Water Bottle flash for macro...will it work??

Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
edited September 2, 2010 in Technique
Hi All,

I'm messing with macro photography, bugs and so on, but I don't have a dedicated macro lens. Someone said I would have trouble with light, as I reverse a lens on my 400d body which cuts down on the light.

So, I figured I'd try to get light down in front of the lens, where it's needed. I'm sure many folks have done similar, but I thought I'd have a go at this...a water bottle, a piece cut so it holds itself in the flash hot shoe, white printer paper on the front, and silver baking foil all around. The end is cut on a slant to allow the light to go down in front of the lens.

Question: You think it'll work?

4908269111_b51fec09bd_z.jpg

Comments

  • QarikQarik Registered Users Posts: 4,959 Major grins
    edited August 19, 2010
    it looks like it should work as long as the the subject is within a few inches. I would tend to think the portrait orientation might be better so your ligh side ways..but play with it. To make this even better..do the same thing but get a flat bracket ($10) and flash cord.
    D700, D600
    14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
    85 and 50 1.4
    45 PC and sb910 x2
    http://www.danielkimphotography.com
  • racerracer Registered Users Posts: 333 Major grins
    edited August 19, 2010
    thats quite the contraption you got there! How in the world do you focus that? headscratch.gif whats the magnification?
    Todd - My Photos
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited August 19, 2010
    Craig, you might have already seen this thread, but if not, you might get some hints from it. Umm . . . is your snooty-thing working off your pop-up flash, or is there a speedlight under there somewhere?
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Qarik wrote: »
    it looks like it should work as long as the the subject is within a few inches. I would tend to think the portrait orientation might be better so your ligh side ways..but play with it. To make this even better..do the same thing but get a flat bracket ($10) and flash cord.

    I have a bracket and a SunPak flash, but have been firing that with an optical trigger. Building a contraption would be more complex!

    Here's a picture of a dried petal (couldn't find a bug at 11pm!) I took with the 18-55mm kit lens reversed on the body. No PP at all, just imported from RAW and JPegged. What do you think of the lighting here?

    4909218083_09d677dc55_z.jpg
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    racer wrote: »
    thats quite the contraption you got there! How in the world do you focus that? headscratch.gif whats the magnification?

    You focus by rocking back and forth a very little bit...

    Um...I'm not sure what the magnification is...
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Icebear wrote: »
    Craig, you might have already seen this thread, but if not, you might get some hints from it. Umm . . . is your snooty-thing working off your pop-up flash, or is there a speedlight under there somewhere?

    Just the pop-up flash...
  • r3t1awr3ydr3t1awr3yd Registered Users Posts: 1,000 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Wow, I've done shots with my 50 reversed. Now you make me want to reverse my 18-55 and 55-200 lol.

    When I do this, I just put my flash on a wireless trigger and hold it to the side while I shoot with the camera on a tripod.
    Hi! I'm Wally: website | blog | facebook | IG | scotchNsniff
    Nikon addict. D610, Tok 11-16, Sig 24-35, Nik 24-70/70-200vr
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    r3t1awr3yd wrote: »
    Wow, I've done shots with my 50 reversed. Now you make me want to reverse my 18-55 and 55-200 lol.

    When I do this, I just put my flash on a wireless trigger and hold it to the side while I shoot with the camera on a tripod.

    I tried using flash at the side, but was getting very bright spots on the subject. I was inspired by a guy on Flickr...

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/opoterser/with/4887249906/

    THis photos are stunning.
  • r3t1awr3ydr3t1awr3yd Registered Users Posts: 1,000 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Bend The Light wrote: »
    I tried using flash at the side, but was getting very bright spots on the subject. I was inspired by a guy on Flickr...

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/opoterser/with/4887249906/

    THis photos are stunning.

    I shoot my SB600 through a 9" Lumiquest Soft Box III (minor but important detail? lol)

    That guy Shahan has some amazing pics!
    Hi! I'm Wally: website | blog | facebook | IG | scotchNsniff
    Nikon addict. D610, Tok 11-16, Sig 24-35, Nik 24-70/70-200vr
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    I tried again, on real live subjects. Not outdoors, but in front of a large window (window behind the bug).

    I have a M42 35mm lens I can reverse, so I intend to try that one - I would have manual control over the aperture, which makes life easier. The aperture is wide on this, so DoF is quite small.

    I also intend to play with my tubes on a lens the right way round, too!

    How's this?

    4909720381_03525c186f_b.jpg
  • Chrissiebeez_NLChrissiebeez_NL Registered Users Posts: 1,295 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Pretty cool! thumb.gif

    As i understand, if you set the aperture and then use the DOF preview button and then turn off the camera the lens stays in that aperture mode and you would be able to reverse mount it with the preset aperture. The easiest thing of course is to find manual aperture lenses (that can be had cheap second hand) so you could manually set them. I loved using reverse macro and you can go a long way with it. Try adding a reverse mounted lens on a normal lens (like the 50mm) using a converter thread ring.

    Oh, and in a month or two you'll be buying a dedicated macro rolleyes1.gif
    Visit my website at christopherroos.smugmug.com
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Wow!
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Chrissiebeez_NL wrote: »
    Pretty cool! thumb.gif

    As i understand, if you set the aperture and then use the DOF preview button and then turn off the camera the lens stays in that aperture mode and you would be able to reverse mount it with the preset aperture. The easiest thing of course is to find manual aperture lenses (that can be had cheap second hand) so you could manually set them. I loved using reverse macro and you can go a long way with it. Try adding a reverse mounted lens on a normal lens (like the 50mm) using a converter thread ring.

    Oh, and in a month or two you'll be buying a dedicated macro rolleyes1.gif

    Thanks for this - you commented on my other thread, too, but this is the latest thread and used my water bottle flash director/diffuser.

    I have a 35mm M42 lens that I can reverse on my current set up, so that's my next plan (it has 58mm thread so I can use the EF revering ring I have). Other than that, I have found on eBay a number of threaded adaptors and I am just deciding which ones to get - it depends which lenses I am going to use, as I have 49mm, 52mm, 55mm, and 58mm threaded lenses. I could probably buy a SET for less than £20 and be able to use any pair of lenses, I suppose.

    As for the dedicated lens, I have looked, but the wife has spent all my money, so it'll have to wait. On the plus side, I have two friends, both of whom have asked me to do some shots for them (one with kids, the other to do with weddings) - no pressure, but they are going to pay me for my trouble, so I might have some spends from that that the wife can't pinch!
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 20, 2010
    Icebear wrote: »
    Wow!

    Why, thank you! :D
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited August 27, 2010
    Bend The Light wrote: »
    I have a bracket and a SunPak flash, but have been firing that with an optical trigger. Building a contraption would be more complex!

    Here's a picture of a dried petal (couldn't find a bug at 11pm!) I took with the 18-55mm kit lens reversed on the body. No PP at all, just imported from RAW and JPegged. What do you think of the lighting here?

    4909218083_09d677dc55_z.jpg

    If this lighting is with your "baguette" then I think it is quite superior, particularly that it has not cast any high frequency shadows.

    Neil
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2010
    NeilL wrote: »
    If this lighting is with your "baguette" then I think it is quite superior, particularly that it has not cast any high frequency shadows.

    Neil

    It is, yes. And thank you. :D
  • AmbrolaAmbrola Registered Users Posts: 232 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2010
    Don't wast your money on those screw in diopters. They don't work. I bought them, and ended up buying a micro lens and Kenko tubes. Just added 20.00 bucks to the cost of my gear for nothing.
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2010
    Ambrola wrote: »
    Don't wast your money on those screw in diopters. They don't work. I bought them, and ended up buying a micro lens and Kenko tubes. Just added 20.00 bucks to the cost of my gear for nothing.

    Too late!

    Not got money for a dedicated lens just yet, but keeping my eyes open on Fleabay and so on, just in case...

    ...I do have macro tubes, but not with connections, but got this today (35mm Manual lens at f11, ISO 400, 15mm tubes)...think it's ok?

    4935036236_699b156710_z.jpg
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2010
    Well, "ok" is relative!mwink.gif

    The subject is recognisable, and closer adds interest, but this is not really an image to drool over. As a bit of fooling around with bits and pieces of gear it is entertaining, even informative.

    Dof is the usual very narrow. Lighting is very even (good or bad?), no blown-out reflections, and again lack of dark sharp shadows is very desirable.

    Fool on Macduff!:D

    Neil
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited August 29, 2010
    NeilL wrote: »
    Well, "ok" is relative!mwink.gif

    The subject is recognisable, and closer adds interest, but this is not really an image to drool over. As a bit of fooling around with bits and pieces of gear it is entertaining, even informative.

    Dof is the usual very narrow. Lighting is very even (good or bad?), no blown-out reflections, and again lack of dark sharp shadows is very desirable.

    Fool on Macduff!:D

    Neil

    Thank you, I think. mwink.gif

    composition is not the aim at the moment...even lighting, not blown out, not too dark, sharp, etc...that IS the aim. If I've got those, then the technicalities are being ironed out, and I am getting better. Then I start looking at drooly pictures :D
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited August 29, 2010
    Bend The Light wrote: »
    Thank you, I think. mwink.gif

    composition is not the aim at the moment...even lighting, not blown out, not too dark, sharp, etc...that IS the aim. If I've got those, then the technicalities are being ironed out, and I am getting better. Then I start looking at drooly pictures :D

    Yes, that has been my philosophy also, but when I see what people drool over in most forums, eg 1x, redbubble etc, it's all mist and blur and dark mood and artificial invention. Better to put that bee in front of a Lensbaby, underexpose and shake the camera a bit, maybe.ne_nau.gifrofl

    Neil
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • 22shooter22shooter Registered Users Posts: 34 Big grins
    edited September 2, 2010
    I'm having difficulty understanding why the bevel would direct the light downward. Unless there is something in the path to deflect it, wouldn't it just go in a straight line from the source?
  • Bend The LightBend The Light Registered Users Posts: 1,887 Major grins
    edited September 2, 2010
    22shooter wrote: »
    I'm having difficulty understanding why the bevel would direct the light downward. Unless there is something in the path to deflect it, wouldn't it just go in a straight line from the source?

    I did work, a bit (I think the paper would have scattered the light a little)...however, I have a new design which DOES have internal reflector stuff...and I have also sussed an off-camera flash (albeit not TTL or anything) which also works well with a homemade diffuser. thumb.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.