Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Shift macro flower test  (Read 2885 times)
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« on: April 07, 2010, 07:06:37 PM »
ReplyReply

First post.

This is the first macro I have taken using the Fotodiox EOS-M4/3 plus OM-EOS adapters with a 90mm Tamron 2.5 macro lens on a Panasonic G1 body. The EOS is a shift adapter, 10mm to each side and gives a ~3:1 in horizontal position (adapter rotates to allow vertical). It gives ~2:1 in vertical but at present I can't use vertical because of camera interference with the tripod head. When I get a chance I can rig up a simple adapter to allow vertical.

The reason for the EOS mount is that it allows simple (inexpensive) adapters for OM, Nikon, Pentax, and Leica, among others lenses to be fit on it giving a lot of versatility for the M4/3 format. Otherwise the EOS mount is nearly worthless because there is no aperture ring and and wide open is the only option although there are klutzy workarounds.

The EOS mount is attached to the tripod head (it has a mounting foot) so that the lens stays stationary and the body is moved. This avoids parallax problems.

I originally got the same adapter for the Minolta MD mount (did not know about the EOS) and it does not work as well. Stuck with one lens mount and the Minolta lenses that I have gotten have fallen far short of the quality I need. Plus there is a problem with infinity focus - not quite there. Not good because I take lots of ~3:1 landscape panos with longer focal length lenses at infinity.

This setup works well for me, simple 3:1 cylindrical one row panos. I was using a heavy tripod and pano head setup and using the rotation method (not for macros which this setup opens the possibilities).

Now I use a very light compact tripod (feasible due to the rotating LCD screen) and small ball head. Weighs probably 1/4 of what I was using. Makes for much more enjoyable treks in the woods.

The rotation method has the advantage that it gives a higher resolution image, in fact much more than I need for 36" wide images. So if you need max resolution, use the rotation method.

The flower image has been cropped from approx 3:1 to 2:1. Blended in CS4. It is nothing special, just a test to check and see if the method works. I am looking forward to trying some more shift macros and seeing if I can come up with some interesting perspectives.

Larry

Logged
elf
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 232


« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2010, 02:58:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: leuallen
First post.

This is the first macro I have taken using the Fotodiox EOS-M4/3 plus OM-EOS adapters with a 90mm Tamron 2.5 macro lens on a Panasonic G1 body. The EOS is a shift adapter, 10mm to each side and gives a ~3:1 in horizontal position (adapter rotates to allow vertical). It gives ~2:1 in vertical but at present I can't use vertical because of camera interference with the tripod head. When I get a chance I can rig up a simple adapter to allow vertical.

The reason for the EOS mount is that it allows simple (inexpensive) adapters for OM, Nikon, Pentax, and Leica, among others lenses to be fit on it giving a lot of versatility for the M4/3 format. Otherwise the EOS mount is nearly worthless because there is no aperture ring and and wide open is the only option although there are klutzy workarounds.

The EOS mount is attached to the tripod head (it has a mounting foot) so that the lens stays stationary and the body is moved. This avoids parallax problems.

I originally got the same adapter for the Minolta MD mount (did not know about the EOS) and it does not work as well. Stuck with one lens mount and the Minolta lenses that I have gotten have fallen far short of the quality I need. Plus there is a problem with infinity focus - not quite there. Not good because I take lots of ~3:1 landscape panos with longer focal length lenses at infinity.

This setup works well for me, simple 3:1 cylindrical one row panos. I was using a heavy tripod and pano head setup and using the rotation method (not for macros which this setup opens the possibilities).

Now I use a very light compact tripod (feasible due to the rotating LCD screen) and small ball head. Weighs probably 1/4 of what I was using. Makes for much more enjoyable treks in the woods.

The rotation method has the advantage that it gives a higher resolution image, in fact much more than I need for 36" wide images. So if you need max resolution, use the rotation method.

The flower image has been cropped from approx 3:1 to 2:1. Blended in CS4. It is nothing special, just a test to check and see if the method works. I am looking forward to trying some more shift macros and seeing if I can come up with some interesting perspectives.

Larry

Can you post a photo of the setup?
Logged
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2010, 10:17:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: elf
Can you post a photo of the setup?

Here are some quick snaps. The tripod is  Benro 168m, its head replaced with Cullman 40180. The Cullmann is slightly larger than the Benro head that came with the tripod but has drag control and panning. The adapter is a shift EOS toM4/3 with OM to EOS mounting a 90mm 2.5 Tamron macro. The EOS adapter is mounted to a Manfrotto quick release plate then to the tripod. Vertical not possible due to camera interference with ball head - an easy adapter to clear is possible.

The swivel LCD of the G1 permits the use of a shorter tripod height because you do no have to bend over to view. Also great for low level macros. A bubble level in hot shoe for perfect horizons. No need to level the tripod because the camera does not rotate and the level stays the same when you shift. Just level the camera.

Shown is the lens shift to max, top view. The camera moves not the lens. This is feasible with M4/3 because the camera is so light. This whole rig weights 4lbs 6oz, less than the tripod without head that I was using. And that's with a relatively heavy lens mounted.

I have Minolta MD mounts, EOS to M4/3 with EOS to OM, EOS to Pentax K, and EOS to Nikon. The Minolta MD mount is a waste. Out of four lenses, only one is close to sharp wide open. There seems to be a problem with some lenses not focusing quite to infinity. It is a lens by lens situation. Fotodiox is looking into it. Much better results with OM and Pentax. My old Tokina 100-300mm 4.0 OM mount works quite well, is sharp, and easy to handle with the tripod collar (can do verticals with this). Most of my work is with longer focal lengths anyway. See example of pano taken with Minolta 135mm 2.8 at 8.0. This lens is not too sharp, my Vivitar 135mm 2.8 is sharper, and the Pentax K 135mm 3.5 is much sharper. Lots of lenses, but with old orphan lenses you can pick them up for $20 on up. I usually spend less than $100. Some of them are very good performers, you take your chances. Note that I am talking 40mm lens and up which are long on M4/3. With wide angle the picture is not so rosy. The 2x crop factor works against you and some lenses smear in the corners due to the angle the light rays strike the corners. Not for Arch work.

Stitching is very easy with CS4.

Larry

Logged
elf
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 232


« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2010, 11:51:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: leuallen
Here are some quick snaps. The tripod is  Benro 168m, its head replaced with Cullman 40180. The Cullmann is slightly larger than the Benro head that came with the tripod but has drag control and panning. The adapter is a shift EOS toM4/3 with OM to EOS mounting a 90mm 2.5 Tamron macro. The EOS adapter is mounted to a Manfrotto quick release plate then to the tripod. Vertical not possible due to camera interference with ball head - an easy adapter to clear is possible.

The swivel LCD of the G1 permits the use of a shorter tripod height because you do no have to bend over to view. Also great for low level macros. A bubble level in hot shoe for perfect horizons. No need to level the tripod because the camera does not rotate and the level stays the same when you shift. Just level the camera.

Shown is the lens shift to max, top view. The camera moves not the lens. This is feasible with M4/3 because the camera is so light. This whole rig weights 4lbs 6oz, less than the tripod without head that I was using. And that's with a relatively heavy lens mounted.

I have Minolta MD mounts, EOS to M4/3 with EOS to OM, EOS to Pentax K, and EOS to Nikon. The Minolta MD mount is a waste. Out of four lenses, only one is close to sharp wide open. There seems to be a problem with some lenses not focusing quite to infinity. It is a lens by lens situation. Fotodiox is looking into it. Much better results with OM and Pentax. My old Tokina 100-300mm 4.0 OM mount works quite well, is sharp, and easy to handle with the tripod collar (can do verticals with this). Most of my work is with longer focal lengths anyway. See example of pano taken with Minolta 135mm 2.8 at 8.0. This lens is not too sharp, my Vivitar 135mm 2.8 is sharper, and the Pentax K 135mm 3.5 is much sharper. Lots of lenses, but with old orphan lenses you can pick them up for $20 on up. I usually spend less than $100. Some of them are very good performers, you take your chances. Note that I am talking 40mm lens and up which are long on M4/3. With wide angle the picture is not so rosy. The 2x crop factor works against you and some lenses smear in the corners due to the angle the light rays strike the corners. Not for Arch work.

Stitching is very easy with CS4.

Larry

About the only recomendation I have is to mount the ballhead upside down which will give you pans on the same plane when the ballhead is tilted.

I don't understand how you're moving the camera and not the lens with the shift adaptor. I don't see any mechanism that holds the lens in position. Can you explain this more
« Last Edit: April 12, 2010, 02:25:58 PM by elf » Logged
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« Reply #4 on: April 13, 2010, 12:32:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: elf
About the only recomendation I have is to mount the ballhead upside down which will give you pans on the same plane when the ballhead is tilted.

I don't understand how you're moving the camera and not the lens with the shift adaptor. I don't see any mechanism that holds the lens in position. Can you explain this more


See the Fotodiox web page. It shows the mount on the adapter. Fotodiox

Tried some more macro panos this afternoon. Difficult as the wind moves the flowers.

Larry

Logged
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #5 on: April 13, 2010, 07:11:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: leuallen
See the Fotodiox web page. It shows the mount on the adapter. Fotodiox

Tried some more macro panos this afternoon. Difficult as the wind moves the flowers.

Larry
We cannot see if the pictures are critically sharp, but with a "macro" lens they should be... and it seems to be a very cost-effective system.

With higher magnification you get an increase in image circle, so it is possible to cover FF on Medium format with small format lenses... and I might try my Micro-Nikkor 200 on MF sometime, perhaps with the Copal 3 shutter from my Sinar/Rodenstock Macro Sinaron 300.

To photograph 3 flowers in the wind, do you shift to make three exposures to avoid any flower being split between pictures?

Where are you?

If you are local, perhaps you could help/inspire me me set up my H3D11-50/P3/Apo-digitar Macro 120 which should produce some good results.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2010, 07:16:11 AM by Dick Roadnight » Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« Reply #6 on: April 13, 2010, 10:01:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
We cannot see if the pictures are critically sharp, but with a "macro" lens they should be... and it seems to be a very cost-effective system.

With higher magnification you get an increase in image circle, so it is possible to cover FF on Medium format with small format lenses... and I might try my Micro-Nikkor 200 on MF sometime, perhaps with the Copal 3 shutter from my Sinar/Rodenstock Macro Sinaron 300.

To photograph 3 flowers in the wind, do you shift to make three exposures to avoid any flower being split between pictures?

Where are you?

If you are local, perhaps you could help/inspire me me set up my H3D11-50/P3/Apo-digitar Macro 120 which should produce some good results.

What's in focus is critically sharp. Only problem I had is when my eyepiece diopter changed accidently and my glasses were a wee bit dirty, everything looked blurry. Remember with the Panasonic G1 you are focusing on the screen at up to 10x mag. I also use fairly wide aperatures, 5.6 or so, so I do not get or want depth of focus. The overall look of the image is most important and for my work that means a pleasing bokeh.

In the three flower picture, only the end two have parts that are in focus. The center flower is out of focus, as it is below the other two. It is difficult to find flowers which all line up with the same depth of focus.

It would be nice to avoid splitting a flower being split and sometimes that works out. But I have shot with a flower being split with not much wind to move the flower, and you can't tell in the final print. The three exposures can be made very quickly, a couple of seconds. It takes practice to move the camera without moving it out of alignment.

I am in Mackinaw, Illinois, USA so can't help. Don't know anything about medium format except that your cheapest accessory probably cost more than my entire kit. What is shown above is around US $1000. Lots of fun for the money.

I have shown 3:1 ratios but using two shifts gives you about 2:1. This is easier compositionally to find subjects that work. It still gives an interesting format probably more suited to the macros. The 3:1's work better for landscapes. I tried the shift macros to see if I could get it to work and I can. Someday I will run into a situation where the shift maco would be ideal. Since the special equipment required is small, just the adapter, I usually have it with me.

Here is an example where very little is in focus. I did not like it at first but it is growing on me after I have had the print around for a couple of days. The lens is only about 3"" (75mm) above the ground. These are emerging Hosta leaves.  

Larry



Logged
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2010, 02:33:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: leuallen
It would be nice to avoid splitting a flower being split and sometimes that works out. But I have shot with a flower being split with not much wind to move the flower, and you can't tell in the final print. The three exposures can be made very quickly, a couple of seconds. It takes practice to move the camera without moving it out of alignment.

Larry
If you stitch three images for three flowers, can't you focus each flower independently?

A 10Kg fully geared tripod is very useful... ( and less than $1000!).
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2010, 07:19:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
If you stitch three images for three flowers, can't you focus each flower independently?

A 10Kg fully geared tripod is very useful... ( and less than $1000!).

I doubt that you could refocus each exposure. Image size changes with focus so that the blending would be off.

Heck my whole kit is not much more than $1000. But I do have a Manfrotto 055 and a 410 geared head with leveling base and two cross
slides for when I need it. Use that mostly when I work with flowers in my yard or working close to the car. Otherwise you need
a sherpa for transport. But yes, it is very nice to work with.

Larry
Logged
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #9 on: April 14, 2010, 07:48:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: leuallen
I doubt that you could refocus each exposure. Image size changes with focus so that the blending would be off.
Larry
I thought that photo-merge would zoom to compensate for any difference in magnification due to focusing, and it would only affect overlapping areas of the background,,, and you could focus by moving the camera.

The head I have on my Manfrotto is a 400.
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« Reply #10 on: April 14, 2010, 06:35:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Might work. I'll have to try it sometime.

Your head may be bigger but my camera is smaller.  

OK. Gloves off. I think I got the technique down pretty well. Now for some more serious, lighting, composition, etc. Took the following this morning. Use reflectors and gobos for the light. Shot with the Tokina ATX 100-300mm at 5.6 and about 250mm (500mm 35mm equivalent). I think I'll call it "Tuplip Ballerinas"

Larry
Logged
EinstStein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 281


« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2010, 11:13:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm as much interested in the panorama photography.
Out of curious, since you are limited by the lens's image circle, how much benefit comparing straight on larger sensor (35mm full frame) vs. shifting on smaller sensor (4/3rd).
I'm planning to try the Gigapan, assuming Gigapan to be a much easier and flexible solution, your comment?  



Quote from: leuallen
First post.

This is the first macro I have taken using the Fotodiox EOS-M4/3 plus OM-EOS adapters with a 90mm Tamron 2.5 macro lens on a Panasonic G1 body. The EOS is a shift adapter, 10mm to each side and gives a ~3:1 in horizontal position (adapter rotates to allow vertical). It gives ~2:1 in vertical but at present I can't use vertical because of camera interference with the tripod head. When I get a chance I can rig up a simple adapter to allow vertical.

The reason for the EOS mount is that it allows simple (inexpensive) adapters for OM, Nikon, Pentax, and Leica, among others lenses to be fit on it giving a lot of versatility for the M4/3 format. Otherwise the EOS mount is nearly worthless because there is no aperture ring and and wide open is the only option although there are klutzy workarounds.

The EOS mount is attached to the tripod head (it has a mounting foot) so that the lens stays stationary and the body is moved. This avoids parallax problems.

I originally got the same adapter for the Minolta MD mount (did not know about the EOS) and it does not work as well. Stuck with one lens mount and the Minolta lenses that I have gotten have fallen far short of the quality I need. Plus there is a problem with infinity focus - not quite there. Not good because I take lots of ~3:1 landscape panos with longer focal length lenses at infinity.

This setup works well for me, simple 3:1 cylindrical one row panos. I was using a heavy tripod and pano head setup and using the rotation method (not for macros which this setup opens the possibilities).

Now I use a very light compact tripod (feasible due to the rotating LCD screen) and small ball head. Weighs probably 1/4 of what I was using. Makes for much more enjoyable treks in the woods.

The rotation method has the advantage that it gives a higher resolution image, in fact much more than I need for 36" wide images. So if you need max resolution, use the rotation method.

The flower image has been cropped from approx 3:1 to 2:1. Blended in CS4. It is nothing special, just a test to check and see if the method works. I am looking forward to trying some more shift macros and seeing if I can come up with some interesting perspectives.

Larry
Logged
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2010, 08:38:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: EinstStein
I'm as much interested in the panorama photography.
Out of curious, since you are limited by the lens's image circle, how much benefit comparing straight on larger sensor (35mm full frame) vs. shifting on smaller sensor (4/3rd).
I'm planning to try the Gigapan, assuming Gigapan to be a much easier and flexible solution, your comment?

I don't think that full frame plus pano heads and the M4/3 shift adapter solution are in the same ball park. The full frame solution offers more versatility as to field of view, multiple row, resolution and so on but at a much higher cost. If you are interested in single row panos with about a 3:1 aspect ration, do not need extremely high resolution for very large prints, want light weight, easy field handling, and low cost, the M4/3 setup works very well. The largest I ever print is about 38 inches long and the M4/3 handles this nicely.  Your Gigapan solution, for the Gigapan alone, is about half the cost of my entire setup. Plus it is much more bulky and not as fast to work with. I can use a wide variety of older legacy lenses and not worry about parallax, and thus do macro work. You can do this with full frame if you use shift lenses but you will have a much more limited selection to choose from and each lens will be about twice the cost of  the M4/3 setup.

There is no problem with the lens image circle on M4/3. The lenses cover the shift.

Here is an example I took yesterday, this is as close as we get to epic Grand Canyon vistas around here, the gravel pit. It only took a few minutes to shoot and I shot multiple versions. It was difficult in post due to shooting into the sun, flare, and haze. Tokina 100-300 4.0 at 300mm 8.0.

Larry
Logged
EinstStein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 281


« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2010, 04:50:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for your long explanation, but i don't catch the points I'm asking.
The limitation of 35mm with shift adapter on 4/3rd sensor is, the largest image length or width is limited to the 35mm lens's image circle.

All 35mm lenses I know of, less the PC/TS lenses, is more or less suffering the light fall-off even at 35mm full frame. So, shift adapter with those lenses on 4/3rd sensor only gives the total image size (after process) about the full frame 35mm. For all these troubles, it is only to get what a native full frame is.
Yes, the full frame DSLR will be much more expensive, and might be heavier and bulkier. If this is the poor man's (or lazy man) solution for full frame DSLR, I can get it.

If the target is for panorama, it will need something much more flexible.    




Quote from: leuallen
I don't think that full frame plus pano heads and the M4/3 shift adapter solution are in the same ball park. The full frame solution offers more versatility as to field of view, multiple row, resolution and so on but at a much higher cost. If you are interested in single row panos with about a 3:1 aspect ration, do not need extremely high resolution for very large prints, want light weight, easy field handling, and low cost, the M4/3 setup works very well. The largest I ever print is about 38 inches long and the M4/3 handles this nicely.  Your Gigapan solution, for the Gigapan alone, is about half the cost of my entire setup. Plus it is much more bulky and not as fast to work with. I can use a wide variety of older legacy lenses and not worry about parallax, and thus do macro work. You can do this with full frame if you use shift lenses but you will have a much more limited selection to choose from and each lens will be about twice the cost of  the M4/3 setup.

There is no problem with the lens image circle on M4/3. The lenses cover the shift.

Here is an example I took yesterday, this is as close as we get to epic Grand Canyon vistas around here, the gravel pit. It only took a few minutes to shoot and I shot multiple versions. It was difficult in post due to shooting into the sun, flare, and haze. Tokina 100-300 4.0 at 300mm 8.0.

Larry
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad