David Nelson wrote on 8/13/2004, 9:45 PM:
> G'day all, > More of a 'technical' PAW than enything else, but an interesting image > (IMO) captured with a rather different technique. > > http://davidavid.whatsbeef.net/eyes.jpg That's a pretty cool shot from a technical standpoint and interesting in an abstract sort of way. > > My estimate is that magnification was about 6:1 > That's quite a bit of magnification. The most I've ever attempted is 4x > The setup I used was an A 50mm f2 reversed in front of my A* 300mm f4. > The 50mm was at f5.6, the 300mm was at f8 (though stopping down this > lens didn't appear to change anything until about f11 when vignetting > occurred). Tripod, MLU and all that. I did do a fair bit of sharpening > in PS. Why did you stop down the 50mm? must have made for a pretty dim viewfinder.... John shaw in "Closeups in Nature" says to leave the reversed lens wide open and it's what I've always done. Just curious if you have a different technique To eliminate the vignetting at smaller apertures, use some extension behind the 300mm lens. I found that a 100mm bellows lens reversed on the SMC-A 200mm F4 vignets unless I add an extension tube. > > The obvious deficiency of the photo is the extremely limited DOF. I > believe that this is unavoidable at this sort of magnification (at least > with this primitive setup). I also noticed that stopping down the 50mm > more resulted in funny rainbow-like starbursts in OOF highlights. > Diffraction? try adding extension and stopping down some more. As you said at this magnification DOF is going to be really limited. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
