I have a Nikon lens as per the title. It is engraved with black lettering as shown in the title with the word Plan in Red.
Could anybody please tell me what type it is, where it comes in the optical pecking order and if it would be suitable for my first attempts at focus stacking at about x5 magnifacation.
I would be most grateful for any advice and possible pointers to any threads were this, or similiar, lenses are discussed.
Thank you,
Norman
Nikon 10 Plan 0.25 #44977
Moderators: Chris S., Pau, Beatsy, rjlittlefield, ChrisR
-
Wakkies Norman.
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:25 am
- Location: Wakkerstroom, South Africa
Nikon 10 Plan 0.25 #44977
Wakkies Norman.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
-
ChrisRaper
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:40 am
- Location: Reading, UK
- Contact:
Welcome to the forum Norman 
If you could post a photograph of the lens (or even 2 from different sides) then it would probably help the experts identify it - there have been a lot of variations and styles over the years. If it is a 10x then you will have difficulty running it at 5x, I think, but it should be a fun lens to experiment with anyway
I will back out now and let the real experts have their say
If you could post a photograph of the lens (or even 2 from different sides) then it would probably help the experts identify it - there have been a lot of variations and styles over the years. If it is a 10x then you will have difficulty running it at 5x, I think, but it should be a fun lens to experiment with anyway I will back out now and let the real experts have their say
-
Wakkies Norman.
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:25 am
- Location: Wakkerstroom, South Africa
Thank you Chris and Laurie for your reply.
There is nothing else on the lens , it's exactly as I quoted. I'll organise a photo of the lens tomorrow
I've searched the Forum archives as much as I can. Perhaps I should explain that I live 250Km South of Johannesburg out in the sticks. We only have a slow, very expensive, dial-up Internet that makes searching for information very difficult.
I very much appreciate your help.
Norman. Out in the sticks with the Hicks and the Ticks!
There is nothing else on the lens , it's exactly as I quoted. I'll organise a photo of the lens tomorrow
I've searched the Forum archives as much as I can. Perhaps I should explain that I live 250Km South of Johannesburg out in the sticks. We only have a slow, very expensive, dial-up Internet that makes searching for information very difficult.
I very much appreciate your help.
Norman. Out in the sticks with the Hicks and the Ticks!
Wakkies Norman.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
-
Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
-
Wakkies Norman.
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:25 am
- Location: Wakkerstroom, South Africa
Nikon 10 Plan 0.25 #44977
Hi All,
Herewith (I hope!) photos of the lens.
Your help most appreciated.
Norman.
Herewith (I hope!) photos of the lens.
Your help most appreciated.
Norman.
Wakkies Norman.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
-
Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Norman,
I can't say with absolute certainty but here is what I think...
This appears to be one of the objectives offered for use with the Nikon Model S microscopes (1960's, early 70's). These were "160mm tube length", finite optics. So ideally, you would use 150mm distance from the shoulder of the objective mount to the camera sensor, and obtain a 10X magnification. This was before Nikon came out with their "CF" objectives (which did all color correction in the objective alone). What I do not know is whether or not you will experience too much chromatic aberration without corrective eyepieces. During this period Nikon offered basic Huygenian eyepieces as well as more complex "corrective" eyepieces. The working distance is 7mm. the focal length is 15.6mm,
Since you have it, it is certainly worth a try.
Things to consider and watch for:
1) Coverage. Used at 10X, it may adequately cover an APS-C sized sensor. You would need to check the edges and corner performance. If you used less extension, and thereby obtained a lower magnification, this really needs to be checked. (My suspicion is corner performance would suffer significantly). On the other hand you can usually go a little above 10X and get good results. (In fact, if the corners are "soft" at 10X, you might be better off going up a little to something like 12X or so).
2) Chromatic aberration. As has been often discussed in the forum, many older objectives relied on "corrective" eyepieces to complete color correction. Too often there is little or no specific documentation about this when you go back 40 or 50 years. So unless it is clearly known, all you can do is give it a try. Illuminate the subject with diffuse light, and look closely at bright spots or edges away from the center of the image. With an achromat you cannot expect perfection, but if you get a real obvious rainbow of colors around a bright spot or edge, you likely have an objective that "expected" additional eyepiece color correction.
I can't say with absolute certainty but here is what I think...
This appears to be one of the objectives offered for use with the Nikon Model S microscopes (1960's, early 70's). These were "160mm tube length", finite optics. So ideally, you would use 150mm distance from the shoulder of the objective mount to the camera sensor, and obtain a 10X magnification. This was before Nikon came out with their "CF" objectives (which did all color correction in the objective alone). What I do not know is whether or not you will experience too much chromatic aberration without corrective eyepieces. During this period Nikon offered basic Huygenian eyepieces as well as more complex "corrective" eyepieces. The working distance is 7mm. the focal length is 15.6mm,
Since you have it, it is certainly worth a try.
Things to consider and watch for:
1) Coverage. Used at 10X, it may adequately cover an APS-C sized sensor. You would need to check the edges and corner performance. If you used less extension, and thereby obtained a lower magnification, this really needs to be checked. (My suspicion is corner performance would suffer significantly). On the other hand you can usually go a little above 10X and get good results. (In fact, if the corners are "soft" at 10X, you might be better off going up a little to something like 12X or so).
2) Chromatic aberration. As has been often discussed in the forum, many older objectives relied on "corrective" eyepieces to complete color correction. Too often there is little or no specific documentation about this when you go back 40 or 50 years. So unless it is clearly known, all you can do is give it a try. Illuminate the subject with diffuse light, and look closely at bright spots or edges away from the center of the image. With an achromat you cannot expect perfection, but if you get a real obvious rainbow of colors around a bright spot or edge, you likely have an objective that "expected" additional eyepiece color correction.
-
Wakkies Norman.
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:25 am
- Location: Wakkerstroom, South Africa
Nikon 10 Plan 0.25 #44977
Thank you Charles, you've certainly given me planty to think about.
This is a completly new field for me and I've a great deal to learn. I'm building up a Vertical stand based on an Ashai Pentax Bellow 11 where the Bellows extension just happens to be 150mm.
I'll also use it with another that lens that I have. It's a Nikon 19mm f2.8 Macro Nikkor. I bought it in 1971 for a project that was eventually cancelled and it has never been used!
Thank you for the information, I'll keep the Forum posted on my progress.
This is a completly new field for me and I've a great deal to learn. I'm building up a Vertical stand based on an Ashai Pentax Bellow 11 where the Bellows extension just happens to be 150mm.
I'll also use it with another that lens that I have. It's a Nikon 19mm f2.8 Macro Nikkor. I bought it in 1971 for a project that was eventually cancelled and it has never been used!
Thank you for the information, I'll keep the Forum posted on my progress.
Wakkies Norman.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
-
Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Norman,
The 19mm f2.8 Macro Nikkor is a wonderful optic. When used on APS-C or even 24x36mm sensors you want to pay attention to your magnifications. With its 2.8 aperture you would want to keep the maximum magnification to about 6X or 7X on an APS-C sized sensor. (A little more with a 24x36mm sensor).
At 10X, the microscope objective you have would provide an effective aperture of about f/20. By contrast, used at 10X the 19mm f/2.8 lens would yield an effective aperture of about f/31. Unless the objective has the previously mentioned color aberration "issue", then I would actually expect the images, at 10X, to likely look better with the microscope objective. The 19/2.8 Macro Nikkor is a near "legendary" optic, and the specs give a magnification range of 15X to 40X. But that was with 4x5" film on a Nikon Multiphot. With an APS-C sized sensor, those magnifications would be far to high, and the images would have low resolution due to diffraction.
Don't forget, the Nikon body depth (lens mount flange to sensor) adds 46.5mm of "extension" all by itself.based on an Ashai Pentax Bellow 11 where the Bellows extension just happens to be 150mm
The 19mm f2.8 Macro Nikkor is a wonderful optic. When used on APS-C or even 24x36mm sensors you want to pay attention to your magnifications. With its 2.8 aperture you would want to keep the maximum magnification to about 6X or 7X on an APS-C sized sensor. (A little more with a 24x36mm sensor).
At 10X, the microscope objective you have would provide an effective aperture of about f/20. By contrast, used at 10X the 19mm f/2.8 lens would yield an effective aperture of about f/31. Unless the objective has the previously mentioned color aberration "issue", then I would actually expect the images, at 10X, to likely look better with the microscope objective. The 19/2.8 Macro Nikkor is a near "legendary" optic, and the specs give a magnification range of 15X to 40X. But that was with 4x5" film on a Nikon Multiphot. With an APS-C sized sensor, those magnifications would be far to high, and the images would have low resolution due to diffraction.
-
Wakkies Norman.
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:25 am
- Location: Wakkerstroom, South Africa
Laurie,
Hi, Yes, I've thought about selling it but although I've bought stuff via eBay I've never sold anything.
I gather that the 19mm Macro go for as much as $1500. It's in absolute pristine condition.
I use a D80 with the kit lens 18 - 55mm, although the lens is a bit plasticky (really a lot plasticky) the results are good.
I have a 60mm AF Micro f2.8 D, and a 70 - 300 VR ED IF which I intend to use for Dragon Flies with a Kenko Extension ring, an EL- Nikkor 50mm f4 and a Componon 80mm. Also a very nice Nikkor AF 35 - 105mm D that might also be good with an Extension ring.
Flash SB400 and a SB24 and SB28 from my FM2 and F90 days!
I would like a 200mm Micro or a 105mm Micro but you can go on for ever at this game!
Thanks for your interest, this is a great Forum and although I battle a bit with the connection etc very informative.
Norman, out in the Sticks with the Hicks and the Ticks!
Hi, Yes, I've thought about selling it but although I've bought stuff via eBay I've never sold anything.
I gather that the 19mm Macro go for as much as $1500. It's in absolute pristine condition.
I use a D80 with the kit lens 18 - 55mm, although the lens is a bit plasticky (really a lot plasticky) the results are good.
I have a 60mm AF Micro f2.8 D, and a 70 - 300 VR ED IF which I intend to use for Dragon Flies with a Kenko Extension ring, an EL- Nikkor 50mm f4 and a Componon 80mm. Also a very nice Nikkor AF 35 - 105mm D that might also be good with an Extension ring.
Flash SB400 and a SB24 and SB28 from my FM2 and F90 days!
I would like a 200mm Micro or a 105mm Micro but you can go on for ever at this game!
Thanks for your interest, this is a great Forum and although I battle a bit with the connection etc very informative.
Norman, out in the Sticks with the Hicks and the Ticks!
Wakkies Norman.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
HI Norman - a couple of odd notes in passing..
How's your weather - some friends on a farm in Zambia are complaining that it hasn't rained yet!!
Nikon did the T5 and T6, Canon's is still avaiilable, and Raynox do some powerful ones.
"We" generally find that telephotos don't do so well with extension tubes.
A 1.4x kenko converter would probably work well.
How's your weather - some friends on a farm in Zambia are complaining that it hasn't rained yet!!
You might do better with a good ( two element) close-up lens, also known as "diopters".70 - 300 VR ED IF which I intend to use for Dragon Flies with a Kenko Extension ring,
Nikon did the T5 and T6, Canon's is still avaiilable, and Raynox do some powerful ones.
"We" generally find that telephotos don't do so well with extension tubes.
A 1.4x kenko converter would probably work well.
Lose it! The 50mm f/2.8 is much better and not too expensive used. Sonynut thought his f/4 was great until he bought a f/2.8.. We kept telling him...!EL- Nikkor 50mm f4
It would be a bit of a surprise if it really is - compared with your 60, say. Fun to try them reversed though for a zoom macro lens. The reversing ring doesn't take up much luggage space.Nikkor AF 35 - 105mm D that might also be good with an Extension ring
My solution is to buy everything then you run out of things - I'm still working on it though...I would like a 200mm Micro or a 105mm Micro but you can go on for ever at this game!
-
Craig Gerard
- Posts: 2877
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 1:51 am
- Location: Australia
I recall a discussion about a similar Nikon objective (link below).
Look closely at the images from center to edge. Forum member arnsteins paid an exorbitant price for the objective purchased from an occasional but knowlegable contributor to this forum (who will remain unnamed
I'm uncertain if that matter was resolved amicably?). Its market value is $25.00 on a good day.
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=11391
Craig
*edit: corrected typo
Look closely at the images from center to edge. Forum member arnsteins paid an exorbitant price for the objective purchased from an occasional but knowlegable contributor to this forum (who will remain unnamed
I'm uncertain if that matter was resolved amicably?). Its market value is $25.00 on a good day.http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=11391
Craig
*edit: corrected typo
Last edited by Craig Gerard on Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
To use a classic quote from 'Antz' - "I almost know exactly what I'm doing!"
-
Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Craig,
The old post you referenced is an older M Plan objective. It appears to be from the same era as Normans. I don't know how much difference there might be. Probably some, but a 10/025 is not really cover glass sensitive. These were pre-"CF" so likely wanted corrective eyepieces. The other thing to consider with older objectives is the "coverage". When these were made the largest FN (field number) needed was about 18mm (diagonal of image). So that is why you need to check the edges and corners carefully even on an APS-C body.
At that time, 20-22mm were considered widefield. Today, that is pretty standard "coverage" and the latest objectives (medium range and upper range) will now go to 26.5mm or so (often called super-widefield").
The old post you referenced is an older M Plan objective. It appears to be from the same era as Normans. I don't know how much difference there might be. Probably some, but a 10/025 is not really cover glass sensitive. These were pre-"CF" so likely wanted corrective eyepieces. The other thing to consider with older objectives is the "coverage". When these were made the largest FN (field number) needed was about 18mm (diagonal of image). So that is why you need to check the edges and corners carefully even on an APS-C body.
At that time, 20-22mm were considered widefield. Today, that is pretty standard "coverage" and the latest objectives (medium range and upper range) will now go to 26.5mm or so (often called super-widefield").
-
Wakkies Norman.
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:25 am
- Location: Wakkerstroom, South Africa
Thank you everyone for your replies, Most interesting and informative.
I'm getting my head around the subject. Your advice regarding the Zoom lenses is most welcome, the old adage about "Horses for courses" applies and although it's great fun trying all the various options there is no real alternative to the specific tool desined for the job.
I've had a good rummage in my various store boxes and all sorts of goodies have come to light. Three enlarging lens, A Beselar 180mm which I used on a 5 X 7 enlarger, and a 50mm Ross Resolux (built like a Tank!), and a very nice small 50mm f3.5 Steinheil Cassar.
I'm in the process of converting a Durst M606 enlarger into a Copy Stand and an old Bosch Drill Stand into a vertical Macro setup. I'm looking forward to producing some images so that the various lenses can be compared.
Thanks for the pointers to the other threads.
I'm getting my head around the subject. Your advice regarding the Zoom lenses is most welcome, the old adage about "Horses for courses" applies and although it's great fun trying all the various options there is no real alternative to the specific tool desined for the job.
I've had a good rummage in my various store boxes and all sorts of goodies have come to light. Three enlarging lens, A Beselar 180mm which I used on a 5 X 7 enlarger, and a 50mm Ross Resolux (built like a Tank!), and a very nice small 50mm f3.5 Steinheil Cassar.
I'm in the process of converting a Durst M606 enlarger into a Copy Stand and an old Bosch Drill Stand into a vertical Macro setup. I'm looking forward to producing some images so that the various lenses can be compared.
Thanks for the pointers to the other threads.
Wakkies Norman.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.
Nikon User.
Plus anything else that makes an Interesting Image.