The Bellows II for Macro Photography
If you happen to like working with the older Leica gear, one of the very important accessories for macro work, still adaptable to any Leica camera SM, M or R — or indeed any ILC or DSLR — is the Bellows II, 16556 (1961 – 1983). The Bellows II came with a front adapter 16558 to directly take the lens heads of 135mm f/4 Elmar and f/4.5 Hector when combined with adapter OSTRO or 16472. All these older lenses are important ones to consider, as explained shortly.
The Bellows II has an extension of 95mm, primarily designed to reach from infinity to a life-size ratio of 1:1 with a 90mm lens head. It reaches from infinity to greater than 1:1 with the 65mm head, and reaches from infinity to 1:1.5, almost life-size, with a 135 lens head. These ratios are very convenient for close-up and macro work because the bellows provide continuous focus travel without having to exchange extension tubes or front supplementary lenses to get different ratios. And the camera can be rotated from horizontal to vertical by pressing a button on the back panel of the bellows.
The extensions scale on the right side of the rail goes from zero to 95mm On the left side is an exposure factor scale for 90mm lenses only, scaled from zero down to the 4x or two-stop factor for a 1:1 macro image, needed in the days before TTL metering appeared in cameras. For any other lens, the factor can be calculated from the right-side extension scale — such as a one-stop factor for each 34mm of extension with a 135mm lens head of the earlier simple designs such as the Hector or Elmar. (A telephoto design such as the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar will require approximately 75% additional exposure due to the telephoto design. However, we can skip all that calculation if we’re using a camera with TTL metering).
On the bottom of the Bellows II is a very important improvement over the earlier Bellows I. It is a micrometer focusing knob which can move the entire bellows and camera unit back and forth over 2 inches on its lower rail for easier and more accurate focus in the macro range, without changing a given extension setting. The knob also has a focus lock for when the rig is mounted vertically, as in a copy setup.
Lenses
For more extreme macro work great depth of field is needed. At ratios approaching 1:1 and beyond the depth of field is very close to being equal regardless of the focal length of the lens, so a longer length is often preferable to provide more space between the lens and the subject for lighting and manipulation of the subject. According to published table, depth of field at 1:1 is only 2mm at f/16 regardless of focal length!
We also need a lens which has a very small minimum aperture and which stays sharp when stopped way down. There are two Leica lenses we can consider which stop down to f/32 — the 90mm f/4 Elmar and the 135mm f/4.5 Hektor. Those extra-small apertures provided means that these earlier and simpler designs have less diffraction effect at the smallest aperture than more modern lenses which are designed to produce better performance at the largest apertures. More complicated modern lenses will begin to show diffraction after f/11, so their aperture scales are often restricted to f/16. These two earlier designs only begin to show diffraction at one stop short of the minimum, so they still remain sharp at f/22, where the more modern ones should be limited to f/11. That’s two stops of possible added depth available with the older lenses, while avoiding any diffraction at the very smallest apertures. The 65mm f/3.5 Elmar-V goes down to f/22, so is still free of diffraction at f/16.
Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, a cast lead soldier bought at Warwick castle in England on a trip in 1964. He is 60mm (2.25 inches) tall, no bigger than a thumb, but very detailed and hand painted. He has suffered some by being played with by grandchildren, but still has his majestic stance seen here photographed with two different lenses on a Bellows II — left, with 65mm f/3.5 Elmar lens head, and right with 135mm f/4.5 Hector lens head in adapter OSTRO or 16472. On the film negatives the figure is 25mm high, making the ratio 1:2.4 in both pictures.
A slight difference between the two pictures can be seen: In the 65mm shot (left) the figure looks taller, with the wider lens looking more upwards at the head and downwards at the foot-plate, as though the figure was photographed with a wide angle lens at a very close distance. Which one looks more realistic? There is not much difference at half-size here, but from closer and at larger ratios the 135mm (right) looks more correct.
The lenses I have used most for macro work have been 135mm f/4.5 Hektors. The version seen here is a black enameled screw-mount example from 1949, No. 700154. It allows plenty of room between it and the subject. For instance, with the bellows set at a 67mm extension for a half life-size ratio of 1:2, there is a 17-inch space between lens and subject. With increased extension down to 1:1 the space is still a convenient 11 inches. With a 90mm lens at 1:1 distance is less than 7 inches. And with the 65mm Elmar the 1:1 distance is down to only 3 inches!
With the 65mm lens there is a progressively noticeable perspective difference with subjects at 1:2.5 or larger — looking as though the closeup was made with a wide angle lens from a close distance. So, when showing subjects down toward lifesize, the 135mm lens seems to give a more correct-looking perspective on a small subject, as seen in the photos.
metering
The two choices are either to use a TTL spot-metered camera M or R on the bellows and using that exposure, or to take a handheld incident or reflected light meter reading at the subject’s position and then adding the exposure increase factor determined from the extension scale on the Bellows II. The readings here were done handheld with a Metrastar meter in incident mode, and the exposure factor added to the shutter speed. The incident reading doesn’t get influenced by such things as a white or black background. But a gray card reading, handheld or TTL, can provide an equally accurate exposure by reflected light if there is enough room to put the card close to the subject.
Image 3
(images 3 & 4)
The two photo setups used are shown when focussed at 1:1. The camera is a Leica IIIc on Visoflex II, screw-mount version. The Visible release arm is left in the forward position to facilitate mirror tripping, and the shutter is released by a cable release directly to the camera to minimize vibration.
(image 3) In order to get the 1:1, the 135mm Hector lens head needs a little more extension. The head was taken from the adapter OSTRO and put into its lens barrel, with bayonet adapter, and attached to the front of the Bellows II using adapter plate 19596 for bayonet M lenses. (Or you can use 16590 or SM lenses). Bellows extension was set at 45mm which, combined with the mount (focus at infinity), gave the required total extension of 135mm to provide a 1:1 ratio on the ground glass of the Visoflex. Distance from the lens flange to the subject was 11 inches.
(image 4) The 65mm Elmar lens head was mounted on the front of the Bellows II using the 16558 adapter supplied with the bellows. Extension was set at 65mm to give a 1:1 ratio. Distance to the subject from the lens flange was 3.25 inches.
Image 4
Image 5
Image 6
Image 7
(images 5 & 6)
There were made with the 135mm Hector at the life-size ratio of 1:1. The pictures cover 36mm of the actual figure’s 60mm height. The depth of field at f/22 was approximately 4mm, but showing a quite slow change to blur in front of and behind the place of focus. The actual height of the Earl’s shield is 20mm, and the distance from the shield’s top face to the chest armor measures 6.5 to 7mm
(image 7)
This was made with the 65mm Elmar at 1:1. The shield is shown the same size as picture made with the 135mm, but more of the figure behind the shield can be seen due to the somewhat wider angle of view provided by the shorter focal length from the closer position. The 65mm Elmar stops down to f/22, so the picture was made at f/16 to avoid the onset of any diffraction. Notice the visibly shallower depth of field on the figure behind the shield at f/16 compared to 135mm picture made at f/22.