I've been working toward macro video lately. A lot. Not sure I've gotten there. I have some ideas that I am not sure are correct. Please let me know if you find my logic to be incorrect.
True macro is 1:1. That means the object photographed is captured on the film at exactly life size.
My micro 4/3 sensor is 17.3mm wide. Using a 1:1 macro lens, I should be able to take a pic of a ruler and fill the entire viewfinder screen at approx 17mm.
If I had an ultra macro lens, say a 2:1, I should be able to photograph the ruler and fill the screen with a perfectly focused area approximately 8mm wide.
Is that right?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On this page, https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews ... cro_review
near the bottom, this quote:
"We used the lens with a full-frame camera in both its full-frame and APS-C formats. A full-frame sensor measures 36x24mm, so an object as little as 18x12mm will fill the frame of a picture."
On a full frame camera, shouldn't the object be 35-36mm wide or thereabouts?
Maybe they are talking about on the APS-C format?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Also, is there a mathematical formula to figure out what ?degree? of macro you might get by using, say, a 100mm true macro lens in combination with a reversing ring? I've purchased a couple but haven't had much success with them in my experiments.
What about extension tubes?
I have some footage where I used a 400mm macro lens plus 31, 21, and 13mm 35mm extension tubes, a Canon mount to micro 4/3 adapter, and two micro 4/3 extension tubes, one 14 and one 10mm.
Is there a mathematical way to figure out the degree of "macro-ness" this combination would create?
thanks for your thoughts,
Paz