Scanner Nikkor 40 mm (ED) tested

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau


typestar
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:45 am
Location: Austria

Re: Scanner Nikkor 40 mm (ED) tested

Post by typestar »

Dear Enrico,

thankyou for your detailed and excellent test of the little Nikon ED Scanner lens (the lens you got from me) --

Great to know, what your test confirms and what some had supposed:
we have a really very usefull & little Nikkor without any CA problems in a tiny setup!
So, perhaps we can see soon some of your nature closeup pictures taken with this lens ... ;-)

Thankyou and good luck for your further tests,

Christian
Last edited by typestar on Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23564
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Thanks for the report. I notice that this lens has significant curvature of field. I've often wondered if scanner lenses have some curvature specifically included in the design in order to partially correct for typical curvature of film when used in glass-free mounts. Do you have any idea whether that's the case here, or how the curvature of this lens compares to the curvature of other scanner lenses?

--Rik

enricosavazzi
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 2:41 pm
Location: Västerås, Sweden
Contact:

Post by enricosavazzi »

Hi Rik,

at 1.4x and higher, there seems to be no significant curvature of field. There is instead a significant curvature of field at 1x and below, but at these magnifications the lens is outside its apparent optimal magnification. I have no way to know whether field curvature at 1x is by design, but considering that the lens magnification in the scanner is 1.33x, this does not seem likely.

Reversing the lens did not make things any better in my test. It is possible that one of the problems at low magnification is also spherical aberration caused by a sensor filter stack that does not match the lens design specifications (some 5 mm for Micro 4/3, less than 0.5 mm on the scanner sensor). The lens could already be fast enough to be sensitive to this type of problem, especially at low magnification.
--ES

enricosavazzi
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 2:41 pm
Location: Västerås, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Scanner Nikkor 40 mm (ED) tested

Post by enricosavazzi »

typestar wrote:
Dear Enrico,

thankyou for your detailed and excellent test of the little Nikon ED Scanner lens (the lens you got from me) --

Great to know, what your test confirms and what some had supposed:
we have a really very usefull & little Nikkor without any CA problems in a tiny setup!
So, perhaps we can see soon some of your nature closeup pictures taken with this lens ... ;-)

Thankyou and good luck for your further tests,

Christian
And thank you for providing this lens. There won't be much chance for field nature shots this time of the year in Sweden, but spring is only 1/3 of the year away :-)

I would rate this lens as better (especially for stacking) than Zeiss Luminars and Leitz Photars at 1.3x-3x, primarily for the lack of chromatic aberration.

Image

And a really small test pattern at 3.3x, 1:1 pixel crop on 20 Mpixel Micro 4/3, just for the fun of it.
--ES

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3417
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

enricosavazzi wrote:Hi Rik,

at 1.4x and higher, there seems to be no significant curvature of field. There is instead a significant curvature of field at 1x and below, but at these magnifications the lens is outside its apparent optimal magnification. I have no way to know whether field curvature at 1x is by design, but considering that the lens magnification in the scanner is 1.33x, this does not seem likely.

Reversing the lens did not make things any better in my test. It is possible that one of the problems at low magnification is also spherical aberration caused by a sensor filter stack that does not match the lens design specifications (some 5 mm for Micro 4/3, less than 0.5 mm on the scanner sensor). The lens could already be fast enough to be sensitive to this type of problem, especially at low magnification.
Thanks, this answers a question I was going to ask. I was hoping the lens would be reversible, so that it would be useful at ~0.7x for imaging 19mm US Cents, but it seems the field curvature at lower mags is still a problem.

mawyatt
Posts: 2497
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater, Florida

Post by mawyatt »

ray_parkhurst wrote:
enricosavazzi wrote:Hi Rik,

at 1.4x and higher, there seems to be no significant curvature of field. There is instead a significant curvature of field at 1x and below, but at these magnifications the lens is outside its apparent optimal magnification. I have no way to know whether field curvature at 1x is by design, but considering that the lens magnification in the scanner is 1.33x, this does not seem likely.

Reversing the lens did not make things any better in my test. It is possible that one of the problems at low magnification is also spherical aberration caused by a sensor filter stack that does not match the lens design specifications (some 5 mm for Micro 4/3, less than 0.5 mm on the scanner sensor). The lens could already be fast enough to be sensitive to this type of problem, especially at low magnification.
Thanks, this answers a question I was going to ask. I was hoping the lens would be reversible, so that it would be useful at ~0.7x for imaging 19mm US Cents, but it seems the field curvature at lower mags is still a problem.
Ray,

Around 0.7X wouldn't a standard macro lens like the Nikon 105mm f2.8 or Canon/Sigma/Tamron equivalent be good enough?

Best,

Mike

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3417
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

mawyatt wrote:
ray_parkhurst wrote:
enricosavazzi wrote:Hi Rik,

at 1.4x and higher, there seems to be no significant curvature of field. There is instead a significant curvature of field at 1x and below, but at these magnifications the lens is outside its apparent optimal magnification. I have no way to know whether field curvature at 1x is by design, but considering that the lens magnification in the scanner is 1.33x, this does not seem likely.

Reversing the lens did not make things any better in my test. It is possible that one of the problems at low magnification is also spherical aberration caused by a sensor filter stack that does not match the lens design specifications (some 5 mm for Micro 4/3, less than 0.5 mm on the scanner sensor). The lens could already be fast enough to be sensitive to this type of problem, especially at low magnification.
Thanks, this answers a question I was going to ask. I was hoping the lens would be reversible, so that it would be useful at ~0.7x for imaging 19mm US Cents, but it seems the field curvature at lower mags is still a problem.
Ray,

Around 0.7X wouldn't a standard macro lens like the Nikon 105mm f2.8 or Canon/Sigma/Tamron equivalent be good enough?

Best,

Mike
Well, if that were the case, then my last 8 years of effort would be a waste :wink:

There are several reasons the standard macros don't do well for imaging small coins. In fact my purchase of a 105mm VR Micro Nikkor back in 2009 is what set me on the path I am still on. The 105VR is still in my stable of lenses, but only gets used occasionally for flowers and such.

A lot of coin photographers use the longer standard macros (the Sigma 150mm is especially popular) with good results, but I've never wanted to deal with the very large systems these require.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic