Lomo 3.7x Objective Extension vs Stacked Test Images

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

typestar wrote:
RobertOToole wrote: Glad you liked the results. Others mentioned the improvement wasn't exactly striking but for me the difference was more than I expected and I was really glad to see that the SK lens didn't introduce any CAs. ....
Robert, great test again -- such a tiny lens with even - visible - better results with this stacked setup... I am lucky to own the tiny russian optics...
Thanks Christian.

Yes its a great lens, the CAs, LoCAs correction is really fantastic. I need to add some CA images I shot to my site, I will share those here also.

I wonder how a direct comparison "lomo vs. Companon 2.8/28" -- stacked usage will look like... ;-)
The 2.8/35 Componon would be give me really similar magnification. I might try that. Thanks for the idea.

Robert

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

Posted a 2500 pixel image example on my site, you can click on the image below open that full size version image in a new window.

Image quality is very consistent over the entire APS-C frame.

Image

I will need to post come CA correction test images, the Lomo is very well corrected BTW.

Robert

elimoss
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2018 11:31 am

Post by elimoss »

Ever try one of those generic 4x objectives stacked [instead of pure extension]? I'm thinking it might also do pretty well. Maybe not as high res as the Lomo, but the coatings are probably more modern.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

elimoss wrote:Ever try one of those generic 4x objectives stacked [instead of pure extension]? I'm thinking it might also do pretty well. Maybe not as high res as the Lomo, but the coatings are probably more modern.
I have not done that yet, it might be better, you never know!

Some lenses I thought would not work on a tube lens, like a Tominon 17 and 35 were very good!

Robert

lothman
Posts: 959
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:00 am
Location: Stuttgart/Germany

Re: Lomo 3.7x Objective Extension vs Stacked Test Images

Post by lothman »

I just sold a Lomo 3,7x and to check that it is OK I run a stack on fullframe. Extension adjusted that magnification was slightly less than 4x, Sony A7riv. This lens even can bring good results in the corners of full frame.

Link to big file of a wafer

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Lomo 3.7x Objective Extension vs Stacked Test Images

Post by RobertOToole »

lothman wrote:
Wed Feb 16, 2022 8:42 am
I just sold a Lomo 3,7x and to check that it is OK I run a stack on fullframe. Extension adjusted that magnification was slightly less than 4x, Sony A7riv. This lens even can bring good results in the corners of full frame.

Link to big file of a wafer
Nice results Lothar, thanks for sharing.

Best,

Robert

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic