www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Lenses for use at 4-5X on an APS-sized sensor
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Lenses for use at 4-5X on an APS-sized sensor
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 17783
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:49 am    Post subject: Lenses for use at 4-5X on an APS-sized sensor Reply with quote

Here's an assortment of lenses that I've recently tested for use at 4-5X on an APS-sized sensor.

Except for the JML 21 mm f/3.5 in the back row, these are all lenses that either can be purchased new or come up fairly frequently on eBay.



They're roughly in order by overall image quality, worst at lower left, increasing across the front row, increasing again across the back row starting at left and ending up with highest quality at back right.

The test images were shot as stacks and processed through Zerene Stacker PMax to bring out difficulties in the corners. The target consisted of 600-grit silicon carbide sandpaper, scored with a spring steel pin so as to crush particles and produce lots of fine detail. The target will be described in a separate thread.

Camera-resolution images for evaluation can be found here (in order matching the above photo):

no-name achromat, commonly found on eBay shipping out of China, very small image circle, severe aberrations on sides and corners of APS sensor at 4X. This objective is advertised as DIN, but it appears to actually be JIS, with a parfocal distance of only 36 mm instead of 45 mm for DIN. As a result, the working distance is shorter than you'd think also. For our purposes, avoid this one.

Nikon E achromat. This old objective appears to be in the CF line, but it actually has obvious color fringes. It's also not very sharp in the corners. Not shown above but tested separately, the Nikon Finite Conjugate 4X sold by Edmund Optics is very similar. Avoid both of these.

AmScope plan achromat, optically similar to the Cnscope, both lenses have differences from one corner to another. With both lenses corners are softer than the EL Nikkor but the center looks better.

Cnscope Plan Achromatic, covers most of the frame with high quality image. If you need an inexpensive DIN format objective, this is well worth the price at $25. What appears to be this same lens is widely advertised on eBay shipping out of China, not always advertised as "Cnscope".

EL Nikkor 50 mm f/2.8 at f/4, more uniform across the field than any of the small objectives, but not as sharp in the middle. At typically low prices, definitely a Good Buy.

Olympus 38 mm at f/2.8. Somewhat sharper than the EL Nikkor, with more uniform corners.

JML 21 mm f/3.5, similar sharpness to the Olympus and the absence of false colors is striking. An outstanding lens, if you can snag one.

MPE-65 at f/2.8 and 4X, slightly sharper than all except the Nikon CFI combo, better uniformity especially in corners.

MP-E 65 at f/2.8 and 5X. For direct comparison with the CFI combo, next.

Nikon CFI 10X Plan Achromat on Canon 100 mm macro lens, giving 5X. This combo is much sharper than the MP-E 65, not surprising since the MP-E is running around f/16 effective while the combo is about f/10. What is surprising is that the combo holds up well clear to the corners, despite that this far exceeds the field size that the objective was designed to handle.

Comparing up and down the line, there's really not much difference in central resolution until you get up to that last combo.

Edges and corners are a different story. The small fields of the finite objectives are a bit of concern for use on bellows, since any misalignment of the front standard will shift the optical center back on the sensor. For critical work it'd probably be a good idea to check that.

I hope this is helpful.

--Rik

Edit: to add test results for the Nikon Finite Conjugate 4X sold by Edmund Optics.


Last edited by rjlittlefield on Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:54 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
harisA



Joined: 03 Jul 2011
Posts: 404
Location: Greece

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice work thank you.
Nikon cfi is far better from all others.
I was wondering if you Know the working distance of chinese 4x cnscope.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
seta666



Joined: 19 Mar 2010
Posts: 859
Location: Castellon, Spain

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice comparison; in my opinion the JML image looks better that that of the MP-E, more "clean", with less CAs but both are very good. The pupil ratio of the Olympus may affect it a little bit because of higher efective aperture but still is a very nice lens to use.
I do not own the MP-E but both the JML 21/3.5 and the Olympus 38/2.8 give great results in full frame cameras even at lower magnifications

Regards
Javier
_________________
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/seta666/
www.macrosmuymacros.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChrisRaper



Joined: 04 Oct 2011
Posts: 289
Location: Reading, UK

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent test - thanks Rik Very Happy Where does that non-name Chinese 4x Plan Achromat fit into the list?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Saul



Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 770
Location: Naperville, IL USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you very much for the article, it answered my question, what to use for 5x range !

Any information about quality of:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-10X-0-30-WD-6-5-CF-PLAN-BD-OBJECTIVE-/120642596091#ht_2424wt_1101 ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric F



Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 246
Location: Sacramento, Calif.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rik, thanks very much for bringing this info and your excellent tests together for us!

One question about the MP-E: ever since Charles' discussion on the best f-stop (at 5x) for this lens (Feb. 2007 - here), I have followed his advice and happily used f/4; you are testing this lens at f/2.8...what gives?

Eric
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 17783
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

harisA wrote:
I was wondering if you Know the working distance of chinese 4x cnscope.

15.0 mm at 4X. The Amscope has a bit more working distance at 15.7, but because of the shape of the barrel it provides slightly less angle for illumination.

ChrisRaper wrote:
Where does that non-name Chinese 4x Plan Achromat fit into the list?

Not sure I understand the question, but the objective I think you're asking about is the one I've labeled "Cnscope". That's what the web page said when I bought it, from eBay HERE. Looking closer at the ad and email, I see that "Cnscope" looks like the name of the company, not the objective. I was a bit confused by that because the eBay member id I bought from is "hunter20099". Exactly the same barrel design and markings, including the "Plan" designation is available from other sellers also.

There is also a very similar looking objective labeled "SP" (Semi Plan), available from other sellers. I have no experience with that one.

I see also that there are numerous objectives that look almost identical to the Nikon E that I tested. But they are designated Semi Plan and can be distinguished by details of the silver ring:

vs

Again I don't know anything about these.

Saul wrote:
Any information about quality of:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-10X-0-30-WD-6-5-CF-PLAN-BD-OBJECTIVE-/120642596091#ht_2424wt_1101 ?

I believe the optics in that lens are the same as the non-BD lens that I tested HERE. If so, then it's very good at 10X over an APS-sized sensor, but the image quality drops badly outside that. The lens will extend farther for magnifications above 10X, but expect the corners to go bad if you reduce the extension for lower powers. See details HERE.

Eric F wrote:
One question about the MP-E: ever since Charles' discussion on the best f-stop (at 5x) for this lens (Feb. 2007 - here), I have followed his advice and happily used f/4; you are testing this lens at f/2.8...what gives?

My MP-E 65 is sharper at f/2.8 than at f/4. Here are single frames at 5X, viewed at 200% of actual pixels.



I don't know why the difference from Charles' results. Diffferent sample, different camera. That's why all these test results should be taken for general guidance only. For critical work, you really need to test your own equipment.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric F



Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 246
Location: Sacramento, Calif.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Rik; good advice!

By the way, a lens I really like -- which we don't see often on Photomacrography -- is the Canon Macrophoto 35 f/2.8. (Dave Millard showed some tests here).

Eric

Admin edits: Link corrected.
Chris R. 4 Dec 2013
Rik L. 18 Jan 2014
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChrisLilley



Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 680
Location: Nice, France (I'm British)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great series of tests, very informative.

I note that in another thread, Rik also tested the Mitutoyo 10X NA 0.28 (working distance 33.5 mm) at 5x
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Charles Krebs



Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 5662
Location: Issaquah, WA USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice work Rik.... thanks! (and it is a lot of work to do this!)

Saul,
Quote:
Any information about quality of:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-10X-0-30-WD-6-5-CF-PLAN-BD-OBJECTIVE-/120642596091#ht_2424wt_1101 ?
Rik:
Quote:
I believe the optics in that lens are the same as the non-BD lens that I tested HERE.


The appearance is similar but the lens Saul indicated is an infinity M Plan type. (I know nothing about it's performance).


Eric:
Quote:

One question about the MP-E: ever since Charles' discussion on the best f-stop (at 5x) for this lens (Feb. 2007 - here), I have followed his advice and happily used f/4; you are testing this lens at f/2.8...what gives?
Eric... don't forget the examples I posted back in 2007 were made of a 3-dimensional subject using a 12.7Mp, full-frame (24x36mm) sensor (Canon 5D). So this minor difference does not surprise at all.
_________________
http://www.krebsmicro.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ChrisRaper



Joined: 04 Oct 2011
Posts: 289
Location: Reading, UK

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rjlittlefield wrote:
Not sure I understand the question, but the objective I think you're asking about is the one I've labeled "Cnscope". That's what the web page said when I bought it, from eBay HERE. Looking closer at the ad and email, I see that "Cnscope" looks like the name of the company, not the objective. I was a bit confused by that because the eBay member id I bought from is "hunter20099". Exactly the same barrel design and markings, including the "Plan" designation is available from other sellers also.

Thanks Rik - you're right - I just hadn't seen "Cnscope" on the ad. Smile It's interesting that it is so close to the EL-Nikkor but they have complimentary faults ... the EL-Nik being not quite as sharp in the middle but the Cnscope is worse on the edges. I think I will try a Cnscope because that central sharpness will be useful for what I am doing Smile

I wonder how some of the older lenses stack up ... like the Watson, Reichert & Vickers lenses out there? There are always more questions and more lenses to test Very Happy

EDIT: Ohh, I just thought - how about having a special subforum for equipment tests? That would be a great reference Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric F



Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 246
Location: Sacramento, Calif.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent point Charles -- thanks (I did forget about the sensor difference; I'm accustomed to an APS-C camera).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 17783
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Charles Krebs wrote:
Rik:
Quote:
I believe the optics in that lens are the same as the non-BD lens that I tested HERE.

The appearance is similar but the lens Saul indicated is an infinity M Plan type. (I know nothing about it's performance).

Oops -- good catch! I didn't scroll over far enough to see that last image. Sad

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 17783
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Diligent readers of this thread will notice that I've split off the discussion of pixel counts into a separate thread of its own: "Pixels for use at 4-5X on an APS sensor".

Please continue each discussion in its own place. Thanks!

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 17783
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I found a very good lens I would like to share with you:



This is a Nikon CFI BE Plan Achromat 4X NA 0.10, part number MRN70040, available in the US as new manufacture for normal list price of $59 at OpticsPlanet.com. I have no idea about availability in other countries. (Yes, the picture on the OpticsPlanet web page is wrong. What they're showing are CFI60 Plan Achromats. The nomenclature is very confusing. I can't even find the BE series on Nikon's own website, though it's in their price lists.)

This is an infinity objective that has to be used in conjunction with a tube lens. It's designed to deliver 4X on 200 mm, but it can be pushed cleanly down to 2.7X on a 135 mm, or even down to 2X on a 100 with some softening and a bit of transverse CA in the corners. At 2.7X and above, the image is sharp and clean corner to corner -- very nice! (Remove the black barrel covering the lens to avoid darkening of the edges & corners, especially at lower magnifications. See HERE for discussion.)

Of course you can push it to higher magnifications on a longer tube lens, or by adding a teleconverter. That works fine but it won't get you much more detail, because even at 4X the objective is already running at effective f/20.

In addition to corner-to-corner sharpness, this lens has very nice color characteristics. It's not as color-free as the JML 21, but it's hugely better than my MP-E 65 or the Olympus 38 mm. More like the Nikon CFI 10X shown in the initial post.

Sample images from this objective can be viewed at these links. (Shot with black barrel still in place as shown above.)

Nikon CFI BE Plan 4X at 4X on Vivitar 200mm

Nikon CFI BE Plan 4X at 2.7X on Vivitar 135 mm

Nikon CFI BE Plan 4X at 2X on Canon 100 mm f/2.8L USM macro

One potentially handy feature of this lens is that it can be focus stepped using the AF motor of the tube lens. In fact, the DOF of this low-mag objective is large enough that it can even be focus stepped using a front-focusing lens such as the Canon 55-200 mm f/4.5-5.6 that came as a kit lens with my first Digital Rebel. Focusing with EOS Utility, single press of "<", here's what came out.

Full frame:


Crops resized to 67% of actual pixels.



I was pleased to see no evidence of focus banding. An increment of 2 "<" might be OK, but that telephoto has a little play in the mechanism and I'm not sure that would work reliably. By the way, the spectral colors in some areas are due to the fly, not the lens. I used undiffused illumination coming from a fiber bundle over 6 inches away, so the illumination was quite harsh. See the spectral fly thread for more discussion of this issue.

Note that unlike the Nikon CFI objectives that we're most familiar with, which are CFI60's, the BE objectives use a standard DIN thread and parfocal distance. This means that BE objectives need a different adapter from the Nikon CFI 10X objective seen earlier in this topic.

I did test this objective on bellows, with no tube lens. It got soft. And anyway, it's still a 50 mm lens, so using it on empty extension would have no advantage over doing the same thing with say the EL Nikkor 50mm.

I hope this is helpful. I actually ordered this objective expecting to test it and send it back. That's not going to happen -- this one's a keeper.

--Rik

Edit: to add note about removing the black barrel to avoid darkening of edges and corners.


Last edited by rjlittlefield on Fri Sep 21, 2012 2:43 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group