Sharpest lenses for 0.3x...1.2x??

[ray_parkhurst]

The mag range I'm most interested in is 0.3x...1x for coin photography. US Dollars require 0.4x for full-size on APS-C, while US Cents require 0.8x and I want a bit of flexibility outside the range. I've tested a LOT of lenses over the last year or so and have found that various lines of enlarging and duplicating lenses give me the best results. The lens lines and single lenses that I'm most happy with, in order of sharpness result in the critical range I've specified, are:

Nikon Printing-Nikkor (tested 105PN and 95PN)
Nikon Apo-EL-Nikkor (tested 105AEL)
Rodenstock Apo Rodagon D (tested 75ARD1 and 75ARD2)
Rodenstock Scitex S-3 (tested all 3, 67S3, 89S3, 110S3)
Tominon E36 (tested several from 58mm to 94mm)
Kyocera E36C (tested several from 67mm to 94mm))
Schneider-Kreuznach Apo Componon HM (tested 45ACHM and 90ACHM)
Nikon EL-Nikkor (tested all from 40mm to 150mm)

My question for the forum...are there other lines of lenses, or specific single lenses, that I should look at for this magnification range?

Other lenses I've heard about but not tested are:

Zeiss 74mm S-Planar
Zeiss 60mm S-Orthoplanar
Nikon Macro-Nikkors (65mm??)
Nikon Ultra-Micro Nikkors

I owned an 85mm Repro-Nikkor for a short time but found it was not really suited for DSLR use due to excessively short register requirements.

After testing several "dedicated macro" lenses (mostly Nikon) against the list above, I've given up on all of them. The results I could achieve with the optimized lenses were far superior to all the macro lenses I've tested.

So what am I missing? I'm still searching for a few lenses listed above, but maybe there are other lines I am not aware of? How good are the Edmund Optics repro-optimized lenses?

[naturephoto1]

Hi Ray,

You may wish to consider the Leica R 60mm f2.8 Macro Elmarit with the 1:1 adapter or some Leica R extension tubes as a substitute. You can ask Harold about his impressions since he found one at a very good price and followed my recommendation. At present many of the Leica R lenses can be found at relatively reasonable prices. When the anticipated Leica camera (probably in Prototype form) which is expected to accept R lenses, makes its appearance presumably for Photokina 2012 these and other lenses may be held more dearly by their owners and the pricing may well start to increase as the camera becomes available.

Rich
_________________
Richard A. Nelridge

http://www.facebook.com/RichardANelridgePhotographer

[ray_parkhurst]

Rich...thanks for the recommendation. However, I should have prefaced this with a couple statements / limitations for coin photography:

- I've found that 75mm is about the shortest lens I can deal with due to working distance limitations and lighting flexibility
- Most dedicated macros are fairly large in diameter, so make lighting more difficult. Hence part of my gravitation toward smaller lenses without focusing arrangements
- I'm addicted to bellows

The above limits pretty much rule out dedicated macros for me. Most also have the annoying quality of shortening focal length as magnification increases. The 75mm I refer to above is effective at the magnification. Do you know what the focal length of the 60mm Leica is at 1:1?

I had not considered going with a Leica lens or camera before. Do you know if the cameras have EFSC capability? I'm finding that to be a huge benefit on the Canon I now use in place of the Nikons I used for last 2 years.

...Ray

[naturephoto1]

Hi Ray,

I do not know about the question of the focal length of the Leica 60mm f2.8 Macro Elmarit or the other questions that you have posed. I think that it has been suggested that the lens is close to 50mm at 1:1. However, I have extracted this information that I provided to Howard when he was considering the lens; I believe that should provide you with useful information:

I just made a quick and dirty set-up to provide you with some information. I used my Panasonic Lumix G1 M4/3 camera and Lumix Adapter R. I connected both my Leica R 60mm Macro Elmarit f 2.8 lens (both with and without the Macro Adapter R) as well as my Leica Bellows R with my Leica Bellows R Macro Elmar f4.0 lens to the camera by way of the Lumix Adapter R. I believe that the Macro Adapter R is 50mm in length while the 1:1 adapter that is designed for the lens (and what is coming with the lens in question) is 60mm in length.

I tripod mounted the camera and faced it toward some writing, manually focused on the screen (camera body long axis and front of the lens parallel to writing) (I did not use the fine focus adjustment on the camera but results would have been similar), made adjustments as stated and took measurements of the size of the image on the screen and took distances from the subject to the front of the lens.

Below are my findings and measurements:

Leica R 60mm Macro Elmarit f 2.8 lens:

Lens racked out to closest focus: image size on screen 25.5mm or a little larger than 1/2 life size (this is in agreement with the markings on the lens since this is past the markings for 1:2). The distance from the subject to the front of the lens was 123mm.

Leica R 60mm Macro Elmarit f 2.8 lens plus Leica Macro Adapter R (this is a different adapter than the 1:1 Adapter):

Lens at minimum focus with the Macro Adapter R used:

Image size on screen about 27mm. This is not quite be 1/2 life size with this adapter. The distance from the subject from the front of the lens with the Macro adapter R was approximately 133 mm. Using the 1:1 adapter on the lens would probably provide an image size of about 26mm or 1/2 life size when used on the lens. The distance from the subject to the front of the lens may be closer to about 130mm when using the 1:1 adapter.

Lens racked out to closest focus with the Macro Adapter R used:

Image size on screen 13mm or life size. Distance from subject to front of the lens was approximately 63mm. According to the markings on the lens, the 1:1 adapter would actually provide more magnification than life size when focused at its closest. This should result in an image size perhaps of 12mm and closer to 60mm? from the subject.

Having gone back, I do believe that my Leica Macro Adapter R may actually provides 1:1 with the lens and the information that I have provided should be quite close to what would be gotten with the Leica 1:1 adapter and quite close to the information that I have provided.

Rich
_________________
Richard A. Nelridge

http://www.facebook.com/RichardANelridgePhotographer

[ray_parkhurst]

Rich...great info...but the 63mm working distance at 1:1 is a showstopper for me. The working distance isn't actually the issue per se, it's the difficulty in getting lighting on the coin with so little room between lens and coin. I've built a few specialty diffusers that help with this but I've found I need about 100-125mm at 0.8:1 with as high an angle as I can get before direct reflection/glare sets in to get the best (IMO) lighting style...Ray

[naturephoto1]

[Peter De Smidt]

Over the next few weeks, I'll be testing a bunch of lenses at 1:1. (A Linos 75mm from an Imacon, an 80mm rodagon, 100mm Componon-s, 90mm fujinon es, 135mm el-nikkor, 150mm el-nikkor, and a Mitutoyo 2x at about 1.3.) If any of them is a standout, I'll let you know.
_________________
www.peterdesmidt.com/blog

[ray_parkhurst]

Is the Linos an Apo Rodagon D? If not, what are the markings on it? ...Ray

[TheLostVertex]

[ray_parkhurst]

Yes, I've tried various types of axial and pseudo-axial lighting. Axial lighting creates a particular "look" and is very useful for certain types of coins that have heavy toning and "deep" coloration. With a short working distance, axial may be the only practical method, but it's not my preferred "look".

Note that you are spot on with most coin photographer's desire to show luster. Axial lighting unfortunately shows virtually no traditional "cartwheel" luster. The preferred luster presentation requires a significant angle between coin and light to generate the "luster bands" that coin collectors want to see. When the coin is minted in a coining press, metal flows outward radially. Lighting the coin from an angle picks up direct reflections off the metal flow lines perpendicular to the light direction. I call these "luster mirrors" since the presentation of luster is specular reflection in contrast to dark areas where the light reflects away from the lens. This local contrast creates lots of problems for chroma and other effects at the sensor as well. But axial lighting can only reflect specularly on the entire coin surface, reducing local contrast and eliminating the "luster bands".

Another issue with axial lighting is that many coins these days are encapsulated in plastic and graded by third party grading services. The flat surface of plastic above the coin causes no end of problems with direct specular reflection off the plastic surface back to the lens, and a resulting big drop in contrast.

Ray

[Peter De Smidt]

I would be surprised if it wasn't closely related to the Rodagon Ds, but I don't know for sure.
_________________
www.peterdesmidt.com/blog

[ray_parkhurst]

Looks interesting! Did you get it from the eBay seller for $79. How is it mounted? I will be very interested to hear how well it performs...Ray

[Peter De Smidt]

Hi Ray,

Yes, that's where I got it. It doesn't have any threads on the back. It does have filter threads on the front, but I don't know what they are. I made a sleeve for it, and the sleeve mounts on an extension tube.

My early tests show that at 1:1 it works better reversed. I'm modifying my test setup a bit. When I'm done, I'll do some tests and report the results. It might be kinda hard to get a hold of another one, though.
_________________
www.peterdesmidt.com/blog

[Harold Gough]

[typestar]