www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - How do you calculate EA on stacked lenses?
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 
How do you calculate EA on stacked lenses?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Beginners Macro
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JohnyM



Joined: 24 Dec 2013
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 2:37 pm    Post subject: How do you calculate EA on stacked lenses? Reply with quote

As in topic.

Im waiting for coupling ring to do the correct measure, but looks like when i put reversed 50 1.4 on 100 2.8 macro, i get 2:1 on infinity and more on 1:1 setting.

I assume that 2.8 is a limiting aperture so @ 2:1 its gonna be 8,4?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18166
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

EA depends on the apparent width of the limiting aperture, as seen by the sensor. If the limiting aperture is the one in the rear lens, then the front lens has no effect on EA. In your example, when the rear lens is focused at infinity and set on f/2.8, and the front lens is wide open, you'll still be at EA f/2.8. If you refocus the rear lens to its 1:1 setting, the EA will probably drop, but it won't go all the way from f/2.8 to f/8.4. Instead, it will drop only as far is if you were using the rear lens by itself, probably something in the range of f/4 to f/5.6 depending on lens design.

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



Joined: 24 Dec 2013
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see.

In my case it's 100mm:

And 50:


When focusing from oo to 1:1 front element in 100mm move forward and i guess (from exsposure difference) that its EA is 5 - which is quite not in order with EA=A*M+1 eqation?!

So if i understand correctly:
@1:1 100mm only, my EA is 5,6
@2:1 with 50 1.4, my EA is still gonna be 5,6 as front lens have no effect unless stopped down bellow f2.8?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18166
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

JohnyM wrote:
When focusing from oo to 1:1 front element in 100mm move forward and i guess (from exsposure difference) that its EA is 5 - which is quite not in order with EA=A*M+1 eqation?!

I gather from punctuation that you're surprised by the mismatch between observation and formula.

Most formulas are exact only for simplified models and special cases. The formula that EA = A*(M+1) is no exception. It is exact for an ideal thin lens that is focused solely by extension. It is also exact for a realistic thick lens that happens to have pupil ratio = 1 and is focused solely by extension. For other lenses, the formula is only a useful approximation; careful measurements will show some deviations.

Most modern macro lenses do not have pupil ratio = 1 and do not focus solely by extension. Instead it is very common, almost universal, that focus will be accomplished in part by shifting the spacing of internal elements so as to shorten the effective focal length. The nominal value of 100 mm is correct at infinity focus, but at 1:1 it's probably more like 70-80 mm. You could find out by measuring how much the magnification changes when you add extension behind the lens, while leaving its focus ring set at 1:1. In that experiment, the relevant formula -- which does happen to be exact even for real lenses -- is that:

effective FL = increase in extension / increase in magnification

For example, if you add 25 mm extension and discover that the magnification increases from 1.00X to 1.33X, then at that setting of the focus ring the effective FL is
25 / (1.33-1.00) = 75.8 mm.

Quote:
So if i understand correctly:
@1:1 100mm only, my EA is 5,6
@2:1 with 50 1.4, my EA is still gonna be 5,6 as front lens have no effect unless stopped down bellow f2.8?

That sounds right.

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



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1738
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The beauty of stacked lenses is that the EA is not f*(m+1) but just f*m, if the back lens' aperture is not limiting (and so f here refers to the aperture of the front lens). So at life size the EA is just the marked aperture of the front lens, and you save two stops of light loss and diffraction. Edit after seeing Rik's last post-- this ignores pupil magnification factor.

I wrote more about this here:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31547

and put it into practice here:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33553&start=15&sid=5103da1d7cd644a88e9e9b4635ef3ca9
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JohnyM



Joined: 24 Dec 2013
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Rik
That sounds about right, as attaching raynox dcr150 on 100mm 2.8 yelds only 1.8x which led me to belive that focal lenght changes on 1:1
Thanks.

@LouLost
Yes, i've been reading those threads as they evolved and they are really interesting but they are also a bit confusing to me. Especially the part where you've coupled 2x f2.0 lenses and then claimed it's an f1.0 lens. Now i understand that you were refering to F1.0 as... lets say new "nominal" aperture as EA is F2 in this case.

I should get coupling rings day after tommorow, seems i can get nice, cheap diffraction limited 00-> 3:1 system (00->1:1 with 100mm alone, 1:1->2:0 with raynox DCR150, 2:1->3:1 with 50mm on 100mm)!
I wonder, how will this compare to reversed componon-s 50mm on bellows which i have now.

P.S: It is weird, but seems like reversed raynox give much, much, much better results.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1738
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Now i understand that you were refering to F1.0 as... lets say new "nominal" aperture as EA is F2 in this case.


Yes, exactly.

Quote:

diffraction limited


The devil is in the details. Yes, it may not be affected by diffraction, but it will be affected by other aberrations, especially chromatic aberrations, some of which can be removed in software but some will resist Photoshop's best efforts . So you have to stop down. There is no way to know in advance how much you have to stop down. It may be that you will have to stop down so much that you lose the advantage of coupling. Need to choose carefully, and optimize the aperture carefully too. And remember to test your results by actually stacking them, not just looking at the individual images. The common green/magenta colors in the out-of-focus areas can be disturbing in single shots but vanish in the stacking. And there are big differences in PMax vs DMap so look at both. Try using RAW files and processing them to remove CA before stacking.
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1738
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
It is weird, but seems like reversed raynox give much, much, much better results.


I think it is not weird, it is expected. The Raynox is designed to go in front of a lens, facing in the direction that the lens is pointing. The principle behind reversed lenses is that optics is reversible. If an optical system makes a good image at a certain setting and distance from a subject, then you can switch subject and image and it should still work well. If your Raynox works well when mounted normally on your lens, you are maintaining that good arrangement when you reverse the whole thing (lens + Raynox).
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1738
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A successful combination I just tested at about m=2 is a reversed Sigma 70mm macro lens on a 150 mm Apo-Componon enlarging lens focused at infinity, with an 18mm paper aperture between the two lenses at the telecentric position, and with the Apo-Componon stopped down to f/5.6 . Apparently this 5.6 was not small enough to be the limiting aperture of the system, because the Zerene console log confirms that the lens was close to telecentric (scale values around 0.999). Very sharp on MFT sensor, should be even sharper-looking on a bigger sensor.
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18166
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lou Jost wrote:
A successful combination I just tested at about m=2 is a reversed Sigma 70mm macro lens on a 150 mm Apo-Componon enlarging lens focused at infinity, with an 18mm paper aperture between the two lenses at the telecentric position, and with the Apo-Componon stopped down to f/5.6 . Apparently this 5.6 was not small enough to be the limiting aperture of the system, because the Zerene console log confirms that the lens was close to telecentric (scale values around 0.999). Very sharp on MFT sensor, should be even sharper-looking on a bigger sensor.

I'm having trouble imagining the mechanics of this setup. How much separation do you have between the two lenses, and where is the aperture placed?

By the way, I don't consider scale values around .999 per focus step to be terribly close to telecentric. That's still 1 part in 1000, which would be about 2.5 pixels position shift from one frame to the next, at the edges of a 5000 pixel image. Not nearly good enough to turn off scale correction and still be guaranteed a clean result. I'd recommend tuning for 0.9998 or better .

JohnyM wrote:
I should get coupling rings day after tommorow, seems i can get nice, cheap diffraction limited 00-> 3:1 system (00->1:1 with 100mm alone, 1:1->2:0 with raynox DCR150, 2:1->3:1 with 50mm on 100mm)!
...
It is weird, but seems like reversed raynox give much, much, much better results.

Can you clarify, please... Do you mean that when you stick a Raynox DCR-150 in front of your 100 mm macro, with the macro focused at 1:1, you get better results when the Raynox is mounted with male threads toward the subject?

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



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1738
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rik, the back focal plane of the lens is a couple of mm in front of the front element of the reversed lens. To put the aperture there I built the special nested rings described here:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33588&highlight=

The inner ring can be screwed in or out to precisely position the aperture. I did have it set to a point where it gave me scaling factors much lower than 0.999 (see thread mentioned above) but then I had to change something and I haven't taken the time to re-calibrate as precisely as I'd like.

Will take some pictures of the lens arrangement now....
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1738
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is the whole set-up, with HDMI output live on my computer monitor as I stack.


The camera and lenses (there is a Fotodiox shift adapter between the Nikon PK11 extension tube and the Oly PEN F camera:



And the lenses split from each other so you can see the shelf that the paper aperture sits on:



The results (31% sharpening applied) (not hi-res mode):



100% crop:

_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
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 -> Beginners Macro All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
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