Ultra Macro with 18-55mm reverted lens

Hello Eveybody,

Here are my first try of macro with the 18-55 mm put in reverse on my 300D.
The DOF is very small but you can obtain some very important magnification: the insect on the pictures above is less than one centimeter long.

http://www.yffic.net/p​ub/inverse/index.html

Comments are welcome.

Kind regards.

Yffic

yffic...those are great shots...I have to plead ignorance, but how do you reverse the 18-55...is there a special attachment to do this?

Yes you have to use a "reverse adapter" that you can easily find on ebay for less than 10 Euros.

Thanks for your comment

Yffic

wow. Did you do any post work on them? They are amazing!

Where did you get all the light from? I found it way to dark to focus. What were your settings?

No absolutly no post processing on it.
I have taken on my balcony on a sunny afternoon: one is with the internal flash of the 300D.

All are at 1/500 s for speed, and F/0 for aperture (because the camera hasn't any electronicals connections).

Thnaks again for your comments.

Yffic

Those are very nice and sharp Yffic.
How big was that Bee? When you said "Ultra" macro, I must confess, I was expecting to see something like only the head, eyes, or a portion of a wing though.
-Bruce

Ballen Photo wrote:
Those are very nice and sharp Yffic.
How big was that Bee? When you said "Ultra" macro, I must confess, I was expecting to see something like only the head, eyes, or a portion of a wing though.
-Bruce

There's a very good write up in this article. It should be all you need to figure out what magnification you're going to get from a reversed lens assembly. It's no substitute for a real macro lens but is certainly a cost-effective way to get started.

foxbat wrote:
There's a very good write up in this article. It should be all you need to figure out what magnification you're going to get from a reversed lens assembly. It's no substitute for a real macro lens but is certainly a cost-effective way to get started.

Thanks for posting this link. I'll definitely have to go back in there soon.
-Bruce

Ballen Photo wrote:
Those are very nice and sharp Yffic.
How big was that Bee? When you said "Ultra" macro, I must confess, I was expecting to see something like only the head, eyes, or a portion of a wing though.
-Bruce

The bee was ~1 cm long not a big one.

Yffic

foxbat wrote:
There's a very good write up in this article. It should be all you need to figure out what magnification you're going to get from a reversed lens assembly. It's no substitute for a real macro lens but is certainly a cost-effective way to get started.

thanks lot for the link. Very interesting.

Regards.

Yves

Great first effort.

Wow! How timely....I just posted a question asking if reverse threading rings worked and here are all the answers I need!

It's pretty much the only way to get 3:1, 4:1 and higher without splashing out on the rather esoteric Canon MP-E-65.

foxbat wrote:
There's a very good write up in this article. It should be all you need to figure out what magnification you're going to get from a reversed lens assembly.

Thanks for the link! According to that article, the magnification you'll obtain is simply the ratio between the focal length of the lens on the camera and the focal length of the reversed lens. And it makes sense. But, what about a reversed lens directly attached to the camera via a reverse adapter ring? I carried out some experiments and I empirically calculated the result, but I wonder if there is an exact formula, or a reasoning, a proof.