Mugly,

I have a $600 camera that ran about $1000 with lenses. That means no money left over for other things for the camera. Right now my rate is about one piece of camera equipment a year. Something that gives me eq faster seems pretty nice. Still, I don't anticipate trying this any time soon.

Columcille

i would think if you had a thousand dollar camera you couldn't be on too much of a budget

MuglyTheWorm

Well, I strongly think that thing is hideous. I can just wait for the look on people's faces when they go "Oooh, look, it's a professional photographer taking a picture of a pretty flower... is that a Pringle's can???!?!??!?!

Brad

Oh, also, previews link doesn't work.

Undead-Fox

Lifehacker seems to be a bit off on good ideas today...

Undead-Fox

"Oooh, look, it's a professional photographer taking a picture of a pretty flower... is that a Pringle's can???!?!??!?!"
It could easily be spray-painted black,or covered in something to make it look somewhat more professional.
I think that this is a great money saver, as just the camera set-up alone will set you back a good amount of cash.

marc.j

Though -1 on dead link :(

Bobly

No offense but I know a couple of students who've invested in a DSLR but probably can't afford the luxury of spending another load on an item reserved for macro photography, this could easily fill that gap... I say +1 :D

Bobly

i was going ask to link my site, but i think i wont bother now. hahaha.

markaduffy

looks like his files where deleted off. Lifehacker strikes again!

markaduffy

Shoulda bought a better web server. ;-)

Sean Robertson

@Xaro: Yep, Google does. Sadly, no photos, so fairly pointless.

[74.125.95.104]

UnStatusTheQuo

dead link, anyone has a mirror?

Xaro

If the pictures come out good who care what anyone thinks while you're taking them?

JustinD.

Eh...no!

RonnyNussbaum

Yeah, getting a disgusting, greasy tube near my camera is not appetizing (yuk yuk) at all.

Especially when a nice cheap set of extension tubes can be had for like $10 on eBay...with shipping.

atanguay

@Brad: Brad, who said anything about professional?

@Columcille: I second that thought. After spending all that money on a camera and lenses... its easy to be broke enough to be using a pringles can. This project can definitely be cleaned up some and look nicer but its a nice hack for making something cheap and DIY. Especially something like a macro lens, which is something you dont need everyday so to buy a "real" one for a couple hundred bucks may not be worth it.

joeny1980

@Brad: Spray-Paint much? A quick coat of black or silver quickly eliminates any cosmetic issue.

Overheal

Yes, it's hideous. If you're going to let other people's judgment of what looks professional interfere, then buy a professional macro lens. But for the rest of us, it's a great way to try some macro work.

The principle is sound -- a reversed lens on bellows for extension tube is a time-honored way to get quality macro optics on the cheap.

moe52

Reverse adapter rings are just a few dollars on ebay...soo why don't you just get those? But this is a cool idea.

j12

@Brad: black spraypaint

Gstein

I bought a reversing ring for $5 shipped on ebay. Then I bought a bellows for $30 shipped on ebay. So I have two macro options for less than $50. I would rather have something made for it than a jury-rigged pringles tube. Plus that would require eating the pringles and I don't do that!

Ethan Halko!

I don't need this. I hold my 50mm in reverse in front of my other short focal length lens and get the same effect.

D0rk

@Brad: what does it matter what kind of tool the photographer uses?? why does everyone has to be so hell bent on image? [no pun intended] oh no, a pringles can. end of the world.

Avolition

marc.j: It could easily be spray-painted black,or covered in something to make it look somewhat more professional.

No

You have to spray paint it white and put a red ring around it ;)

lordargent

Brad: "Oooh, look, it's a professional photographer taking a picture of a pretty flower... is that a Pringle's can???!?!??!?!

:)

/Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

lordargent

I think this is awesome and am not sure why people are being so snobbish about a DIY project. I love free information like this and hope people continue to post more tips like this! The photography is beautiful too.

jordan314

@Brad: I think that professional photographers don't really hear much of anything when they're concentrating on a subject. Besides, a Pringles can works great; Fritos bags and Snickers wrappers just don't seem to cut it.

Chef

As an artistic alternate to macro photography, I've seen some really cool images created using a flatbed scanner on 3D objects (like flowers). Just lay the object on the scanner (don't close the lid and crush it!), leave the room lights on (creates a black background), scan, then check out the amazing detail in the resulting image.

Also makes great custom powerpoint backgrounds, due to the black background around the object.

bobbo33

@lordargent:

I have that same lens -- it's a beautiful piece. I end up using it for a ton of shots, close up or not just because it's so sharp.

OX4

whats funny is that people will spend thousands on cameras and lenses and think that makes them a great photographer, and someone else can take a $199 camera from bestbuy and wipe the floor with them.

caedus

@caedus:

I think it all depends on how good the photographer is.

You might be right saying that somebody could take a point'n'click camera and beat somebody with their expensive camera, but it just goes to show that the person with the nice camera simply has a pocket full of cash.

Khaavren

Man, some people are lazy. Why NOT do this, if you can, and it saves you some money? It's a fun project, it might teach me something. Someday when I'm able to afford a proper macro lens I'll still be glad I tried this out.

Tymian

"By hollowing out the can..."

It's a can. Already hollow, innit?

That pedantic nit-picking out of the way, sounds like a cool idea. Kind of like looking through the wrong end of binoculars when you need a magnifier. (Seriously, it works. I've used it to help remove splinters.)

Roy Jacobsen

@Roy Jacobsen: Actually the writer is more pedantic than you by specifying that you actaully have to remove the chips from the can.

Troy F.