Photocameras

Comparative photos in nature, the first two are Industriar 69, the second two are Lomo, and the last one is a caterpillar - in order to take a picture of it, I had to urgently wind up Lomo, otherwise it would crawl away)
Shooting on the I69 was with an aperture of 5, this is the minimum from which it works at least a little bit. Ideally, of course, the aperture is 8. But, even with an aperture of 5, the difference in shutter speed with Lomo is very large, so I had to shoot in autoISO, acc. lots of noise.
The proportions are preserved, no processing, only reducing the size.

Well, if you put the aperture of 8 and on a less noisy matrix, so that at least ISO 200 can be set, then you can even take pictures with this object, well, then add contrast.
But still )

Pictures:

P1013576.jpg — (472.79к)


P1013585.jpg — (623.38к)


P1013586.jpg — (566.89к)


P1013581.jpg — (470.53к)


P1013584.jpg — (503.68к)

Apparently, the Kodakovites have not learned how to make a normal in-camera run, so if the camera does not write RAV, then it's a disaster. By the way, judging by the pictures on the Internet, Nikonian soap dishes also have solid watercolors. So, it seems that Canon and Olympus are driving in this segment.

I found a contrast switch in the A540, set it to low, now there is no such strong dip in the shadows as there was before, however, noise in dark places climbs out. But with the adjustment of sharpness, the trouble is - even on neutral there are artifacts in the form of white borders around contrasting details, and if you turn it in the negative, the blurring is already underway. By the way, the A550's "development" algorithm was significantly upgraded, there were noticeable edges only in macro mode, but the sharpness increased better. It will be necessary at your leisure to still smoke this-the most hacker whatever it is, to see, at least for interest, what you can get out of the local rav.




This post was edited by ENO-03.04.2017 03: 20

Sell a working Canon A570 IS for 350 rubles.
Does it make sense to take it to indulge in replacing
the lens lenses with an "attached lens" or does it not make sense?

It is better to add a little and take an old DSLR like Nikon d50 or Canon 350d.

It is better to add a little and take an old DSLR like Nikon d50 or Canon 350d.

We've already suggested it, but it's no use.
Just local "kulibins" just trudge from their experiments with antediluvian optics on equally antediluvian soap dishes. They are trying to get some super-duper combination with 20-800 foci and the ability to shoot super-macro from a distance of 2-3 m. Well, let them amuse themselves - the flag is in their hands...

It is better to add a little and take an old DSLR like Nikon d50 or Canon 350d.

I have 650D + MP-E 65 + 100L
and Sony A6000 + a bunch of Soviet manual machines (I-61, I-26m, I-69, Helios, Vega, etc.)
I'm talking about "indulge"...: -)

I have 650D + MP-E 65 + 100L
and Sony A6000 + a bunch of Soviet manual machines (I-61, I-26m, I-69, Helios, Vega, etc.)
I'm talking about "indulge"... :-)

There is a desire and time to "tinker", of course take it.

PS
And if you look at the work of our "kulibins" for at least a year, then the positive result is obvious.

This post was edited by Yuriy352-03.04.2017 18: 36

Sovietchegi
Macro shooting on a DSLR-at least on what, even with MP-E, this is still something)) And even on a mirrorless camera, if there is a 24mm matrix )
The advantage of a mirrorless camera in high ISO conditions is reduced when using objects with large working segments and acc. the need to clamp the diaphragm. The fact that on a soap dish you can take a picture of an acceptable GRIP with a rear segment of 12mm and a matrix of 6x4mm at an aperture of 2.8, with a shutter speed of 500 at ISO 50 - - - on a 24mm matrix, you will have to take pictures at 11-16 aperture, ISO 400 and a shutter speed of 150, and then, on a good day

I take 400-600 pictures of different objects a day, while I spend several seconds on one picture, both on fixed and moving objects. This is not the case when you need to crawl around and put a tripod, clamp the aperture, also use the flash, and eventually shoot one bug a day, and then if you're lucky ))
All this is done quickly, neither the lizard nor the beetle will wait)

Pictures:

P1013385.jpg — (507.26к)


P1013907.jpg — (426.32к)


P1013927.jpg — (449.79к)


P1013958.jpg — (583.21к)

A" standard Kenon features " cheto despite the picture in direct sunlight-darken and soap, despite the butterfly in full frame-scales are not visible )

Here is a photo from 3-4x meters, on 2/92, despite the fact that the matrix here, on Olympus c-480, is much worse than Kenon's ) Soap object alas, will always be soapy, because manufacturers are not fools to make objects on cheap photos that would take good pictures, then why buy MP-E )))

This post was edited by Hierophis - 04.04.2017 00: 22

Pictures:

P104041.jpg — (661.42к)

They don't ask for advice to indulge, but they take it and indulge. You can" Change", for example, indulge in:

No, I don't plan to return to the film.
And I already had soap dishes (Nikon 7900, Canon A640, Lumix LX3, Olympus SP-560), pleasant memories remained, but... sold out, but gave away.
Zina even shared about the experience of shooting with Nikon on the website - Photographing beetles with a digital soap dish.
And now I decided to take a look at what MP-E and other lenses on a small matrix can do. :-)

This post was edited by Bomka - 04.04.2017 02: 57

Enough for now about the photo, now we will talk about the video, namely about using the Z990 Codec as a video camera. First, about the good stuff: 1080p resolution, stereo microphone. Now for the bad news: the video mode is controlled by a single record / stop button, there are no options (only the resolution can be changed to less - a function with questionable usefulness); the optical stabilizer is turned off for the duration of video shooting (strange, yes), but the constant autofocus, on the contrary, is turned on, and its knock is recorded by microphones, besides however, he sometimes breaks down and wanders thoughtfully in space for a few seconds, and there is no way to push him in the right direction until he comes to his senses. Here is an example of how you can put together something unintelligible from sufficiently good components, and it's not for nothing that Kodak ended up badly in the digital field. However, compared to the only device I used to shoot videos earlier - the Kenon A540/550 (I write with a fraction, because in terms of video shooting they are completely identical) - this is just space. An illustration of all of the above: https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=c6GqGTl4uFk

PS Vile YouTube once again put a pig: it shredded the sky and added some flashes behind the bird, there is no such horror in the original. I can't imagine how people manage to achieve a good viewing quality with it, maybe the "leave as it was" button appears for money? When I started using it (in 2008, as far as I remember), there was no such "free retelling of the author's video". Probably, you still need to switch to another resource.

This post was edited by ENO-04.04.2017 02: 53

The link is broken)

Bomka, about MP-E, the fact is that the size of the matrix when using the same object does not affect anything other than the apparent increase in FR
To see what the MP-E gives on a small matrix, take a picture on a DSLR in full resolution, cut out the crop from the center acc. the physical dimensions of the matrix, for example 1/2. 5, and see what happens ) The same thing, only with big noises and the worst DD get on the soap box ))

In order to use the advantage of a small matrix, you need to put objects with FR as small as possible, with a back segment of 15 mm, even 10 mm, but high-quality, preferably from imported microscopes, plan-apochromats. It is then that you will get a high aperture and a large GRIP area.

By the way, just by the way, there is a factory mirrorless camera with a 1/2.5 matrix, this is Pentax Q, there the matrix is better than the soapbox ones, BUT! these radishes made a "carcass" without a shutter! Central shutter in replaceable objects inside, and acc. it is impossible to use third-party objects on it at all, except for making a gate block.
There is also a Nikon 1 V1, there is a shutter, and a 12mm matrix, but there are also problems with third-party objects, in order to work in mode A, you need an adapter with a chip, otherwise only in mode M.

There really is something wrong with the link, but I took it from the video viewing page. In general, Google and YouTube have now degenerated into total evil, a solid shell for all sorts of" PRISMS". Here is another link, but follow it carefully, hz. where will it lead next time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6GqGTl4uFk&feature=youtu.be

it is necessary to put objects with FR as little as possible

That's understandable.
You will need to try microscopic PL4 / 0.10 160/.

I bought it!
In addition, they gave a macro attachment with an adapter
and
a still
disassembled Canon A710 IS.

Can I take a picture through the nozzle?

By the way, about the use of SLR cameras for "playing" (experimenting) with" found " various lenses (not as with attachments, but as with the main lens), the main limitation is due to the large working length of the camera itself (for example, for Nikon =46.5 mm) and mainly related to the trajectory of raising the mirror. That's why I decided on a mobile phone with a purely electronic shutter and, as a result, with a very small working segment of the "camera"itself(about 12 mm). I was interested in the actual resolution of specific lenses, namely in the center of the field (it is clear that this is only one of the parameters of the optical system).
For real photographing, this bundle "LG T300 phone+arbitrary lens" is not very suitable.

This post was edited by Yuriy352-07.04.2017 21: 52

Bomka, a good camera, almost new, judging by the absence of characteristic scuffs (they have all the inscriptions very quickly slazyat). And a cool adapter, I would like that. It turns out that in Donetsk there is not on sale (and before the war there was not) what is even in the Baikal region. And I made similar things out of old metal flashlights, there is a one-in-one diameter, but they ran out, and you can't find any more on sale (I checked it today).

Yuriy352, do not equate God's gift with scrambled eggs, a DSLR with a mobile phone, at least with yours. Mobile photos turned out to be purely for fun, there is no question of quality there at all, I'm sorry. But what you didn't like about the working segment is a mystery to me. This is a macro, and the working segment is defined at infinity. People perfectly marofotkaet digital mirrors with Soviet rangefinder lenses, and still a solid stock for rings remains. Today they gave me some kind of pentax to take pictures of (people, though, not insects), a cool thing, rav writes a split second, and the autofocus is very tenacious, despite the fact that at that time it was contrasting.

This post was edited by ENO-08.04.2017 02: 31

Can I take a picture through the nozzle?

Roman, here are 4 photos of a gadfly without processing, directly from a flash drive:
IMG_3720 - with the nozzle in the teleposition of the lens
(the distance from the gadfly to the lens is ~ 7 cm)-
In this position, focusing is possible only by approaching/moving away from the subject. Sharp area in ~ 7 cm
. IMG_3721 - with a wide angle nozzle (~ c 2 cm)
IMG_3722-without a wide angle nozzle (~ c 5 cm)
IMG_3723-without a nozzle in the teleposition of the lens (~ c 35 cm).
Files
of 2.5-3.5 Mb each - you can download them to your computer and view them.

Gadfly like
this (I shot it with my hands, without a tripod, on my knee/more precisely on the couch ) -

and also a slightly processed photo
to show the depth of field (according to the label)
of the nozzle in the wide-angle position of the lens -


This post was edited by Bomka-08.04.2017 06: 24

And also such a
little thing (Canon A570IS + macro nozzle + teleposition of the lens (23.2 mm) -

And I took a picture of the nozzle itself with the adapter -


This post was edited by Bomka - 08.04.2017 05: 39

And a cool adapter, I would like that. It turns out that in Donetsk there is not on sale (and before the war there was not) what is even in the Baikal region.

Makronasadku, IMHO, the former owner in China bought.
P. S.
A570 in Kaluga for 300 re sell (if anyone else needs) - https://www.avito.ru/kaluga/fototehnika/fot..._a570_905653260

Bomka, after all, what kind of soap dish you don't take, her native object will be soapy, but if you look at your photos, the contrast is excellent, the photos are beautiful, but you feel that the contours are somehow fuzzy, despite the fact that there is a focus.

I picked up similar objects specifically for comparison. taken last year through the nozzle and the standard object, and this year through the microscopic object.
By the way, the matrices are identical, that in Olympus 510, that in C-480 the same matrix.

Photos are all cropped only, without reducing the size, the first photo is a picture on the SP510UZ through the nozzle or without it(dream grass), and the second picture is a picture of this year through the peephole)

Distance is very important for nature photos, and the longer it is, the more likely you are to take a picture of shy insects. Regular features of soap dishes do not give this, with a macro nozzle - this is possible.

Pictures:

P4030249.jpg — (1.62 mb)


5P1014261.jpg — (1.33 mb)


P4070949.jpg — (2.57 mb)


5P1012713.jpg — (1.94мб)


P4070792.jpg — (1.62 mb)


5P1013260.jpg — (1.12мб)


P4130097.jpg — (1.46 mb)


5P1012230.jpg — (1.38мб)

But I wonder: if there is no thread on the lens of the soap dish, can I still attach a macro nozzle or an interchangeable lens to it? What do photoworkers think about this? Maybe someone has such experience?

and this year through a microscopic object.

Yes, the difference is noticeable.
And what is the "bayonet" thread of the Lomo 3.7 - through which ring do you attach it to the carcass?

So many soap dishes do not have threads for attachments, attachments, even for sale, are attached by, um, tight fitting)) or on the native ledge on the object, if there is one, or on the nose of the object itself, there are such selling macrolenses, but they are light and more curved in the image than the objects, or you need to disassemble the soap dish, screw the ring on the reverse side with screws and attach the objects to it.
What is good about macro settings is that when they are well - chosen, they increase the light intensity by several times.

And I have a microscopic object pressed into the helicoid from the eyepiece for MBS 8X, and that, in turn, through spacers into a small macro ring from the Zenith M42, that's all)

Pictures:

P4080008.jpg — (327.75к)

Roman, and the rear lens of the LOMO screwed into the "carcass bayonet"
at what distance is it from the matrix?

Well, at least 14-15mm, as much as you need for pictures at infinity, there is also a helicoid, the distance varies, you can shoot from 10 cm to infinity. The distance of 15 mm is the maximum limit for this alteration, due to the fact that it was done hastily and the bolt carrier is raised in relation to the matrix.

This can't be happening! For these cameras, autofocus works perfectly in any position of the lens.

It works, but it can't focus.
And when switching to macro ,it "hooks" an object in a teleposition
approximately at a distance of 7-7. 5 cm.
In wide-angle mode, it clings to an object in the range from 2 to 8 cm.
Without macro, it doesn't hover at all, although it tries.
M / b is a feature of my instance... attachments.
As I understand it, the native nozzle should be with a thread of 52 mm, and I have 37 mm
.- - -
I liked to be guided in the "MF" mode-
a square appears with an enlarged fragment of the image,
and zoom in/out with my hands as accurately as possible to focus.
---

Was the stabilizer turned on?

I didn't notice the effect of the stabilizer.
IMHO, the shutter speed is long, you need to reduce it.
I, out of habit, in the mode of changing the aperture fotkal.
---

first, the camera will have to be disassembled to make sure that picking holes is safe.

I'm more concerned about the loops on the lens -
I'm looking at the broken A710... and what parts can be painlessly removed is not yet clear.
Will the camera still work later, for example, without an aperture loop or stabilizer?

This post was edited by Bomka - 09.04.2017 05: 45

Does autofocus work properly without the nozzle?

Yes, it is being set up fairly quickly.

All I know is that powersh trains are very flimsy

I saw on YouTube that if the aperture loop is turned off,
then the "small band" matrix starts...
How to deal with this is not yet clear.

This post was edited by Bomka - 09.04.2017 17: 10

The metaphragm loop should not affect the matrix in any way. "Melkosobie" is peresvet. If what is described on YouTube applies specifically to your camera, then everything is fine, obviously with the loop turned off, the aperture simply opens to full. In this case, the loop and aperture can be safely thrown out and manually set the aperture of the new lens. If there are streaks, just slow down the shutter speed and cover the aperture.

I took several test photos of butterflies at my leisure with different cameras and different attachments and without them.

A540 without nozzle (macro mode):




A540+I-90U:




Z990+and-11M (with flash):





For parameters, see exifs. Everything is a camera JPEG, the first two and last images are not processed, the rest of the noise is removed and the brightness curves are slightly adjusted.

This post was edited by ENO - 11.04.2017 00: 32

Results of the first field tests.

A540+new nozzle (from the filmoscope lens, in case anyone forgot), wide-angle position (the minimum focal length of a standard lens, the installation of which does not entail vignetting , is 11.76 mm), natural lighting:




Same, maximum long-focus position (23.2 mm):





Same, intermediate zoom position (13.74 mm):




Then the sun disappeared behind dense clouds, so I had to increase the shutter speed, sometimes to completely indecent values like 1/13 s, which, despite all my tricks, led to a stir. Therefore, based on the following images, I recommend evaluating parameters other than sharpness and noise level.

"Nozzle on nozzle" - A540+I-90U+filmoscope lens (you can shoot with this system only at long focus):








Now the results of shooting after sunset, at dusk. Naturally, only one new (filmoscope nozzle), without "Industriar".

No flash, 9.82 mm focal length (already noticeable vignetting at the corners), 1/13 s:



11.76 mm, 1/13 s, minimum flash (with this combination, for my taste, the image looks as close as possible to what the eye saw):




23.2 mm, 1/400...1/500 s., aperture /6.3.../7.1, medium flash (this is how I used to shoot macro shots at dusk):




Still the same, but the focal length is 15.78 mm:



A comparative picture with the same parameters, but with a different nozzle-I90-Y (and, accordingly, with the reflector on), I really clamped the diaframe to /8, but in vain, I slightly underexposed it in the end:



Conclusions.

1. The new nozzle provides a unique (in my arsenal) macro shooting opportunity in the short-focus position of the standard lens. Since in this position it has a much larger aperture than in the long-focus one, the final system turns out to be lighter than any other I have tested, despite the complete lack of illumination on the filmoscope lens. You can also shoot larger objects. In the long-focus position, the characteristics are similar to the I-90U, but the pattern is softer, and the sharpness is slightly less. And this lens does not eat colors, unlike Industriar. It is especially surprising that its HA is not much larger than that of normal lenses and the field is even. IMHO, a good option for those who all sorts of "Marumi achromats" are not available for the price, and there is no mount for mounting a heavy Soviet lens.

2. The "nozzle-to-nozzle" system is similar in scale, MDF, and GRIP to a magnifying glass, but it has three significant advantages: better contrast, a flat field, and less aberration (especially chromatic ones) - and one equally significant drawback - very low aperture.