www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Best Choice fo 1X-3X macro
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 
Best Choice fo 1X-3X macro
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Macro and Micro Technique and Technical Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
lonepal



Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 154
Location: Turkey

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi;

Ray said;

If you will use APS then 1X is better. It has better center resolution than 2X.
If you will use FF then 2X is better. It has a bigger image circle and bigger coverage.

These comments are for 1X-3X magnification.
_________________
Regards.
Omer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pau
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Jan 2010
Posts: 3998
Location: Valencia, Spain

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm very satisfied with both 75/4 (1X) and 75/4.5 (2x) Apo Rodagon D but I'm not at all a lens tester.
Here you have tests (and also one of the MP-E at the site)
http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en/comparative/low-magnification-test
_________________
Pau
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lonepal



Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 154
Location: Turkey

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pau wrote:
I'm very satisfied with both 75/4 (1X) and 75/4.5 (2x) Apo Rodagon D but I'm not at all a lens tester.
Here you have tests (and also one of the MP-E at the site)
http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en/comparative/low-magnification-test


Hi Pau;

I read the comparation, thanks.

When I check the 5X APS-C test on the macrosmuymacros I saw a lens named ''SumRay 50mm f1.9''. I searched for more information but there is no information on the net also ebay. Is this a miswriting? I am very curious about this lens because it outresolves MPE.. Interesting..
_________________
Regards.
Omer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pau
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Jan 2010
Posts: 3998
Location: Valencia, Spain

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I saw a lens named ''SumRay 50mm f1.9''. I searched for more information but there is no information on the net also ebay. Is this a miswiriting? I am vey curious about this lens because it autresolves MPE.. Interesting..

It's a lens combo explained at the end of the very same page
_________________
Pau
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18235
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I cannot find SumRay described on http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en/comparative/low-magnification-test .

But it is described near the bottom of http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en/component/content/article/9-content/articles/6-la-abertura-efectiva .

Search in page for Why Summar 12cm f4.5 + Raynox 12diopter becomes SumRay 50mm f1.9 .

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



Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 154
Location: Turkey

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pau, Rik Thanks.
I thought that it is a different lens Smile
I understood that it is a combination of Summar 120 and Raynox.
Very interesting.
_________________
Regards.
Omer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChrisR
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 7251
Location: Near London, UK

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have a look at http://coinimaging.com/lens_compare.html

You can pick different comparisons to reveal/ hide various things, and his test conditions aren't what anyone else would choose, but eg

_________________
Chris R
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lonepal



Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 154
Location: Turkey

PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 3:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I understood from this mtf graph is that componon-s is better than apo rodagon d 1 is it right Smile
_________________
Regards.
Omer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ray_parkhurst



Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 1073
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lonepal wrote:
What I understood from this mtf graph is that componon-s is better than apo rodagon d 1 is it right Smile


Well, "better" is a complicated word.

The graph below (also from Mark's site) puts another perspective on the comparison:



Note that the 50CS does not cover even APS-C well at 1:1. Its slightly better sharpness (MTF50) in previous graph is offset by a 60% drop in sharpness at the corners at 1:1.

Conversely, the 75ARD1, while it does very well around 1:1, drops off in corner sharpness above this. Extrapolating the graph to 3:1 where you want to use it, the lens has perhaps 60% corner sharpness reduction. In comparison, the 50CS is coming into its element, and at 3:1 has only 10% reduction in corner sharpness.

So if you're looking for good corner sharpness across the full 1x-3x range, in reality neither the 75ARD1 nor the 50CS would be a good choice. More likely the 75ARD2 would be superior.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Deanimator



Joined: 23 Oct 2012
Posts: 367
Location: Rocky River, Ohio, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm using a Minolta 50mm manual lens reversed onto two sets of extension tubes. The lens came from my 35mm Minolta XG-1 purchased in Korea in '81.

I do almost exclusively indoor macro, and for that it's working out well.

My execrable math skills aside, I think I'm getting about 3.5x out of it.

I use a Wemacro rail as the depth of field is infinitesimal and manual stacking with my generic manual rail would be excruciating.

Reversed manual film lenses are a very economical way to get to relatively high magnifications.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pau
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Jan 2010
Posts: 3998
Location: Valencia, Spain

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deanimator wrote:
My execrable math skills aside, I think I'm getting about 3.5x out of it.

The easier and more accurate way to know the magnification is to directly measure it: take a picture of a ruler parallel to the sensor long side and just divide the sensor width by the ruler image width, for example if you use a 24mm wide sensor and the image is 8mm wide you're shooting at 3X
_________________
Pau
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RobertOToole



Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 401
Location: United States

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just caught this thread.

1-3X

Years and years ago I ran a comparison of the Canon MPE65 vs the MP35 and posted the results here on the forum. The Canon 35mm from the 1980s was sharper than the MPE65.

From 2x to 3x its going to be hard to beat especially in the corners.

The links on the post are broken since they linked to my old site.

28mm lenses vs the MP35

On another comparison, also from a few years ago, I shot the Schneider Componon 28mm f/4 old and new versions, Componon 28mm f/2.8, Rodenstock Rodagon 28mm f2.8, 28mm f/4, and Canon MP35 at 2-3X (I forget the exact mag).

The Canon MP35 was so far ahead it wasn't even much of a contest.

All sold

After seeing the results, I sold all the lenses except for the MP35, although I might have a SK 28/4 or two lying around someplace.

In the center the old SK was very sharp but with all the 28s, the corners were very weak. It was interesting that the newer lenses had more contrast but the older designs were just as sharp in the middle.

I would share the results again now but they were posted on my old site and I don't have access to those old images at the moment.

4X

Planning on running a 4X test soon, first objectives than lenses, then objectives vs lenses.

Also I plan to throw in the Componon 28mm and Canon MP20 and MP35 and MPE65 to make things interesting.

Any suggestions at 4X, let me know.

Robert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ray_parkhurst



Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 1073
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RobertOToole wrote:
Just caught this thread.

1-3X

Years and years ago I ran a comparison of the Canon MPE65 vs the MP35 and posted the results here on the forum. The Canon 35mm from the 1980s was sharper than the MPE65.

From 2x to 3x its going to be hard to beat especially in the corners.

The links on the post are broken since they linked to my old site.

28mm lenses vs the MP35

On another comparison, also from a few years ago, I shot the Schneider Componon 28mm f/4 old and new versions, Componon 28mm f/2.8, Rodenstock Rodagon 28mm f2.8, 28mm f/4, and Canon MP35 at 2-3X (I forget the exact mag).

The Canon MP35 was so far ahead it wasn't even much of a contest.

All sold

After seeing the results, I sold all the lenses except for the MP35, although I might have a SK 28/4 or two lying around someplace.

In the center the old SK was very sharp but with all the 28s, the corners were very weak. It was interesting that the newer lenses had more contrast but the older designs were just as sharp in the middle.

I would share the results again now but they were posted on my old site and I don't have access to those old images at the moment.

4X

Planning on running a 4X test soon, first objectives than lenses, then objectives vs lenses.

Also I plan to throw in the Componon 28mm and Canon MP20 and MP35 and MPE65 to make things interesting.

Any suggestions at 4X, let me know.

Robert


Tough thing about the 35MP is getting lower magnification. When you tested it, did you go as low as 1x? My "shootout at 2.4x" was done at 2.4x because on bellows I could not get the 35MP any lower! I wanted to use a similar setup for all the shots so had to find the lowest common denominator. Of course it is possible to get to 1x, but the lens must be mounted almost directly to the camera. What I am curious about is if you did this, how did its 1x performance compare to the 65MPE? I suspect it does not have wide coverage at 1x, but would love to be proven wrong. On the Photography in Malaysia page, it states the 35MP is used for 2-6x. Same page states the 20mm is used for 4-10x, so it might do well at 4x in your tests. Its small-ish aperture may give some issues against some of the more exotic lenses available today, but I have not tested this.

My first shootout was in the 4x-6x range. It included the 20MP, 35MP, and several others. The 20MP was really good:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19252
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RobertOToole



Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 401
Location: United States

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ray_parkhurst wrote:


Tough thing about the 35MP is getting lower magnification. When you tested it, did you go as low as 1x?


Same experience as you Ray, I was only able to get it down to right over 2X.


ray_parkhurst wrote:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19252


I shared this link yesterday in a post! Very Happy

Great work on that one!

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



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 1798
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been using higher-resolution MFT sensors to test these lenses, including the Canon 35MP, and I found that the 35MP was definitely limited in resolution by its small aperture. I can get better resolution with lens stacking, but at the price of some ghosting/flare. I am still searching for the ideal lens combinations, inter-lens distances, and apertures.
_________________
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 -> Macro and Micro Technique and Technical Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
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