large format macro photography help?

[Jon Paul]

I am hoping to start taking some flower close-ups, as well as some other detail images in nature, with my/a 4x5 camera. I am hoping for some input regarding technique and equipment... Given that my camera has limited bellows extension, will I be happy with the performance of the Rodenstock macro 120mm lens (can I avoid distortion if I shoot relatively straight on)? Do I need a camera with greater bellows extension so that I can use the Rodenstock 180mm macro?

Thanks for your assistance.

Jon

PS- I want to use the 4x5 for this type of work because I print very large...40x50 is a standard size, and I occassionally go larger than that.

[Ernest Purdum]

It sounds like the article I wrote on this subject could help you. You can find it by returning to the home page, then scrolling down to the list of articles. <p.

You will quite possibly have some questions remaining after reading the article. If so, come back here, or email me.
Clicking on my name will give you my email address.

[Ralph Barker]

Ernest's article, Macro Lenses, Equipment, and Techniques provides a great start, and provides good information about lens choices and such. It may be helpful to take a multi-step approach, however, so you can achieve your pictorial objectives without going overboard on specialized gear.

My suggestion would be to think about what and where you'll be shooting first, and then consider reproduction ratios that you'll typically be encountering doing that work. If, for example, something around 1:1 (life-size) is sufficient, you may be able to get by less expensively. Unfortunately, there are contradicting trade-offs involved. Greater distance from the subject afforded by slightly longer lenses adds convenience (for placement of supplemental lighting and such), but adds to the bellows-extension requirement. If you currently have a 4x5 field camera, for example, with slightly over 300mm of bellows draw, you can get 1:1 with a standard 150mm lens. Thus, I'd suggest doing some experimentation with what you have. Determine where the shortcomings are for the type of work you're doing, and then augment the equipment.

Another approach worth considering is using an 8x10 field camera with a 4x5 reducing back. A double-extension 8x10, for example, will typically give you around 550-600mm of bellows. Combined with something like a 240mm G-Claron on 4x5, that gives you ample bellows draw for better than 1:1, while maintaining a good working distance.

[Brian Yarvin]

I was saddened to see that you feel the need to make an excuse for using large format. I myself shoot large format macro just for the joy of it and am always delighted to hear about others doing the same thing.

If you need a bit more extension in a pinch, get yourself some quality closeup lenses. Make sure they're made well though - a brand like Tiffen will work well. In my experience the quality and cleanliness of the lenses will make all the difference.

Good luck!

[Yves Gauvreau]

This is not actually a reply its more a few questions for clarification. Hope this is all right.

I've seen mention often the term working distance while talking macro. I'd like to know if I understand this correctly say M is 1:1 then for this we need about twice the focal length of belows and our working distance would be about the focal length. Is this correct?

What happens to this distance when we use a closeup lens and what happens to the depth of field? Or if I put this another way I want to do macro 1:1 or more and I want the maximum DOF possible so wich equipment should I use to achieve both these objective? And I would like excellent sharpness as well.

Thanks everyone.

[Ernest Purdum]

Yves, you are correct about the lens to film distance at 1:1, but the lens to subject distance would also be two focal lengths. You would only get down to one focal length distance if your film was infinitely distant from the lens. Try to visualize it as being the reverse of the normal situation.



Regarding the use of a close-up lens, it all depends on how strong that auxiliary lens is, so how much it changes the focal length of the main lens. Depth of field of the combination will be the same as for a single lens working at the same aperture and focal length. Depth of field gets to be a severe problem when working very close.



Regarding what equipment is best, it depends greatly on what size your subjects will be and (assuming you are going to use an existing camera) how much bellows extension you have available. Unless your subjects can be illuminated from the other side (translucent) it is easier to work with a lens long enough that the front of the camera isn't too close to the subject which causes lighting difficulty. Longer focal length lenses require very long bellows, though.

[Bill Brady]

I have been having great results using the Nikon 6T achromat (2 element) close up lens with a small amount of extension. Nikon makes several of these lenses from +1 to +8 (I think). They make them in 2 sizes, the 6T is 62mm so you might need a step ring. The achromats are for use with mild telephotos while the smaller (non achromats) are for "Normal" lenses.

This setup, in one case, actually improved the sharpness of the main lens!

If the Nikon price bugs you ($40+), there are a couple of guys on eBay selling close up sets which include a "Macro" lens. The mount is thick like the 6T so they may be achromats also and are much cheaper than the Nikons. I have two sets of these but have not yet had a chance to take any pics.

When I say "great results" I mean the Pics knock my socks off! Not only sharp but great tonality and contrast.

[Dan Fromm]

Jon, when you say close-ups, how close do you mean? I ask because in my experience working much above 1:1 in the field with formats larger than 35 mm still is painful and doesn't always give the image quality desired. Two problems, limited depth of field and loss of image quality to diffraction when stopped down to gain more DOF. For me, stopping down below f/16-f/22 @1:1 is counterproductive, and as magnification increases the limiting apeture gets larger (smaller f/number). Controlling subject motion is also a large headache; flash sometimes eases the pain.

The way to get more magnification with limited extension is to use a shorter lens. But few short lenses will cover 4x5 at relatively low magnification. The 120 Rodenstock macro you have in mind will, so will the 120 Nikkor. The 100/6.3 Zeiss Luminar covers 4x5 from 0.8:1 up, according to Zeiss.

Buy a copy of Lester Lefkowitz' book The Manual of Closeup Photography. You'll learn more from it than from random answers on a bulletin board. And visit http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/microlen.htm to learn more about specialized optics for photomacrography.

Good luck, have fun, be patient,

Dan

[Bob Salomon]

Distortion is not an issue. The lens does not distort.

But foreshortening can be an issue. That is not distortion that is simply the fact that objects closer to the lens will reproduce larger then items further away from the lens.

If you want distortion a close up lens will probably give you some.

If you need more extension and have a camera with a Technika style board you can get extended lensboards from Wista that would help.