High-end 1x Lens Test: Looking for Suggestions Please

[ray_parkhurst]

The particular Photoshop adjustment I tried was suggested by Rik Littlefield. To quote his email: "In comparison, your Micro Nikkor 105 does best at reported f/11. Assuming that means effective f/11, there should still be enough detail in the optical image to outresolve your sensor, albeit at reduced contrast. That being the case, it makes sense to attack with a strong but small sharpening filter, to push up the tail of the MTF curve. I would be interested in your thoughts about how the Micro Nikkor 105 plus a Photoshop USM 100% 0.7 pixels compares to the camera's direct capture from the Printing Nikkor."

I believe this is the same method used by Canon on the 5DSR to create their "fine detail" mode. When I tested the 5DSR I discovered that my T2i could produce images just as sharp using the same sub-pixel sharpening. It's a good tool for getting the most out of an image taken in that diffraction "grey zone".

I'm fairly certain the PN would win...

I guess we will find out soon. With the A7Riii Robert has a tool which can look a bit deeper into the compo than has been published here before. I started down the path of using a 2x teleconverter but it is only useful for center of the image. Even by corners of APS-C I found the aberrations of the teleconverter were dominant. If the A7Riii compo works it should give results to the corners of FF, which would be a very useful result.

[mawyatt]

The particular Photoshop adjustment I tried was suggested by Rik Littlefield. To quote his email: "In comparison, your Micro Nikkor 105 does best at reported f/11. Assuming that means effective f/11, there should still be enough detail in the optical image to outresolve your sensor, albeit at reduced contrast. That being the case, it makes sense to attack with a strong but small sharpening filter, to push up the tail of the MTF curve. I would be interested in your thoughts about how the Micro Nikkor 105 plus a Photoshop USM 100% 0.7 pixels compares to the camera's direct capture from the Printing Nikkor."

I believe this is the same method used by Canon on the 5DSR to create their "fine detail" mode. When I tested the 5DSR I discovered that my T2i could produce images just as sharp using the same sub-pixel sharpening. It's a good tool for getting the most out of an image taken in that diffraction "grey zone".

I'm fairly certain the PN would win...

I guess we will find out soon. With the A7Riii Robert has a tool which can look a bit deeper into the compo than has been published here before. I started down the path of using a 2x teleconverter but it is only useful for center of the image. Even by corners of APS-C I found the aberrations of the teleconverter were dominant. If the A7Riii compo works it should give results to the corners of FF, which would be a very useful result.

Ray,

I used a Nikon TC 1.4II with the PN105 to keep the PN at the "design center" per Lou's suggestion, this produced a very good result at 1.4X. Then I tried a Nikon 1.7X and Tamron 2X TCs and the result began to degrade, with the 2X not good at all.

Think the PN is so good that any glass added will degrade the IQ, with the 1.4X not degrading enough for me to notice but the 1.7X was noticeable and the 2X not good. Of course the IQ of the TC plays into this as the 1.4X is the best and the 2X the worst.

Best,

[ray_parkhurst]

I used a Nikon TC 1.4II with the PN105 to keep the PN at the "design center" per Lou's suggestion, this produced a very good result at 1.4X. Then I tried a Nikon 1.7X and Tamron 2X TCs and the result began to degrade, with the 2X not good at all.

Think the PN is so good that any glass added will degrade the IQ, with the 1.4X not degrading enough for me to notice but the 1.7X was noticeable and the 2X not good. Of course the IQ of the TC plays into this as the 1.4X is the best and the 2X the worst.

In my use of the 2x teleconverter I was not planning on publishing anything at full size. The idea was to shoot with the TC, then downsize by 2x as a way to improve the IQ at the original size. This has the effect of reducing false colors and reducing demosaicing issues (such as filling-in the interpolated color matrix). I still may do this even though it doesn't help with interpreting corners, but it's on the back burner. Of course if the A7Riii or Oly pixel shift can give similar results, that's an easier course.

[ray_parkhurst]

I just remembered about another 1:1 optimized lens I own that I have not fully tested...the 75mm Schneider Apo-Artar HM 1:1. Now I have to test it, but it's another one of those "never seen one for sale before" lenses. I guess I have a few of them, though still looking for that elusive 75PN.

[rockycarter]

RobertOToole hello robert, I was just wondering if you have ever tested the 90 mm sony macro lens. The lens i would like to see how they compare is against. The sigma 105 mm macro lens. The reason i ask is i am thinking about purchasing one of these lens. Your tests are outstanding. I have watched some videos where comparison have been done. There tests are no where near your work.I hope you do not mind my asking this. thank you in advance

[Macro_Cosmos]

I guess we will find out soon. With the A7Riii Robert has a tool which can look a bit deeper into the compo than has been published here before. I started down the path of using a 2x teleconverter but it is only useful for center of the image. Even by corners of APS-C I found the aberrations of the teleconverter were dominant. If the A7Riii compo works it should give results to the corners of FF, which would be a very useful result.

Yeah, with the use of TCs or extension, the PN105's qualities are degraded. The further one gets from 1:1, the worse it gets. I ran a quick comparison here: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=39123

There's also a 3.5x Rayfact lens, I hope some surplus units gets out soon... would love to get my hands on a copy.

[ray_parkhurst]

Yeah, with the use of TCs or extension, the PN105's qualities are degraded. The further one gets from 1:1, the worse it gets. I ran a quick comparison here: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=39123

There's also a 3.5x Rayfact lens, I hope some surplus units gets out soon... would love to get my hands on a copy.

Just to be clear, I did not plan to run at higher magnification. The teleconverter was to be used to mitigate the Bayer/AA filter/false color issues. Plan was to shoot with the TC, then down-size the image by the TC ratio, resulting in the original magnification. This is analogous to what the A7Riii does in pixel shift mode, but instead of looking at sub-pixel detail, it spreads the information across multiple pixels, then downsizing brings that information back to the original size.

Edited to add: unlike the 1x and 2x lenses, the 3.5x Rayfact lens is for sure not the original 75PN 3.5x lens. It has 127mm focal length, which requires 505mm of extension (!!) to achieve 3.5x. That's a lot of extension...

[RobertOToole]

Two nifty fifties?

Sorry I'm only now getting to reply, I somehow managed to unsubscribe from this thread!

FYI, tried to Sigma 1.4/50 Art loaner lenses years ago. It was nice and bright but a mess with lots of CAs and flare. In this case slower EL lenses might work better.

Robert

[RobertOToole]

[...] Any lens suggestions? [...]

That is a pretty complete list already.

Among lenses that I have, the Zeiss 74 mm is a legacy design known to have a high resolution but low contrast and dynamic range, so it is not now among the best. The "famous" Jenoptic/CoastalOpt 60 mm Apo does not offer native 1:1 and is only f/4, so it is also out. The Zuiko Digital 60 mm does reach 1:1 but barely covers Micro 4/3, so I guess it is also out because all other tested lenses cover larger sensors. Otherwise it might be interesting to test because it is affordable, as well as so far almost the only native macro lens for Micro 4/3 format with a decent focal length.

One or two of the Micro Nikkors might qualify, for example one of the more modern iterations of the 200 mm, in spite of being f/4. They are not especially modern designs, but neither are the Scanner Nikkor 100 mm and Printing-Nikkor 105 A.

Thanks for the input on the Costal optics and Zeiss 74mm.

In 2017 I did run a 1x macro lens test with mostly consumer macro lenses on my Nikon D850.

https://www.closeuphotography.com/sharpness-test-1x

The Nikon lenses did not do well. The Micro-NIKKOR 200mm f/4D IF-ED was a strange one, it was sharpest at f8 but as you close down the aperture, the lateral CAs increased so the f8 image was not so clean compared to the Sigma and voigtlander 120. F4 had less of a CA issue but was softer.

The Nikon AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED macro lens had some of the worst image quality in the test.

Both Nikkor lenses came directly from Nikon HQ in NY.

Best,

Robert

[RobertOToole]

It would be interesting to see how the tiny Minolta DSE 5400 compares to those at 1X on APS-C.

Somewhere on my hard drive I have samples from the range of 1x to 4x with that lens.

Sharpness does fall off in the corners at both ends of the range but still the range was so wide and so clean, the results almost seem unreal.

Robert

[RobertOToole]

Two nifty fifties?

Chris,

You beat me to this!! Or a pair of 85mm, 105mm, or 135mm?

If a pair of these 50mm look good then that begs the question "What would a pair of the new Nikon Z mount 50mm look like", since they are reported to be one of the best 50mm available at any price.

Best,

Hi Mike,

So far all the fast lenses I have tried have not worked as well as I have hoped. Two 4/80 EL lenses were pretty nice there has to be something out there in between, a good f2.8 or f3.5 lenses?

I'll keep trying, thanks for the ideas.

Robert

[RobertOToole]

Out of interest, would two Raynox M150s be a useful pairing? At the very least that would result in a far more manageable combo.

When I was running that big tube lens test last year, I had multiple samples of some lenses laying around. So I just had to try the Raynox, and the one I really had hopes for, was the Thorlabs/Nikon ITL200 stacked.

None of the pairs was worth the time to test.

Robert

[RobertOToole]

How about a 55mm f2.8 Micro Nikkor? I have not tested one out for a long time, and have never had one of the AF versions. Or a newer 60mm? Not sure how they do for CAs but they are very sharp.

That might be something to try, the modern Micro-Nikkors won't make the cut for a high-end test due to CA issues.

I owned one or two of those lenses years ago and I do remember them being sharp.

The Sigma 50/2.8 is still one of the sharpest lenses on mark Goodman's site, its in 5th place in his hall of fame: http://coinimaging.com/hall_of_fame.html?

[RobertOToole]

It is reported by various testers that other "ordinary" 100mm ish macro lenses such as Sigma, Leica, Tokina, Sony, Zeiss, Cosina, Fuji and probably others all reach "excellent" in one way or another and may have noteworthy good or bad points, which bother individuals more or less.

As Ray says, there are plenty of low cost lenses which do a good enough job, maybe 95% of the time.

I don't really know why people take pleasure in trying one more lens and finding it just a bit better. If anyone has an answer, my wife would like to know.

I do have a nice stack of "ordinary" macro lenses like the Tamron SP 90 and Cosina 100mm plastic fantastic, that I plan to run when I get the time. So far it looks like they are all going to be sharp but CA control will be in varying degrees but it looks like there might be some surprises.

You can see how the Tamron SP 90mm performs here: https://www.closeuphotography.com/1x-low-cost-lens-test

My wife likes to ask me, "don't we already have a couple of microscope stands just like that at home already" when she already knows the answer

Robert

[RobertOToole]

I'm fairly certain the PN would win...

So far processing images, and I am close to finishing just yet so I don't want to spoil the results but.......technically this is not the case that I have seen so far.

The Printing Nikkor 105 A is in the top 3 lets just say but definitely not clearly No. 1 or the best at 1x on a wafer with the A7RIII in normal and pixel shift.

Wish I could say more but I don't want to spoil the surprise.