These are highlights from the Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV AF3200 lens I just posted on my site. Some of the results were a nice surprise. I also ran about 10 other lenses at the same time, also at 1.4x, that I will share later.
This is the direct link to the full test on my site: https://www.closeuphotography.com/minol ... -lens-test
Thanks to all the volunteers who were able to help with proofing the AF3200 website page.
Quick AF3200 Specs:
- 35mm f/5.8
- Optimized for 1.1 x
- Good performance from 1x to 1.4x
- Low dispersion glass
- Full frame coverage
- Reasonably priced and easy to find
- Cost=<$50 (prices will vary of course)
The sample here at 1.1x looks excellent at 2500 pixels, consistent corner to corner, sharp, with no CAs. The 2500 pixel file is downsized here to 1024px. Click on the file to open a new window with the full size image.
1.4x Test
AF3200, Minolta AF-5400 lens, Scanner-Nikkor ED 7E 3/50, and Rodenstock Magnagon 5.6/75
The AF3200 lens was tested at 1.4x
Camera: Sony α6300, model # ILCE-6300, also known as: A6300
Sensor size: APS-C. 23.5 × 15.6 mm. 28.21 mm diagonal. 3.92 micron sensor pitch
Flash: Godox TT350s wireless flash x 2 with one Godox X1s 2.4G wireless flash transmitter
Vertical stand: Nikon MM-11 with a Nikon focus block
For this test a stack of images was made with 5µ (5 micron) steps and the sharpest frame was then chosen using Photoshop at 100% actual pixel view. Separate images were selected for each crop area. Each image was processed in PS CC with identical settings with all noise reduction and lens correction turned off, all settings were zeroed out (true zero) and the same settings were used for all of the images. All of the images shown here are single files.
Test disk
Crop outlines, only the below center crop is being posted below (see the full test for the other crop areas)
100% view. Below center crop. Sharpness levels are close as are the tested apertures. The Magnagon aperture was measured at f/6.0 not f/5.6 as labeled. Both lenses were mounted normally. The AF3200 performance did not change in reverse.
Click on the file to open a new window with the full size image.
100% view. Below center. Minolta AF3200, Minolta AF5400 (DiMAGE Elite 5400), and Scanner-Nikkor ED 7 element lens.
The AF3200 was the slowest, the Scanner-Nikkor was fastest. Sharpness levels match the tested apertures. Click on the file to open a new window with the full size image.
100% view. Below center crop. Canon MP-E 65mm, Minolta AF3200, and Durst Neonon 5.6/80 enlarger lens below center crop area. The AF3200 is sharpest of these 3 lenses. The MP-E was used at f/4.5, the sharpest at 1.4x. The Durst was wide open at f/5.6.
Click on the file to open a new window with the full size image.
100% view. Off center area. Canon MP-E 65mm, Minolta AF3200, and Durst Neonon 5.6/80. AF3200 was lateral CA free. Durst results are very poor, MP-E is better but not as clean as the Minolta. Click on the file to open a new window with the full size image.
100% view. Below center crop. Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual III (AF-2840), Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite II (AF-2920), Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV (AF-3200). This was a surprise. I expected similar sharpness levels. The AF3200 was the sharpest here. Click on the file to open a new window with the full size image.
Final results:
I would recommend the Minolta Scan Dual IV lens for the price. I paid less than $50 for an AF3200 scanner to extract the lens in this test. The performance is very good, better than I expected, close to the Rodenstock Magnagon 5.6/75 (with a smaller image circle).
Another surprise was that the AF3200 lens was better than the others, the AF2840 and AF2920 lenses. I didn't expect that.
The last and maybe the biggest surprise was that the Scanner-Nikkor ED 7 element lens, was the best performer, not only with the lenses in this post, but out of another 10 or so that I tested. I'll share more details from the other lenses soon.
Questions and comments welcome.
