Stacked EL-nikkor 50/2.8 on HR Digaron-S 180/5.6

[Antal]

Hi,
Just did a quick testing:
Camera: FF Canon 5D mk4
Tubelens: Rodenstock HR Digaron-S 180mm 5.6
Frontlens: EL-nikkor 50mm 4.0 reversed >>edit:sorry, it's 2.8, I shot wide open
magnification:3.6X
Stack of 25 (wasn't plane)


Alignement of sensor and TL is not very accurate,
Alignement of TL and Nikkor is bad (adapter is cardboard)
Flocking could be better.
Camera setup is not very stiff (foba colomn stand)
No sharpening or CA correction.


all (its swiss money)


center 100%


corner 100%

[ray_parkhurst]

Surprisingly good given the reputation this lens has, which I have always thought was undeserved. Coverage looks good too.

I have a 180/5.6 Rodagon I've been meaning to test as a tube lens with something. Maybe a 50mm is the ticket since the mag is just about right for what I'm looking to do next.

Edited to add: I mis-read...saw the lens was done at f4 so I thought this was the f4 version of the lens, not the f2.8 operating at f4. Question...did you try f2.8 and it was poor? I expect so, but want to confirm.

[Antal]

Surprisingly good given the reputation this lens has,

Wich lens has bad reputation?
The HR Digaron seem to me the best (non-macro) lens I ever shot with. I did a lot of high-end watch photography (mag ca. 0.7) with a 8000x6000px digiback. This lens was the only one wich gave the high quality watchmakers requested.
I just have tested the lens for the first time with my canon. It's just beautiful, very smooth gradients and so sharp without sharpening.

So I hope it was the EL-nikkor, you ment?
When I started macrophotography, it was the only lens of all my enlarger lenses wich gave acceptable result. And it was the greatest lens for b+w-enlargement in its time..

The results are not as good as expected, althout coverage is good, and CA very good. I may play around with distance between the lenses and iris. to see if I get improvement.
Anyway result is better than the MPE 65, wich I use normally for this mag

There is an error in my post, I used the EL wide open at 2.8..
Would QI benefit of stopping down? I fixed the lens with tape, so not very easy to test.

[ray_parkhurst]

Wich lens has bad reputation?

The Nikon 50/4

The HR Digaron seem to me the best (non-macro) lens I ever shot with. I did a lot of high-end watch photography (mag ca. 0.7) with a 8000x6000px digiback. This lens was the only one wich gave the high quality watchmakers requested.
I just have tested the lens for the first time with my canon. It's just beautiful, very smooth gradients and so sharp without sharpening.

Is that a Schneider, or Rodenstock, or ??

So I hope it was the EL-nikkor, you ment?
When I started macrophotography, it was the only lens of all my enlarger lenses wich gave acceptable result. And it was the greatest lens for b+w-enlargement in its time..

Yes, the 50/2.8 is a decent performer, though I'd question the "greatest lens for b+w" characterization...

There is an error in my post, I used the EL wide open at 2.8..
Would QI benefit of stopping down? I fixed the lens with tape, so not very easy to test.

Best way to answer is to try it out.

[Antal]

Is that a Schneider, or Rodenstock, or ??

It's Rodenstock.

[ray_parkhurst]

Is that a Schneider, or Rodenstock, or ??

It's Rodenstock.

Hah! I just Googled it. So you are using a $7500 (new) large format lens as a TUBE LENS for a $50 (used) enlarger lens?

[Antal]

Hah! I just Googled it. So you are using a $7500 (new) large format lens as a TUBE LENS for a $50 (used) enlarger lens?

After buying this tube lens, there was only 50$ left , so I bought the EL-nikkor! ;-))

It is actually a funny combination. As I wrote, used the Rodenstock for High-end watch photography.

Owning such a fine lens, I needed to the test it as TL.

Started with the best EL I had, but I plan to test also with the Rodagons I have, and maybe the 150 componon-S.

Just bought a Lomo 3.7 for 50$ last night, will test it also with the Digaron as TL, and also maybe with my other large format lens which is Rodenstock Apo-Macro-Sironar Digital 120mm.

I'm I right with the equation:
longer TL=higher mag
and
shorter front lens= higher mag?

[ray_parkhurst]

Hah! I just Googled it. So you are using a $7500 (new) large format lens as a TUBE LENS for a $50 (used) enlarger lens?

After buing this tube lens, there was only 50$ left , so I bought the EL-nikkor! ;-))

It is actually a funny combination. As I wrote, used the Rodenstock for High-end watchphotography.
Owning such a fine lens, I needed to the test it as TL.
Started with the best EL I had, but I plan to test also with the Rodagons I have, and maybe the 150 componon-S.
Just bought a Lomo 3.7 for 50$ last night, will test it also with the Digaron as TL, and also maybe with my other large format lens wich is Rodenstock Apo-Macro-Sironar Digital 120mm.

I'm I right with the equation:
longer TL=higher mag
and
shorter frontlens= higher mag?

Yes, generally correct. The key is to have both lenses focused to infinity. When that is satisfied, then the magnification is just the ratio of the focal lengths, m = FL(tl) / FL(obj).

I think you'll find the Lomo 3.7 a very nice lens to use, except for its lack of flat field. Normally I see a lens with curved field and sharpness drops as the field curves, but with the Lomo you can re-focus on the corners and they are sharp. Works great for stacking.

[Antal]

Did some testing of closing iris.
There is a huge improvement by stopping down the front lens from 2.8 to 5.6. Beyond IQ decreases.


@ 2.8


@5.6

[ray_parkhurst]

Did some testing of closing iris.
There is a huge improvement by stopping down the front lens from 2.8 to 5.6. Beyond IQ decreases.

At m=3.6, your effective aperture at f5.6 is f20, well into diffraction territory.

I assumed you tried f4 nominal? Was f5.6 better?

The Lomo 3.7x will be at f16 effective at 3.6x (on extension), only slightly better than the Nikon, but I expect it will be noticeably better in IQ.

[RobertOToole]

Hi Antal,

Hi,
Just did a quick testing:
Camera: FF Canon 5D mk4
Tubelens: Rodenstock HR Digaron-S 180mm 5.6
Frontlens: EL-nikkor 50mm 4.0 reversed >>edit:sorry, it's 2.8, I shot wide open

Last year I tested the 2.8/50 EL-Nikkor a few times and the performance was so poor I never bothered to post any results on my site or on this forum. The sharpness was not very impressive and the image circle is very small even stacked the results were poor compared to other lenses like Schneider 50mm enlarger lenses.

Hope this helps.

Robert

[RobertOToole]

The Lomo 3.7x will be at f16 effective at 3.6x (on extension), only slightly better than the Nikon, but I expect it will be noticeably better in IQ.

The Lomo should be much better than the EL-Nikkor on extension. The CA correction is excellent.

The Lomo 3,7 works surprisingly well on a tube lens also. I posted some test results here last summer.

Robert

[Antal]

Hi there, sunday morning and the kids are away for skiing, so it's lenstesting time!

I assumed you tried f4 nominal? Was f5.6 better?

I did, the difference was not huge, but 5.6 was better. Today I testet the 4.8 and its not possible to see any difference to 5.6

My testing with the HR Digaron as TL is ongoing.
Coverage where always perfect and CA was never an issu.
I wont show the corner details, as they are as good as the center.

So today I tested a rodagon 80mm 5.6. Mounting and alignement was very quick 'n'dirty, as I didnt expect alot from this not so great lens.


@8.0(stopping down gave better result as 5,6)
I am surprised, expected much less quality. Mag is about 2.5x

[Antal]

Next: Schneider Componon-S 210mm 5.6, a lot of glass:



@8.0 mag=0.8x
Sharpness is good, but color is not brilliant. Maybe this lens needs better lightproofness between the lenses.


Next: Sinar Sinaron digital 150mm 5.6. Its a largeformat lens made by Rodenstock, labeled by sinar:

@8.0 mag is 1.2X
I am very happy with this quality!


Next: Rodenstock Apo-Macro-Sironar 120mm 5.6. A largeformat lens again made by Rodenstock.


@8x mag 1.5X
Yeah! I like it!

What is to come: Leitz Elmar 50mm 3.5, Schneider Apo-Digitar N 60mm, Sinaron Digital 55mm and Sinaron Digital 35mm.
The last ones are largeformat-wideangle lenses, their behavor as a front lens is something unpredictable, its not what tey are build for, let's test anyway. The 35mm should give 5x.

And I need to buil a steady set-up for stacked lens wich allows quick lenschange (since there is only one mag per lens) and fast and accurate alignement.
I have already some ideas...

[Antal]

The Lomo 3,7 works surprisingly well on a tube lens also. I posted some test results here last summer.

Your testing is the exact reason why I bought the lens!