Macro photography for $10

December 16, 2010 @ 1:10PM

Macro photography for $10

How to get in really, really close for next to no money.

By Haje Jan Kamps

Macro photo of a match head

So, you like the idea of doing macro photography, but you think you can’t afford it? Think again – with less than £10 worth of equipment, a little bit of sweat and tears (and blood, if you, like me, are a bit on the clumsy side), and you can build yourself a surprisingly good macro lens. Don’t believe me? Well, have a look at the article, and think again!

Of course, as I’m using a Pringles can to make this lens, you also have the opportunity to pause for a snack. Now that’s the type of DIY projects I like.

So you want to take pictures of things up close, do you? You have gone tired of all the regular ways of doing so? Ready for bellows and reversing rings, but can’t afford them? Have no fear, there is a far cheaper way to get a reasonably good result!

Also, Before we go any further… Need I say that you do all of this on your own risk? If you chop a finger off, ruin a lens or your camera body, it’s your own fault, and your own problem. Just be really careful, and you should be fine.

Cannibalising lens covers

This project takes base in cannibalising a few of the lens- and body covers that most of us have laying around. These are great, seeing as they are already created to connect to the camera – the easiest way to get the correct bayonet fittings to attach stuff to your camera body and lenses!

Obviously, the covers are solid, which is no good to us. So, in order to get them into an useful state, I attacked them with a Dremel tool.

Such a grind…

Carefully chopping the fronts out of a camera body cover and a lens cover takes quite a bit of time, not least because I wanted to do it as neatly as possible.

When you are done, remember to matte the cut by using emory paper (sanding paper): You want to make sure it doesn’t reflect light.

Pringles tube to the rescue

What you make the actual distance tube out of is relatively unimportant, as long as it is completely light-proof. I decided to use a pringles tube because I have done projects in the past with them, so I knew that they were approximately the right size. It turned out, in fact, that it was exactly the right size. Nifty.

After removing the top and decantering all the lovely crisps into a bowl (nope, I’m not affiliated with Pringles. And the jury is still out if the crisps type have any impact on the photo quality of the end product), it was time to attack the bottom of the tube…

Sparks! Oh, the pretty sparks!

Cutting out the bottom of the pringles can caused a lot of pretty sparks, so I couldn’t resist the temptation of taking a few shots.

Ladies: sorry about the unwashed hair, beard stubbles, messy room, and general colour mismatching of this photo. If this turns you on, marriage proposals go on an ePostcard to the address at the bottom of the article.

So… Why the lens cover?

There was no logistical reason for why I decided to cut holes in both the body and the lens cover, other than that I thought it might come in handy later. With the final design, it turned out to not be necessary. It did, however, come in quite handy: The lens cover cap works as a flare-reducing hood, and it helps protect the electrical contacts built into the lens. In addition, it makes it easier to grab on to the lens as it is stuck in the tube.

Chalk that one up to luck rather than than planning, but cut a hole in a lens cover as well, because it makes your life easier, and it reduces the chance of putting one of your lenses out of commission. I don’t know about you, but I prefer to keep my lenses in one piece. I’m not that rich: I’m writing an “on the cheap” guide.

A Sticky situation

So, once the pringles tube had a big hole in the bottom, I set out to attaching the body cover and the Pringles tube.

Any strong glue should do. I suspect a hot-glue gun would probably be best, but I was out of glue sticks, so decided to use epoxy glue instead.

Anything to make the two pieces stick firmly to each other. If the glue you use sets translucent, you may want to take a black felt-tip pen and colour it dark, to prevent light leaks.

Firmly attached

After the epoxy glue had set, I had to try to see if it fitted on my Canon 20D.

Sure enough, it was a perfect fit.

Professionality aside, I gladly admit to doing a minor victory dance at this point.

A snug fit – banishing light

My idea was to use black felt to block out the light leaks from outside the lens.

The particular lens I decided to use for this project is the cheapest Canon standard lenses, namely the Canon 50mm f/1.8 MKII.

It is just the right size, and despite being cheap as chips, it has a couple of tricks up its sleeve – more about that in a minute. Ideally, using an older lens would be a better idea – especially if it has manual aperture controls.

By wrapping black fabric (in my case, a t-shirt I didn’t really like anymore) tightly around the lens, I managed to block out all superfluous light.

Textile Hack

I’ll gladly admit that getting it right took a couple of tries, but eventually I found exactly how much fabric was needed. To hold the bundle together, I decided to tape it all together.

After this, the lens fitted snugly in the Pringles container. Not only did it not fall out, it slides quite easily, so if you need to move it, you can just push or pull it to where you need it. Once you let go, it stays put. This is actually quite important, as it’s part of the focussing strategy: You don’t focus using focus rings, but by moving the lens closer or further away from whatever you are photographing.

Finally: Taking photos!

Right, everything has come together, and now it is time to do the fun stuff: Take pictures!

Depth of field in Macro photography

You’ll probably find that, essentially, you have no depth of field at all. In macro- and microphotography, moving an item half a millimetre forward or backward from the lens changes things dramatically. Of course, you’ll learn soon enough to draw this to your advantage, but there is actually something you can do to increase your depth of field, if only a little: Stop down the lens – more info about that here.

Focussing

Focussing is a serious challenge with microphotography, and it can be bitterly frustrating: The slightest movement throws the object completely out of focus, and even finding your object again can be a nightmare.

My only advice: Try it slowly. Wave your object in front of the lens, and then try focusing it by holding it in your hand, looking through the viewfinder. Once you get the hang of it, understanding how it works, you can try and set it up in a static setup: You are going to want to use a remote release button or the camera’s self timer to reduce shutter shake, so make sure everything is sturdily set up!

Exposure

The internal light-meter is actually a good starting point – it isn’t always accurate, but it gives you an idea. The great thing with digital SLRs, of course, is that you can try and err as much as you like. And trust me, there will be a lot of that while you try and figure out macro photography.

Taking the photo

As mentioned briefly earlier, you’ll want to hold the camera perfectly still. Use the self-timer or use a remote shutter lead to make sure everything is perfectly still.

The photo below is off a simple Bic ballpoint pen (it was the first thing I had to reach).

It is by no means a great macro photo, but it does give an impression of how big things get. That is an un-cropped photo, by the way: I have the photographs below in all their 8 megapixel glory.

The reason for the glare in this photo is that the inside of the Pringles tube was still metallic. The light was bouncing around on the inside of the tube, causing it to look very fuzzy.

Ballpoint pen – Canon 50mm f/1.8 stopped down to f/16, shutter time approx. 10 seconds, ISO 100. Not cropped. (see bigger version)

Ballpoint pen – Canon 50mm f/1.8 stopped down to f/4.0, shutter time approx. 0.3 seconds, ISO 100. Slightly cropped. (see bigger version)

Now in video form!

This article was published in Make Magazine vol.6, and in late 2009, Make Magazine made this their Video Project! I’m proud to say that Kip and the rest of the Make team made a great video guide of it – check it out:

Further improving the system

The first change I made to my initial design was to add a layer of black paper inside the Pringles box. Ideally, black felt or another completely light-eating surface would be better, but felt costs money, and I decided to keep this project as cheap as possible.

Photos taken with the system

During my further experimentation, I decided to have a go at a pack of matches that was conveniently within an arm’s length:

Match head

Match on fire

Burnt match

(For all three images, click on them to see them bigger on Flickr. While you’re there, why not add them as favourites while you’re at it?)

Postscript

I hope this article has inspired you to build a macro lens of your own. It is a tremendous amount of fun, and in the process you are likely to learn a lot about photography and optics: Which, in turn, will improve your overall photography performance. You can’t lose!

Did you like this article? Stay in touch!

Twitter (16,459 followers) • Facebook (2,744 likes) • Flickr (4,218 contacts)

Comments

Anonymous

6 years ago

I’d be interested to see a diagram added to this. I’m having trouble figuring it out just from the few photos you have. Thanks!

Anonymous

6 years ago

Very nice. Try old tennis ball tins as a robust alternative to the Pringles can- Slazenger make them out of mild steel.
Another very useful tip is to look for an old microscope stage. Secondhand microscopes are sometimes avilable online, sometimes are sold off by colleges / schools. The microscope itself can be useful, but the stage is fantastic for making minute incremental adjustments to object position when focussing and composing. (The “stage” of a microscope is the little ajustable platform which the slide sits on to be viewed. It can be fine ajusted through three dimensions).

Anonymous

6 years ago

Great little example here!

Can you do something with setting up your own cheap lights next please? :)

Anonymous

6 years ago

Great Idea!
Maybe you could use some plumbing pipes instead of Pringle Cans to make it work in wet conditions ;)

Thanks very much!

Anonymous

6 years ago

Awesome idea. I’ve always wanted to try macro but couldn’t afford the equipment. Now all I need is a little time to work on it….

Anonymous

6 years ago

This is wonderful stuff. I’ve got random lenses lying all about the place and nothing much to do with them. I’ll be giving this a try with my 35mm dv camera adapter.

Anonymous

6 years ago

Excellent work, but where can I find cheap lense and body covers? All I have are the two that came with my camera.

BTW, your matchhead ‘bigger version’ link is pointing to the burning match.

Anonymous

6 years ago

wow, what a creative and genius idea!

It is definately worth subscribing to this blog.

Anonymous

6 years ago

having studies photography deeply without NEVER using photoshop or likely tools EVER (i actually learned to retouch by hand on the negative/chrome with a tiny brush …) and having shot lots of large- format negs (yes, the good old bellows camera), there is one simple trick to figure out exposure with the help of a ruler and the mm- number of the lens:

a 50mm lens defines itself of being in focus at infinity (thats the little 8 in horizontal) when it is (well) 50mm away from the film- plane (nowadays the chip-plane; usually marked in good cameras by the white stripe painted on top of the cams …)

when you use a pringles-can (or any ohter tube; wether longer or shorter, it will only increase/decrease the makro-effect) you have to compensate for the loss of light, which is defined by 2 to the distance; which works just like the f-stops ….

so, if for example, you go with a 50mm (close to a 5.6 f-stop) to an extension of about 30cm (close to an f32) … well you do the math (5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32) thats 6 stops of compensation or overexposure.

since all lenses (in large format) are defined by being focused to infinity at their focal length in contrast to the object, anything closer to it will result in having a longer way of light, thus loosing light (since light has to travel longer througt this black tube), therefor loosing brightness, therefor in need for a longer exposure ….

kevin schulte

9 months ago

Since i'm reversing the lens when I fit it in the end with the cloth, does it have to be a fixed focal length? (usind an efs 18-55mm on a canon rebel xt, the lens it came with) , that would work since I'm adjusting manually right? , am I missing something?

Not too worried about dust exposure if the can / tennis ball cannister is cleaned thoroughly beforehand.

has anyone thought of anything for minute adjustments that wont cost an arm and a leg? I'm thinking my subjects will be on eye level horizontal planes and I know tripods / microscope stages can cost an arm and a leg...

great article! , having some lens caps shipped in now to try it!

coax

3 months ago

nice tutorial,

i have made my own now, but when i look through the viewfinder, it is unsharp, but when i take the picture it is almost sharp. so it is hard to say when the picture is sharpest. what is the reason?

chur_mur

1 month ago

I've been doing some macro stuff for a couple of weeks. Modified my
phone(Droid 2), and was able to take these shots.
http://www.shareapic.net/content.php?id=26244414&owner=Randomchuck
http://www.shareapic.net/content.php?id=26244415&owner=Randomchuck
http://www.shareapic.net/content.php?id=26244416&owner=Randomchuck
http://www.shareapic.net/content.php?id=26244417&owner=Randomchuck

Here are the originals and a video, too!
http://www.filefactory.com/file/4vi11bo75eo1/n/RedBug_zip

Anonymous

6 years ago

It seems a superb idea if it works. I think it is worth trying.
However, there is a concern that it might destory sencor with nasty dusts on it.
What do you think?
I’ve just been to the camera workshop to clean my censor by technician because I had lots of small black dust dots created from changing lenses even I was very caful about them.

Anonymous

3 years ago

great article. sometimes i use the nikon 50mm reversed on the nikon 105mm. which gives me a ratio which is large enough to scare the heck outta me while shooting insects. the problem, however is that the nikon 105mm i use does not have an aperture ring. manually keeps it “locked” makes it all difficult.
the other type i use is the reveresd 50mm. its great but you need a tripod or you must keep it absolutely steady. a gentle breeze is like a hurricane in this mode of shooting.
some of my macros are here,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shoken/sets/72157603498613213/

Anonymous

3 years ago

My Canon AE lens will not remain öpen”when i twist the lens off the body. When pushing down the preview button the lens apertue opens (wide as i choose that), but still closes when twisted off. AE lenses have a different approach? With an almost “closed”lens i get very small pictures ;-(

Anonymous

3 years ago

Just buy a set of macro tubes for a little bit dearer, will be worth it in the long run, instead of damaging your camera with old tins.

Anonymous

3 years ago

A quick question: What length has worked the best for you? I know a pringles can is 10 to 12 inches, and your lens is inset into that. So, a distance of 8 inches from the camera is my guess.

The reason I’m asking is that I’m attempting a similar mod but using ABS drain pipe. 2 inch, with a rubber coupler to hold lens, and fixed to Canon body mount on other end.

I have the same 50mm Canon lens, but am going to use a Minolta 50mm from my pre-digital days. It will allow aperture and, if necessary, focus ring adjustments.

Thanks for the inspiration.

Anonymous

3 years ago

Hi Rod – the length depends entirely on the magnification you’d like – but go too long, and you lose a lot of light. Start at about 5cm, and increase it from there, see what happens :)

There is a physical/optical technical explanation, but I’d suggest that trial and error is easier to understand for most of us :)

Anonymous

6 years ago

“2 to the distance” is nonsense, you mean distance to the 2nd power. and no, light does absolutely not “lose brightness” (much less ‘loose’ it) over distance. (not in a way that matters here.) what’s at work here is something very different: imagine you shine a spotlight at a wall. as you increase the distance, you increase the illuminated area, which has a width, but also a height, and is always illuminated by the same overall amount of light; thus the brightness of any fixed size area is inversely proportional not to the distance, but to the distance to the 2nd power. however, as soon as you focus or disperese the light with a lens, half of that isn’t true any longer. for example, you could stick a lens on the end of the pringles tube that projects the entire frame perfectly onto the film/sensor. this way you wouldn’t lose any light at all. the distance of the tube doesn’t matter whatsoever. it would be pointless though, as you’d get the same picture as if you hadn’t used the tube at all to begin with. what the tube does is this: it makes only a fraction of the entire frame fall onto the film/sensor. hence the magnification, but obviously the film/sensor now only gets a fraction of the available light, and we need to let the light in for a longer time span to compensate for that.

so in the end the f-stop tip is quite nice because the math checks out. but the explanation of why this is so was bogus.

now i’d also like to lift the mystery of the paradoxical utterance “anything
closer to it will result in having a longer way of light”, but i’m completely lost there.

Anonymous

3 years ago

Great work, thanks for sharing

Anonymous

2 years ago

Hi !

Thanks for great tips.
I’ll try to make my own one, as soon as possible! (:

/Fanny

PS. Visit my Webs-page to see my pictures !

Anonymous

2 years ago

I don’t believe you are really in tight budget but I do believe you are very creative. I admire the way you improvise. More power to you. I enjoyed this.

Anonymous

2 years ago

Thank you, great idea, that can be developed more and more!
for example, what if we connect two cans and put a cardboard with pinhole in it between cans as a aperture?

Anonymous

2 years ago

Great idea, I would never have thought of it. I have tons of old lenses around time to start experimenting.

Thanks again
Geoff

Anonymous

6 years ago

Pretty impressive! I guess this is basically like the Canon extender tubes, just Extreme and without electronics.

I don’t regret spending the money on the 100mm f/2.8 macro though, which is my favorite lens that I own. I recommend it!

Anonymous

2 years ago

This is a great DIY project! Not only did it give me an excuse to gorge on pringles for awhile, it gave me some nice shots (Until my dog knocked the whole tripod over, bad juju). These kinds of projects make me giddy about photography again. :)

Anonymous

2 years ago

nice handmade )))

Anonymous

2 years ago

I have had great results using a similar method, though I just hold the lenses in place my self. I recently took some macro shots of live lobsters…so much detail!

check them out on my website you all

Anonymous

2 years ago

great job on the lenss

Anonymous

6 years ago

Nice hack!

SON: Yes, this can produce very nasty sensor dust if you do not clean the inside of the can completely. Greasy crumbs will not come off the sensor with a blower and your camera will need professional cleaning if you do not clean the can well. A damp cloth should do the trick (on the can, NOT your sensor!), just be sure to pay special attention to the bottom corners of the can where all the crumbs collect.

nex: Yikes man, ease up! Not everyone speaks perfect English, and explaining a concept like the inverse square law can be difficult if English is your second language. Aside from that, thank you for clarifying that point for everyone.

hajejan: Your trick for setting the aperture is not a “reccomended” method (not that there really *is* one), but at worst the “ERR 99″ or “ERR 01″ it may produce on the camera can be cleared up by turning the camera off and back on.

Good luck and happpy hacking!

Anonymous

2 years ago

Great idea I love the pictures from it as well. Going to have a go at this myself, please keep them coming!

Anonymous

2 years ago

Typically lazy american. using equipment like dremmel and compressor etc that is more expensive than a second-hand manual-focus macro lens. Come back when you have done it the low-cost way!

Anonymous

2 years ago

Lazy american? What are you on about Ronald – I am Dutch, grew up in Norway, and live in the UK…

Anonymous

2 years ago

Great idea, I would never have thought about building my own.

Anonymous

2 years ago

this is really AWESOME stuff..!!!
GREAT writing and GREAT photos..!!!

Anonymous

2 years ago

Share your wisdom

Do you want a photo to show up with your comment? Check the spelling of your e-mail address below, and get yourself a Gravatar (Globally Recognised Avatar) account. Bonza!

Anonymous

6 years ago

This is a very interesting article with excellent results (Considering the budget). I’m sure it will be very helpful to enthusiastic photographers out there that can’t afford expensive lenses.

Anonymous

2 years ago

Share your wisdom

Do you want a photo to show up with your comment? Check the spelling of your e-mail address below, and get yourself a Gravatar (Globally Recognised Avatar) account. Bonza!

Anonymous

2 years ago

Share your wisdom

Do you want a photo to show up with your comment? Check the spelling of your e-mail address below, and get yourself a Gravatar (Globally Recognised Avatar) account. Bonza!

Anonymous

2 years ago

I really enjoy your article and have a slightly different approach for those, like me, that are less mechanically minded.

Here is a link to an article I started on using used manual focus equipment with a DSLR.

Steve

Anonymous

2 years ago

I really enjoy your article and have a slightly different approach for those, like me, that are less mechanically minded.
Here is a link to an article I started on using used manual focus equipment with a DSLR.

http://macrobellowsphotography.blogspot.com/

Steve

Anonymous

2 years ago

Share your wisdom

Do you want a photo to show up with your comment? Check the spelling of your e-mail address below, and get yourself a Gravatar (Globally Recognised Avatar) account. Bonza!

Anonymous

2 years ago

reat article. sometimes i use the nikon 50mm reversed on the nikon 105mm. which gives me a ratio which is large enough to scare the heck outta me while shooting insects. the problem, however is that the nikon 105mm i use does not have an aperture ring. manually keeps it “locked” makes it all difficult.
the other type i use is the reveresd 50mm. its great but you need a tripod or you must keep it absolutely steady. a gentle breeze is like a hurricane in this mode of shooting.
some of my macros are here, http://www.masrur.web.id

Anonymous

2 years ago

Wow, this is genius, im on a tight student budget, will try this on my nikon!!!

Thanks!

Anonymous

2 years ago

Share your wisdom

Do you want a photo to show up with your comment? Check the spelling of your e-mail address below, and get yourself a Gravatar (Globally Recognised Avatar) account. Bonza!

Anonymous

2 years ago

Just wanted to suggest, if you ever do it again, try wrapping with aluminum foil. Light proof, thin and lightweight. I have used it to lightproof windows for darkrooms.

Nice article.

Paul

Anonymous

1 year ago

Share your wisdom

Do you want a photo to show up with your comment? Check the spelling of your e-mail address below, and get yourself a Gravatar (Globally Recognised Avatar) account. Bonza!

Anonymous

6 years ago

Hi Haje,

very nice, good trick very nice pictures. I cannot resist not to try it myself!
LOoking forward for your next invention!

Arnaud

Anonymous

1 year ago

This article is 5 years old and I found it today (along with the excellent article on pinhole photography). This is amazing stuff and for cheap, suddenly a whole new world opens up and its’ like there are fireworks of ideas going off in my head.

Anonymous

1 year ago

Impressive, thanks for the tutorial, but i will stay with my 1:1 macro lens…