RR
Ralf R Radermacher
Wed, Jan 15, 2025 11:42 AM
I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when
I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I
never bothered to get a macro lens.
So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without
a macro lens?
I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a
set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012
I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when
I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I
never bothered to get a macro lens.
So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without
a macro lens?
I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a
set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012
JS
John Sessoms
Thu, Jan 16, 2025 3:07 PM
I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
Thanks.
On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when
I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I
never bothered to get a macro lens.
So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without
a macro lens?
I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a
set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
Ralf
--
Vivere in aeternum aut mori conatur
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
Thanks.
On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
> I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when
> I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I
> never bothered to get a macro lens.
>
> So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without
> a macro lens?
>
> I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a
> set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
>
> Ralf
>
--
Vivere in aeternum aut mori conatur
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
BW
Bob W PDML
Thu, Jan 16, 2025 3:34 PM
I seem to be missing posts. They’re not even in my junk folder, which is where most of the PDML goes for some reason.
Anyway, I have a pdf copy of the Pentax extension tubes manual which I found online somewhere, and which is probably still available. It includes charts and so on about what you need to photograph things at what scale.
Try a 50mm lens with tubes 2+3. That should give you more or less 1:1 magnification of a 24x36mm area (ie 35mm negative) with film-subject distance of 204mm and an exposure factor of x3.8. The rest you can crop. This worked for me when I was playing around with copying slides.
But since you have all the gear, and presumably a digital camera, it should be easy enough to find out by trial and error.
On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:08, John Sessoms sessomsj@earthlink.net wrote:
I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
Thanks.
On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I never bothered to get a macro lens.
So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without a macro lens?
I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
Ralf
I seem to be missing posts. They’re not even in my junk folder, which is where most of the PDML goes for some reason.
Anyway, I have a pdf copy of the Pentax extension tubes manual which I found online somewhere, and which is probably still available. It includes charts and so on about what you need to photograph things at what scale.
Try a 50mm lens with tubes 2+3. That should give you more or less 1:1 magnification of a 24x36mm area (ie 35mm negative) with film-subject distance of 204mm and an exposure factor of x3.8. The rest you can crop. This worked for me when I was playing around with copying slides.
But since you have all the gear, and presumably a digital camera, it should be easy enough to find out by trial and error.
> On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:08, John Sessoms <sessomsj@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
>
> IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
>
> Thanks.
>
>> On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
>> I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I never bothered to get a macro lens.
>> So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without a macro lens?
>> I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
>> Ralf
BW
Bob W PDML
Thu, Jan 16, 2025 9:25 PM
Atrocity alert! (But not on a Cotty scale).
I thought I should check that the advice below was sound, so I attached an M42 Schneider 50mm lens to Pentax K tubes 2+3 by way of a M42-PK adapter, then used a PK-LM adapter to attach the tubes to my Leica M10 monochrom, since it’s the only full-frame digital camera I have, and took this picture of the top of an apple.
This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
*any botanists in the room may tell us its proper name.
On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:34, Bob W PDML pdmlbw@icloud.com wrote:
I seem to be missing posts. They’re not even in my junk folder, which is where most of the PDML goes for some reason.
Anyway, I have a pdf copy of the Pentax extension tubes manual which I found online somewhere, and which is probably still available. It includes charts and so on about what you need to photograph things at what scale.
Try a 50mm lens with tubes 2+3. That should give you more or less 1:1 magnification of a 24x36mm area (ie 35mm negative) with film-subject distance of 204mm and an exposure factor of x3.8. The rest you can crop. This worked for me when I was playing around with copying slides.
But since you have all the gear, and presumably a digital camera, it should be easy enough to find out by trial and error.
On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:08, John Sessoms sessomsj@earthlink.net wrote:
I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
Thanks.
On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I never bothered to get a macro lens.
So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without a macro lens?
I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
Ralf
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Atrocity alert! (But not on a Cotty scale).
I thought I should check that the advice below was sound, so I attached an M42 Schneider 50mm lens to Pentax K tubes 2+3 by way of a M42-PK adapter, then used a PK-LM adapter to attach the tubes to my Leica M10 monochrom, since it’s the only full-frame digital camera I have, and took this picture of the top of an apple.
This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
*any botanists in the room may tell us its proper name.
> On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:34, Bob W PDML <pdmlbw@icloud.com> wrote:
>
> I seem to be missing posts. They’re not even in my junk folder, which is where most of the PDML goes for some reason.
>
> Anyway, I have a pdf copy of the Pentax extension tubes manual which I found online somewhere, and which is probably still available. It includes charts and so on about what you need to photograph things at what scale.
>
> Try a 50mm lens with tubes 2+3. That should give you more or less 1:1 magnification of a 24x36mm area (ie 35mm negative) with film-subject distance of 204mm and an exposure factor of x3.8. The rest you can crop. This worked for me when I was playing around with copying slides.
>
> But since you have all the gear, and presumably a digital camera, it should be easy enough to find out by trial and error.
>
>> On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:08, John Sessoms <sessomsj@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
>>
>> IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>>> On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
>>> I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I never bothered to get a macro lens.
>>> So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without a macro lens?
>>> I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
>>> Ralf
> --
> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RR
Ralf R Radermacher
Thu, Jan 16, 2025 9:41 PM
Am 16.01.25 um 22:25 schrieb Bob W PDML:
Atrocity alert! (But not on a Cotty scale).
I thought I should check that the advice below was sound, so I attached an M42 Schneider 50mm lens to Pentax K tubes 2+3 by way of a M42-PK adapter, then used a PK-LM adapter to attach the tubes to my Leica M10 monochrom, since it’s the only full-frame digital camera I have, and took this picture of the top of an apple.
This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
I've been able to come up with something presentable using a Pentax M
4/20 mm lens at f16 and a 12 mm extension ring. Due to the shallow DOF
it needed a fair amount of AI sharpening in ON1 but, given the subject,
it could well do with a bit of additional drama.
As explained in another message in this thread, it took me a good while
to find out that the enamel at the back of the extension ring kept the
camera from recognising that anything was attached and it refused to
step the lens down. Some courageous treatment with a dremel solved this
problem.
I'll let you all be the judge of the picture and the idea once the new
gallery will be online. Just let me add that nothing six-legged was
permanently harmed for this photo.
Thanks for all help and suggestions.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012
Am 16.01.25 um 22:25 schrieb Bob W PDML:
> Atrocity alert! (But not on a Cotty scale).
>
> I thought I should check that the advice below was sound, so I attached an M42 Schneider 50mm lens to Pentax K tubes 2+3 by way of a M42-PK adapter, then used a PK-LM adapter to attach the tubes to my Leica M10 monochrom, since it’s the only full-frame digital camera I have, and took this picture of the top of an apple.
>
> This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
>
> https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
I've been able to come up with something presentable using a Pentax M
4/20 mm lens at f16 and a 12 mm extension ring. Due to the shallow DOF
it needed a fair amount of AI sharpening in ON1 but, given the subject,
it could well do with a bit of additional drama.
As explained in another message in this thread, it took me a good while
to find out that the enamel at the back of the extension ring kept the
camera from recognising that anything was attached and it refused to
step the lens down. Some courageous treatment with a dremel solved this
problem.
I'll let you all be the judge of the picture and the idea once the new
gallery will be online. Just let me add that nothing six-legged was
permanently harmed for this photo.
Thanks for all help and suggestions.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012
BW
Bob W PDML
Thu, Jan 16, 2025 9:47 PM
On 16 Jan 2025, at 21:41, Ralf R Radermacher pdml@uebra.de wrote:
As explained in another message in this thread,
These messages have not come through to me.
B
> On 16 Jan 2025, at 21:41, Ralf R Radermacher <pdml@uebra.de> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> As explained in another message in this thread,
These messages have not come through to me.
B
MW
mike wilson
Fri, Jan 17, 2025 4:06 AM
On 16/01/2025 21:25 GMT Bob W PDML pdmlbw@icloud.com wrote:
Atrocity alert! (But not on a Cotty scale).
I thought I should check that the advice below was sound, so I attached an M42 Schneider 50mm lens to Pentax K tubes 2+3 by way of a M42-PK adapter, then used a PK-LM adapter to attach the tubes to my Leica M10 monochrom, since it’s the only full-frame digital camera I have, and took this picture of the top of an apple.
This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
*any botanists in the room may tell us its proper name.
Where to begin? I had to go and look at the pic, because I have never seen an apple with a stalk (pedicel - the bit that attaches it to the tree) 1cm in diameter. The apple would have to be about 50cm in diameter for that to be true. What is visible in the picture is the remnants of the flower before the apple formed. The petals have fallen and the curly, crispy things are the five sepals from the base of the flower. There will be the withered remnants of the other reproductive organs, the style and stamens, in there somewhere. All at the opposite end of the fruit (pome) from the stalk. Here endeth the botanical anatomy lesson. Amen.
On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:34, Bob W PDML pdmlbw@icloud.com wrote:
I seem to be missing posts. They’re not even in my junk folder, which is where most of the PDML goes for some reason.
Anyway, I have a pdf copy of the Pentax extension tubes manual which I found online somewhere, and which is probably still available. It includes charts and so on about what you need to photograph things at what scale.
Try a 50mm lens with tubes 2+3. That should give you more or less 1:1 magnification of a 24x36mm area (ie 35mm negative) with film-subject distance of 204mm and an exposure factor of x3.8. The rest you can crop. This worked for me when I was playing around with copying slides.
But since you have all the gear, and presumably a digital camera, it should be easy enough to find out by trial and error.
On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:08, John Sessoms sessomsj@earthlink.net wrote:
I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
Thanks.
On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I never bothered to get a macro lens.
So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without a macro lens?
I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
Ralf
> On 16/01/2025 21:25 GMT Bob W PDML <pdmlbw@icloud.com> wrote:
>
>
> Atrocity alert! (But not on a Cotty scale).
>
> I thought I should check that the advice below was sound, so I attached an M42 Schneider 50mm lens to Pentax K tubes 2+3 by way of a M42-PK adapter, then used a PK-LM adapter to attach the tubes to my Leica M10 monochrom, since it’s the only full-frame digital camera I have, and took this picture of the top of an apple.
>
> This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
>
> https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
>
> *any botanists in the room may tell us its proper name.
Where to begin? I had to go and look at the pic, because I have never seen an apple with a stalk (pedicel - the bit that attaches it to the tree) 1cm in diameter. The apple would have to be about 50cm in diameter for that to be true. What is visible in the picture is the remnants of the flower before the apple formed. The petals have fallen and the curly, crispy things are the five sepals from the base of the flower. There will be the withered remnants of the other reproductive organs, the style and stamens, in there somewhere. All at the opposite end of the fruit (pome) from the stalk. Here endeth the botanical anatomy lesson. Amen.
>
>
>
> > On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:34, Bob W PDML <pdmlbw@icloud.com> wrote:
> >
> > I seem to be missing posts. They’re not even in my junk folder, which is where most of the PDML goes for some reason.
> >
> > Anyway, I have a pdf copy of the Pentax extension tubes manual which I found online somewhere, and which is probably still available. It includes charts and so on about what you need to photograph things at what scale.
> >
> > Try a 50mm lens with tubes 2+3. That should give you more or less 1:1 magnification of a 24x36mm area (ie 35mm negative) with film-subject distance of 204mm and an exposure factor of x3.8. The rest you can crop. This worked for me when I was playing around with copying slides.
> >
> > But since you have all the gear, and presumably a digital camera, it should be easy enough to find out by trial and error.
> >
> >> On 16 Jan 2025, at 15:08, John Sessoms <sessomsj@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> I would probably use a telephoto at closest focus & then crop a lot ...
> >>
> >> IN FACT, I just remembered doing that once before ...
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >>>> On 1/15/2025 6:42 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
> >>> I'm hopeless at tabletop photography and I already get the willies when I need to take photos for selling stuff on ebay. Might explain why I never bothered to get a macro lens.
> >>> So, how do a take a photo of something about 1 centimeter square without a macro lens?
> >>> I have SMC-M or SMC-A lenses with 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 and 200 mm, a set of extension tubes, and zooms 10-20, 18-135 and 55-300 mm.
> >>> Ralf
BW
Bob W PDML
Fri, Jan 17, 2025 9:33 AM
Thank you, Your Botanic Majesty!
On 17 Jan 2025, at 04:06, mike wilson m.9.wilson@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 16/01/2025 21:25 GMT Bob W PDML pdmlbw@icloud.com wrote:
This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
*any botanists in the room may tell us its proper name.
Where to begin? I had to go and look at the pic, because I have never seen an apple with a stalk (pedicel - the bit that attaches it to the tree) 1cm in diameter. The apple would have to be about 50cm in diameter for that to be true. What is visible in the picture is the remnants of the flower before the apple formed. The petals have fallen and the curly, crispy things are the five sepals from the base of the flower. There will be the withered remnants of the other reproductive organs, the style and stamens, in there somewhere. All at the opposite end of the fruit (pome) from the stalk. Here endeth the botanical anatomy lesson. Amen.
Thank you, Your Botanic Majesty!
> On 17 Jan 2025, at 04:06, mike wilson <m.9.wilson@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On 16/01/2025 21:25 GMT Bob W PDML <pdmlbw@icloud.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> This is the full 35mm-sized frame, the apple is medium-sized, so the stalk thing at the top* is about 1cm diameter.
>>
>> https://share.icloud.com/photos/005Xj8RmZKnKBrfaWOdmnnFLw
>>
>> *any botanists in the room may tell us its proper name.
>
> Where to begin? I had to go and look at the pic, because I have never seen an apple with a stalk (pedicel - the bit that attaches it to the tree) 1cm in diameter. The apple would have to be about 50cm in diameter for that to be true. What is visible in the picture is the remnants of the flower before the apple formed. The petals have fallen and the curly, crispy things are the five sepals from the base of the flower. There will be the withered remnants of the other reproductive organs, the style and stamens, in there somewhere. All at the opposite end of the fruit (pome) from the stalk. Here endeth the botanical anatomy lesson. Amen.
