Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 Lens Test at 1.2x
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
-
RobertOToole
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Glad you found the post interesting Lou.Lou Jost wrote:I'm very glad to hear that this lens is so good. It is one that I had been curious about for a long time. Thanks for doing this work!!!
We should mention RAF and give him some credit for getting the adapter done, its going to be a lot easier to use this lens from now on.
Robert
Many thanks for this post. Very generous to share your test results with this lens.
I purchased the 5400 scanner and disassembled it easily with your instructions.
To mount the lens I b
ored out a plastic M42 body cap that can adapt to my M42 extension tubes. These plastic caps are available from camera stores and on eBay.
Before I glued it I wanted to make sure the lens was pointing in the proper direction. I checked the orientation of the lens in the scanner and concluded the end with the internal lock ring (long side from OD groves) was toward the subject and the internal flange side was toward the sensor. So that is how I will glue it.
EDIT... THIS CONCLUSION WAS INCORRECT AND THE SCANNER INSTALLATION HAS THE LENS WITH "A" TOWARD THE SUBJECT AND "B" TOWARD THE SENSOR. LENS TESTS IN BOTH ORIENTATION WILL BE SHARED WHEN THEY ARE COMPLETED. THE ORIENTATION DESCRIBED IN THIS POST IS "REVERSED".
I chose to test the lens with "hot glue" to hold it in place so that it can be easily removed if there is a problem. I'll replace the hot glue with epoxy if I am satisfied with the results.
Now comes the fun of testing this on bugs!
Hope this helps others.
Keith
I purchased the 5400 scanner and disassembled it easily with your instructions.
To mount the lens I b
ored out a plastic M42 body cap that can adapt to my M42 extension tubes. These plastic caps are available from camera stores and on eBay.
Before I glued it I wanted to make sure the lens was pointing in the proper direction. I checked the orientation of the lens in the scanner and concluded the end with the internal lock ring (long side from OD groves) was toward the subject and the internal flange side was toward the sensor. So that is how I will glue it.
EDIT... THIS CONCLUSION WAS INCORRECT AND THE SCANNER INSTALLATION HAS THE LENS WITH "A" TOWARD THE SUBJECT AND "B" TOWARD THE SENSOR. LENS TESTS IN BOTH ORIENTATION WILL BE SHARED WHEN THEY ARE COMPLETED. THE ORIENTATION DESCRIBED IN THIS POST IS "REVERSED".
I chose to test the lens with "hot glue" to hold it in place so that it can be easily removed if there is a problem. I'll replace the hot glue with epoxy if I am satisfied with the results.
Now comes the fun of testing this on bugs!
Hope this helps others.
Keith
Last edited by BugEZ on Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Glue job, internal flocking, bayonet to screw mount extension tubes.
EDIT: THIS SHOWS THE "REVERSED" ORIENTATION.
I'll make a small cylindrical black construction paper lens hood to prevent any side light from striking the lens.
Tests to follow!
Keith
EDIT: THIS SHOWS THE "REVERSED" ORIENTATION.
I'll make a small cylindrical black construction paper lens hood to prevent any side light from striking the lens.
Tests to follow!
Keith
Last edited by BugEZ on Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I could be wrong, but Robert seemed to be using A towards the subject and B towards sensor in his rig set up photo. I don't know if he did that on purpose.BugEZ wrote: In the figure below, "A" is toward the sensor, "B" toward the subject.
Does imaging orientation matter for this lens? I am just curious. Thanks.
Selling my Canon FD 200mm F/2.8 lens
-
RobertOToole
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Hi Zzffnn,zzffnn wrote:I could be wrong, but Robert seemed to be using A towards the subject and B towards sensor in his rig set up photo. I don't know if he did that on purpose.BugEZ wrote: In the figure below, "A" is toward the sensor, "B" toward the subject.
Does imaging orientation matter for this lens? I am just curious. Thanks.
It did seem to perform better with the paint mark towards the subject but I am going off memory. Its always best to try it both ways and go with the direction that is sharpest.
You see the factory lens set-up here:
https://www.closeuphotography.com/minol ... s-removal/
Robert
Regarding the orientation of the lens and the distance from the lens to the sensor:
Prior to installing my lens in the plastic body cap and gluing, I checked the orientation in the scanner. I did not have as good a photo as Robert made in his excellent on-line info, but I did make a scanner disassembly movie of me pulling the housing, removing the thin black shield and backing out the two screws that fasten the lens. In the movie I switched the lens from hand to hand several times and peered through the lens using it as a magnifying glass (it is an excellent low power hand lens by the way!). I could not convince myself viewing the movie which was the original orientation so I did a mechanical fit check and compared the glue marks on the lens barrel (some of the loctite from the screws spread to the lens body) with the sheet metal bracket. I found the lens mounts most securely (in my opinion) with the groves in the thin flanges in the scanner plastic housing aligning with the groves and end faces of the lens. This puts the paint mark toward the sensor. Being a mechanical engineer that designed parts to prevent incorrect assembly, I mentally congratulated the scanner designers for this "mistake proofing" then turned the lens that way in my body cap adapter. After Robert replied above suggesting it was the other way round I went back to the movie and watched it on a larger screen and not in the camera's viewfinder. Indeed the paint mark "as built" was visible and was toward the subject (exactly as Robert shows). Thus the lens was exactly opposite of what I posted above. So much for mistake proofing!!(??) My bad! The flanges in the plastic housing must be to insure the lens is aligned with the axis and not trapped axially. The metal clip and Loctite are adequate to trap it axially.
Having made this goof, I will go ahead and edit my previous posts.
In the figure below the paint mark (PM) or side A is toward the subject, the B side toward the sensor. Exactly as Robert shows.
This figure adds the "paint mark" to the figures in the post so you don't have to jump to Robert's website.
I tested the lens with the paint mark toward sensor (opposite of scanner orientation) and got good results. I was surprised how bright the lens is as I had to dial down the intensity of the "bucket light" LEDs well below the intensity I typically use with my UKA 29mm lens which has a similar focal length and body diameter. I found the scanner lens to be very sharp, and it had good contrast. I would have happily left the lens reversed based on the good performance, but now I am curious how it will turn out in the original orientation. I look forward to seeing what happens! I am glad I used hot glue which can be easily removed.
For the record, I tested (reversed orientation) with the distance from the inside edge of the lens housing to the sensor of 118mm and 92mm. (Note the sensor in my camera is 45.5mm from the lens body flange) The measured distance in the scanner from the inside of the lens to the sensor is ~ 85mm.
I'll perform some more tests after I reverse the lens to the scanner orientation.
Keith
Prior to installing my lens in the plastic body cap and gluing, I checked the orientation in the scanner. I did not have as good a photo as Robert made in his excellent on-line info, but I did make a scanner disassembly movie of me pulling the housing, removing the thin black shield and backing out the two screws that fasten the lens. In the movie I switched the lens from hand to hand several times and peered through the lens using it as a magnifying glass (it is an excellent low power hand lens by the way!). I could not convince myself viewing the movie which was the original orientation so I did a mechanical fit check and compared the glue marks on the lens barrel (some of the loctite from the screws spread to the lens body) with the sheet metal bracket. I found the lens mounts most securely (in my opinion) with the groves in the thin flanges in the scanner plastic housing aligning with the groves and end faces of the lens. This puts the paint mark toward the sensor. Being a mechanical engineer that designed parts to prevent incorrect assembly, I mentally congratulated the scanner designers for this "mistake proofing" then turned the lens that way in my body cap adapter. After Robert replied above suggesting it was the other way round I went back to the movie and watched it on a larger screen and not in the camera's viewfinder. Indeed the paint mark "as built" was visible and was toward the subject (exactly as Robert shows). Thus the lens was exactly opposite of what I posted above. So much for mistake proofing!!(??) My bad! The flanges in the plastic housing must be to insure the lens is aligned with the axis and not trapped axially. The metal clip and Loctite are adequate to trap it axially.
Having made this goof, I will go ahead and edit my previous posts.
In the figure below the paint mark (PM) or side A is toward the subject, the B side toward the sensor. Exactly as Robert shows.
This figure adds the "paint mark" to the figures in the post so you don't have to jump to Robert's website.
I tested the lens with the paint mark toward sensor (opposite of scanner orientation) and got good results. I was surprised how bright the lens is as I had to dial down the intensity of the "bucket light" LEDs well below the intensity I typically use with my UKA 29mm lens which has a similar focal length and body diameter. I found the scanner lens to be very sharp, and it had good contrast. I would have happily left the lens reversed based on the good performance, but now I am curious how it will turn out in the original orientation. I look forward to seeing what happens! I am glad I used hot glue which can be easily removed.
For the record, I tested (reversed orientation) with the distance from the inside edge of the lens housing to the sensor of 118mm and 92mm. (Note the sensor in my camera is 45.5mm from the lens body flange) The measured distance in the scanner from the inside of the lens to the sensor is ~ 85mm.
I'll perform some more tests after I reverse the lens to the scanner orientation.
Keith
comparison photos
With the shorter stack of extension tubes, the lens does much better in the "forward" direction with the paint mark toward the subject.
I made comparison images of a dead fly from my bone yard complete with some adornment from a passing spider.
All images processed from raw with identical settings for contrast and then through Zarene in the DMAP mode.
I am glad I shifted the lens to the "forward" direction. It is considerably sharper.
Keith
With the shorter stack of extension tubes, the lens does much better in the "forward" direction with the paint mark toward the subject.
I made comparison images of a dead fly from my bone yard complete with some adornment from a passing spider.
All images processed from raw with identical settings for contrast and then through Zarene in the DMAP mode.
I am glad I shifted the lens to the "forward" direction. It is considerably sharper.
Keith
-
RobertOToole
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Good job. I never thought about showing that kind of result even though I ran the same type of comparison.BugEZ wrote:comparison photos
With the shorter stack of extension tubes, the lens does much better in the "forward" direction with the paint mark toward the subject.
I made comparison images of a dead fly from my bone yard complete with some adornment from a passing spider.
All images processed from raw with identical settings for contrast and then through Zarene in the DMAP mode.
I am glad I shifted the lens to the "forward" direction. It is considerably sharper.
Keith
What was the magnification?
Lou is right about the orientation and magnification.
Have you thought about RAF's adapter, my unit is still stuck in Customs, they dont like my shipment for some reason!
They are on Rafs site for $27: https://www.rafcamera.com/adapter-18mm-id-to-rms-male
and Ebay for $31 free shipping: https://www.ebay.com/itm/18mm-ID-to-RMS ... 2715074539
The RAF unit should allow you to swap orientation in a 2 seconds.
Robert
-
Onlineray_parkhurst
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
-
Smokedaddy
- Posts: 1965
- Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
- Location: Bigfork, Montana
- Contact:
Comparison of Forward vs Reversed with a bit longer extension
I have now tested with two extensions (118mm and 92mm from the back of the lens to the sensor). These configurations are basically shown in my previous post above with the scanner lens attached to the plastic cap with hot glue. The first comparison with the 92mm extension (magnification ~ 1.7 on APS C sensor) showed the "forward" orientation of the lens (paint mark on lens toward the subject, same orientation as in the scanner) produced sharper images.
Tests with 118mm extension (magnification ~ 2X on APS C sensor)
Eye surface
lower antenna
The testing with the longer extension also produced sharper images with the forward lens orientation. This is not surprising as the magnification did not change very much. Were I to shift to slight reduction rather than magnification (a bigger fly!) then the best orientation might change.
I am very happy with the sharpness of this lens. In my examination of the individual stack images I was surprised how much detail of the retina I could extract from them.
ray_parkhurst, RobertOToole, and Lou Jost have reminded me that a flexible mounting arrangement may be best as it allows the lens to be swapped end for end. A very good point. Currently I don't think I need that. My subjects are small and I expect to use it to magnify (3X-1.5X). But my lens is anchored with soft "hot glue" and only requires ~ 10 minutes to extract and reattach. If others find a magnification that works best reversed, I may want to retool.
Once again, many thanks for sharing this lens discovery and for all the testing and configuring done by others!
Keith
I have now tested with two extensions (118mm and 92mm from the back of the lens to the sensor). These configurations are basically shown in my previous post above with the scanner lens attached to the plastic cap with hot glue. The first comparison with the 92mm extension (magnification ~ 1.7 on APS C sensor) showed the "forward" orientation of the lens (paint mark on lens toward the subject, same orientation as in the scanner) produced sharper images.
Tests with 118mm extension (magnification ~ 2X on APS C sensor)
Eye surface
lower antenna
The testing with the longer extension also produced sharper images with the forward lens orientation. This is not surprising as the magnification did not change very much. Were I to shift to slight reduction rather than magnification (a bigger fly!) then the best orientation might change.
I am very happy with the sharpness of this lens. In my examination of the individual stack images I was surprised how much detail of the retina I could extract from them.
ray_parkhurst, RobertOToole, and Lou Jost have reminded me that a flexible mounting arrangement may be best as it allows the lens to be swapped end for end. A very good point. Currently I don't think I need that. My subjects are small and I expect to use it to magnify (3X-1.5X). But my lens is anchored with soft "hot glue" and only requires ~ 10 minutes to extract and reattach. If others find a magnification that works best reversed, I may want to retool.
Once again, many thanks for sharing this lens discovery and for all the testing and configuring done by others!
Keith
Aloha