DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Macro lenses vs long telephoto zoom or normal lens with extension tubes

John , if you cant get the standard bottom plate you could try getting the P-5 battery pack thing that goes in its place . Many 167 users prefer the feel and handling with this in place - it adds size and weight[and means you can take AA batteries instead of those AAA ] , but I would never use mine without it now.......
Steve
 
Swoolf,

Thanks for the lead. I had given that a thought but I didn't know if I would still need the base plate..I sure don't want to buy another 167 to get a base or a P-5.

Is there a place where I can purchase a P-5??

Schulz
 
Daniel,

Thanks for the valuable feedback. I note your points about image circle, limited degrees of freedom for the Contax bellows, and physical constraints when bellows draw is small.

I disagree with your claim that "bellows extension is proportional to the focal length of the lens". This applies to a simple lens, but rarely to complex designs. For ex&le, I measure 13mm of extension for the P100 from infinity to 1m, but only 4mm for the SP60. The extension imposed by inserting the bellows unit between camera body and lens must be a few cm, at least to gain useful movements. Therefore, my hopes of using Contax C/Y lens between infinity and 1m are dashed. I would need MF lenses and a custom adapter to get the results I want from the Contax bellows. I know, I know, real men use a monorail system!

BTW, SP is short for S-Planar, a designation later changed to Makro-Planar - no idea what that's about.
 
Hi!

""BTW, SP is short for S-Planar, a designation later changed to Makro-Planar - no idea what that's about.""

I have a S-Planar 100mm lenses, it is designed for bellows, it can not be connected to camera body directly.
When it mount on bellows, it can be used to take Macro as well as used it as regular 100mm lenses.
The concept is like the old style box camera or old bellows camera.
I would like to take a picture of this equipment and let you know what is it look like. Please send me an e-mail if you want to see it.
My e-mail address is nlpoon@aol.com

Nelson
 
Nelson,

Thanks for the kind offer, but I know the appearance of the SP100/4. I saw it once on eBay, bid, and lost (went for $700). Even with many brands of macro lenses today - some aspheric, some with exotic glass, some with floating elements - your S-Planar is special. From the MTF on Contaxinfo, we know 1:4 has optimum performance. Is the dedicated bellows unit capable of tilt?
 
I bought it around 20 years ago, including S-Planar lenses, bellows, shuter release cord, only cost me $100 (used). I used it to take a 1:1 watch photo developed on 3"x5" photo paper for commercial purpose. It is a great combination.

Nelson
 
John , once you have the P-5 you dont need the old bottom cover . I bought mine from a store that has a lot of secondhand stuff locally - just look around , perhaps try e-bay or maybe someone on this forum will have one[or a redundant bottom plate] they might want to part with....
Steve
 
Swoolf,

Someone sent me to a place that has parts for Contax cameras. I wrote to them and I'm awaiting their response. My first choice is the P-5.

JS
 
John,
I ended up getting a P-5 on eBay (after trying different Contax parts depts.), where it shows from time to time for $60-100. The one that is on eBay right now (I have no connnection to this store) had a "Buy it now price" of $89 (now the price is $29).
I don't think it offers any "ergonomical" advantage. It looks cheap (plastic on the metal body), but of course allows you to use AAs.

Good luck.

Juan
 
Hi Rico,

re "proportional" of bellows extension to focal length, possibly a better choice of words would have been "positively correlated", though I still think the "proportional" holds for infinity focus. Your point about more complex designs (floating elements, etc.) is well taken, and interesting phenomena will certainly occur when you combine bellows extension and barrel extension with particular lenses. The overall point still stands as a first approximation and is confirmed by your own measurements.

I have not plotted any bellows/barrel extension vs. magnification or working distance. The only thing I ever did a bit more consciencously is the working distance for the MP100-stack-50/1.4 combination; it is roughly 35 mm, decreases a bit with closer focus of the MP100, and the focus of the 50/1.4 has hardly any effect, except for providing a "hood". With the 100/50 stack I can get up to 3:1 with a WD of 35 mm. It's ok for ladybugs or jumping spiders, but it gets pretty cr&ed in front of the lens. I can also get 3:1 with bellows, extension tubes and MP100 and have much better WD with plenty of space to put flashes, reflector card and all. However, it is a monster to handle, particularly in the field. I recently did some small clover flowers that way: what a pain (though good results in the end). The half-moons [don't recall what the proper name is in English for Schnittbildindikator] in the viewfinder are also becomming black as the effective f-stop is 4 x 2.8 = 11.2; (4 = magnification + 1). Should get a clear screen.

Re use of perspective control, I just got the bellows a month ago (used OM bellows w/o any perspective adjustments for many years). I tried the perspective adjustments a bit at home, and noted serious blurring with tilt. Using a small working aperture, the blurring seems to get reduced, though I have not shot any film on it. The blurring makes sense, as the periphery of the lens is used where various image degradations are more prevalent; and the improvement with stopping down also makes sense, as the contribution of peripheral rays is restricted. Has anyone some experience how much tilt still produces acceptable images at what f-stops?

Re using the bellows as a cheap alternatives for architectural photos, I had also wondered about that, but it will certainly not do. Here in particular, because of the short focal length of wide angle lenses; even a short bellows extension may not be capable to produce any image at all. The D21 with 13 mm tube has a WD of maybe 2 mm, and cannot produce any image mounted on a bellows. Bummer! So, if you are serious about architecture, get that monorail. Have been toying with that idea myself; Toyo has some entry level systems for about a grand that don't look too shabby. Monorail systems have the advantage that you can swap elements between systems much more easily. So there is no need to start with a Sinar.

Thanks for the clarification on SP/MP60.

Daniel
 
Back
Top