200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1619
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by Scarodactyl »

Yup, I do have that in mind. This guy's setup probably won't need a coaxial illuminator or anything too space consuming, just a nosepiece and the head above. I still may just use a Nikon head with its own conventional tube lens, but I have a nice Mitutoyo measuring microscope head that probably has room for a Raynox in it. I'm waiting for some renovations to finish before spending any money or having optics uncovered thanks to the dust, but it will be fun to explore.

That said, I got a Mitutoyo FS50 a while back and its performance puzzled me. It had a fixed 200mm tube lens, not the 1-2x zooming one, and IQ was fairly poor compared to my Nikon head. It didn't have any signs of disassembly or damage, and the objectives that came on it were fine, it just produced images with noticeable axial CA. Maybe it was one of the uv or laser tolerant variants but not marked as such?

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

Scarodactyl wrote:
Sun Oct 17, 2021 3:10 pm
These results are really handy since I'll be putting a system together soonish for a friend with a full frame camera. I was going to get one of the itl200 clones but it sounds like it would be more money for less corner performance. I wonder if it holds up that way across the whole suite of mitutoyos--I'll try to take some test pics when I have his scope together.
I'm in the middle of getting some Mity 5xHR test results online but I will try the ITL200 on the 5x HR when I get a chance. I'm sure its going to be really good but how far from center is the question. So far with the DCR150 the APO HR 5x is pretty surprising to say the least, I don't want to give it away.

Best,

Robert

JKT
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:29 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by JKT »

Now that the test is finally online...

I had thought the sharp image circle of the Mitutoyo 5x was about 32mm, but you seem to get pretty much perfect results with the Raynox up to about d36mm. Pretty much all the lenses show clear drop on quality at the same point. The level of "better" and "worse" varies between lenses, though.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

JKT wrote:
Thu Oct 21, 2021 12:49 pm
Now that the test is finally online...

I had thought the sharp image circle of the Mitutoyo 5x was about 32mm, but you seem to get pretty much perfect results with the Raynox up to about d36mm. Pretty much all the lenses show clear drop on quality at the same point. The level of "better" and "worse" varies between lenses, though.
Yes, I agree. I was glad to see the results and a bit surprised really!

Speaking of surprises! I've been spending the last week or so on the HR5x 0,21 from Mitutoyo and I'm blown away. Can't wait to show the results but shooting is all done but
a flare issue has been slowing me down a bit, plus I'm busy with family and work, so I'm aiming for posting this weekend I just need to process the files and upload.

First: M Plan APO HR 5x vs M Plan APO vs QV HR 2.5x (on 200mm TL)

Second: APO HR 5x with Raynox, ITL200, 180mm TL, 150mm TL, 135mm TL.

Best,

Robert

Doppler9000
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by Doppler9000 »

Nathan M used a Phase back for his tube lens tests.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=32346&hilit=Mitutoyo&start=30

Huge image circles with the DCR 5320.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

Doppler9000 wrote:
Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:55 pm
Nathan M used a Phase back for his tube lens tests.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=32346&hilit=Mitutoyo&start=30

Huge image circles with the DCR 5320.
Wait, now you tell me this? #-o (Joking)

No seriously, the DCR 5320 looks pretty good for coverage but.

1. The FL is really only 170mm, so you are pushing the 5x down to 4.25x and a smaller IC.
(this is normal, the Century +4 or 250mm is actually 228mm or so in the real world)

2. The corners in all his test images look soft.

3. ​The DCR 5320 isn't cheap, $350. My budget since Covid-19 hit my business is down 95% in income so I don't have $350 to throw around. That said I spent a total of $2000 over the years buying tube lenses, $50 to $100 at a time, and found only a handful that I like in the end.

Well at least others don't have to throw another $2000 into the trash bin. :D

Anyone have a DCR 5320 to loan for a test, I can send you my address!

Best,

Robert

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

Doppler9000 wrote:
Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:55 pm
Nathan M used a Phase back for his tube lens tests.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=32346&hilit=Mitutoyo&start=30

Huge image circles with the DCR 5320.
Forgot to mention!

Turns out its not the tube lens, its the objective. I found that out this week. I will post examples this weekend hopefully.

Spoiler alert! When used with an objective with a broad flat image circle, the Raynox and ITL200 cover full frame perfectly! =D>

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

Doppler9000 wrote:
Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:55 pm
Nathan M used a Phase back for his tube lens tests.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=32346&hilit=Mitutoyo&start=30

Huge image circles with the DCR 5320.
Forgot another one. I'm not too good at multitasking apparently.

Someone with financial resources and connections similar to NM, could easily call Mitutoyo, Raynox or Qioptiq HQ and have a custom APO 200mm tube with 72mm threads made up in no time. Why waste time with off-the-shelf parts. I know this from experience, I've worked with people in the same orbit, also ex-microsoft execs, in years past.

Best,

Robert

Doppler9000
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by Doppler9000 »

RobertOToole wrote:
Thu Oct 21, 2021 3:17 pm
Doppler9000 wrote:
Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:55 pm
Nathan M used a Phase back for his tube lens tests.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=32346&hilit=Mitutoyo&start=30

Huge image circles with the DCR 5320.
Wait, now you tell me this? #-o (Joking)

No seriously, the DCR 5320 looks pretty good for coverage but.

1. The FL is really only 170mm, so you are pushing the 5x down to 4.25x and a smaller IC.
(this is normal, the Century +4 or 250mm is actually 228mm or so in the real world)

2. The corners in all his test images look soft.
They don’t look too bad considering it’s a 54 x 40mm sensor - 67mm diagonal. The 7.5x and 20x are pretty great all the way out.

JKT
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:29 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by JKT »

DCR-5320 indeed covers large area without any vignetting, but I'm surprised at the claimed focal length. My measurement for the two together gives 203.4mm ... with some extra distance (two thread adapters) between the two parts. Without them it seemed to be closer to 200mm.

However, DCR-150 seems to give ever so slightly better image.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

JKT wrote:
Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:48 am
DCR-5320 indeed covers large area without any vignetting, but I'm surprised at the claimed focal length. My measurement for the two together gives 203.4mm ... with some extra distance (two thread adapters) between the two parts. Without them it seemed to be closer to 200mm.

However, DCR-150 seems to give ever so slightly better image.
Correct, I mis-read the specs! That is distance, not FL!

http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/dcr/dcr ... /index.htm
Screen Shot 2021-10-22 at 11.00.11 AM.png

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

JKT wrote:
Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:48 am
DCR-5320 indeed covers large area without any vignetting, but I'm surprised at the claimed focal length. My measurement for the two together gives 203.4mm ... with some extra distance (two thread adapters) between the two parts. Without them it seemed to be closer to 200mm.

However, DCR-150 seems to give ever so slightly better image.
NM also states 170mm FL in the post below, from the Tube Lens tests - medium format and full frame post:
nathanm wrote:
Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:49 pm
I apologize for taking so long to reply. Here is a photo of my current system for phaseone.


The phaneOne camera back fits on top.

I use 3 of the ~2 inch SM3 tubes, and then one ~1 inch variable size SM3 tube.

The Raynox DCR 5320 AB has a focal length of 170mm.

For Canon, the distance from sensor to lens flange is 44 mm.

For Canon, I use a 72 mm lens reversing ring. It happens that the thread is close enough to SM3 that it works great.

That will be probably ~3 mm thick from flange.

By using the 1 inch adjustable length SM3 tube you can focus the system and that will take up the slop for various adapter thicknesses.

So, for Canon I think that this means you need:

2 of the ~2 inch / 50 mm SM3 tubes



1 of the 1 inch


Good luck!

JKT
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:29 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by JKT »

RobertOToole wrote:
Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:12 am
NM also states 170mm FL in the post below, from the Tube Lens tests - medium format and full frame post:
I noticed that as well. However, the magnifications measured with stage micrometer in stack with some known lenses are:
6.894 w. S-K M-Componon 28mm (29.51mm)
3.843 w. S-K M-Componon 50mm (52.95mm)
4.894 w. S-K Apo Componon 40mm (41.55mm)
1.689 w. Gretag 120mm (120.42mm)
10.178 w. Mitutoyo 10x (19.99mm)
Those match a bit too well with the 203.45 mm for it to be so much off.
The focal lengths in parenthesis are achieved in a similar fashion with Excel solver from all the measurements I've made.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by RobertOToole »

JKT wrote:
Fri Oct 22, 2021 2:59 pm
RobertOToole wrote:
Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:12 am
NM also states 170mm FL in the post below, from the Tube Lens tests - medium format and full frame post:
I noticed that as well. However, the magnifications measured with stage micrometer in stack with some known lenses are:
6.894 w. S-K M-Componon 28mm (29.51mm)
3.843 w. S-K M-Componon 50mm (52.95mm)
4.894 w. S-K Apo Componon 40mm (41.55mm)
1.689 w. Gretag 120mm (120.42mm)
10.178 w. Mitutoyo 10x (19.99mm)
Those match a bit too well with the 203.45 mm for it to be so much off.
The focal lengths in parenthesis are achieved in a similar fashion with Excel solver from all the measurements I've made.
Thank you very much for the info.

The DCR 5320 is a lot more interesting now!

Best,

Robert

Duke
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue May 12, 2020 10:06 am
Location: Leningrad, USSR
Contact:

Re: 200mm Tube Lens Full Frame Test

Post by Duke »

Scarodactyl wrote:
Sun Oct 17, 2021 4:27 pm
That said, I got a Mitutoyo FS50 a while back and its performance puzzled me. It had a fixed 200mm tube lens, not the 1-2x zooming one, and IQ was fairly poor compared to my Nikon head.
Just now I've came across Nikon MXA20696 on Robert's site:
https://www.closeuphotography.com/nikon ... lens-test/
Or maybe I didn't paid to much attention to it before, but now 'Oh, wait, that's the lens I have in my Nikon CFI-UW LV-TI3 head'. Apparently, it turns out to have a lot of lateral CA.
Recently I was puzzled about poor CA performance of the Korrektar F-150, how, I thought, with its PLASMAT symmetric design (aka APO-Symmar) should be is 100% CA free! Now I see, the lateral CA by amount and sign are identical to Robert's pictures MXA20696 normal mount.
Now I'm wondering is it possible to swap this crap (MXA20696) for something else like ITL200, other than that LV-TI3 is a great trinocular.
“Thoroughly conscious ignorance is the prelude to every real advance in science.” - JCM

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic