Over a decade ago I picked up this 20mm macro lens, with lens mount,
for about $85 from B&H or Adorama (sorry, I've forgotten which one now;
whatever, the price seems reasonable by today's standards). The lens is
very nice for taking shots of scales on butterfly wings and such, but it
has to be used on a tripod or other solid mount. It's disadvantage is
the manual diaphragm.
Mention was made of drilling and threading a plastic or metal body
cap instead of trying to find the special mount. This should work--in
fact, this is similar to what I have done to mount a 7mm Elgeet wide
angle lens (they were made for 8mm movie cameras) reversed on my OM4T.
If you think you can get close with the 20mm macro lens, I can focus on
a millimeter ruler with the reversed Elgeet on the OM telescopic auto
tube and find that just a bit over 1.2mm fills the frame. In short, I'm
getting about 26X, and I can take shots of just the scales on the edge
of a butterfly's wing. Sure, the lens does not have an automatic
diaphragm, but then neither does this model of the 20mm macro. These
Elgeet lenses come up on ebay several times a year (I've bought
several), and if anyone is interested in really macro work, consider
their low cost: $7-15.
Reversing movie camera lenses is a well-established way to get macro
on a budget. I consider my reversed Elgeet as "macro to the max--and on
the cheap." Considering that this non-automatic 20mm macro OM lens,
with mount from another source, will probably add up to $200, a reversed
movie camera lens on a cheap body cap offers a very attractive and much
less expensive alternative. Has anyone else tried this?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|