
>
> -- dan
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|