Best Choice fo 1X-3X macro
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
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 ... ation-test
Here you have tests (and also one of the MP-E at the site)
http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en ... ation-test
Pau
Hi Pau;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 ... ation-test
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
Omer
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23605
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
I cannot find SumRay described on http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en ... ation-test .
But it is described near the bottom of http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en ... a-efectiva .
Search in page for Why Summar 12cm f4.5 + Raynox 12diopter becomes SumRay 50mm f1.9 .
--Rik
But it is described near the bottom of http://macrosmuymacros.com/index.php/en ... a-efectiva .
Search in page for Why Summar 12cm f4.5 + Raynox 12diopter becomes SumRay 50mm f1.9 .
--Rik
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
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
-
Online
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
Well, "better" is a complicated word.lonepal wrote:What I understood from this mtf graph is that componon-s is better than apo rodagon d 1 is it right
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.
-
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 7:01 pm
- Location: North Olmsted, Ohio, U.S.A.
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.
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.
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 3XDeanimator wrote:My execrable math skills aside, I think I'm getting about 3.5x out of it.
Pau
-
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
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
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
-
Online
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
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.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
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/v ... hp?t=19252
-
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Same experience as you Ray, I was only able to get it down to right over 2X.ray_parkhurst wrote:
Tough thing about the 35MP is getting lower magnification. When you tested it, did you go as low as 1x?
I shared this link yesterday in a post!ray_parkhurst wrote: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=19252
Great work on that one!
Robert
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.