Quick Test: Nikon E-Plan 4

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Quick Test: Nikon E-Plan 4

Post by ray_parkhurst »

I'm slowly slogging through my lenses and objectives to test them on the FF A7Rm4. All my previous tests are on the HRT2i, except a few shift-image tests done on a few line scan lenses. Most coin photogs use APS-C, so for any test I do now I need to consider if the lens is useful for APS-C as well as FF.

A lens that I have been recommending for years for the "money shot" on the Lincoln Cent, and by extension as a good lens for a wide range of error and variety detail shots, is the Nikon M5. It is an inexpensive lens with excellent sharpness in the center, and decent in the corners of APS-C. It's main drawback is short working distance, but the nosepiece is removable and this gives a few more millimeters to work in lighting. These have been discontinued for a long time, and are occasionally available on eBay for ~$50, but the supply has been very sporadic.

Recently I've seen a bunch of Nikon E-Plan 4 objectives on eBay for reasonable prices. Today I see one for $36 and a couple for $39. These were supplied on the Labophot/2 series and it seems many of these microscopes are being sold for surplus, with the objectives suddenly available for good prices. This may be a symptom of the tech shutdowns around the world due to the pandemic, or just a retooling, I don't know. Cheap and good objectives are a nice result though.

I ended up buying a couple of Labophot-2 hulks on eBay for a great price. They each came with 2 objectives, the 4x and 10x, perfect for my purposes. I am finally testing the 4x and will eventually test the 10x.

Mag = 4x on Sony A7Rm4, single image mode. 12-shot stack of a Lincoln Cent mintmark. Crops of Center, APS-C Corner, and FF Corner. Working distance is
~17mm, significantly more than the M5.

My conclusion: I think this objective is an excellent alternative to the M5. It's not quite as sharp in the center but has better coverage, being useful on APS-C and almost useful all the way to FF corners.

Full image, downsized from 9504x6336 to 1024x683:
22-12-05_131321_M=B_R=8_S=4_1.JPG
Crop Areas: Note the white box is the APS-C coverage
Nikon E-Plan 4_7.JPG
Center (Green box)
22-12-05_131321_M=B_R=8_S=4_4_8.JPG
APS-C Corner (Yellow box)
22-12-05_131321_M=B_R=8_S=4_6.JPG
FF Corner (Red box)
22-12-05_131321_M=B_R=8_S=4_5.JPG

lothman
Posts: 959
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:00 am
Location: Stuttgart/Germany

Re: Quick Test: Nikon E-Plan 4

Post by lothman »

just for the fun of comparison this is from the Lomo 3,7x I sold.
Link to big file of a wafer, Lomo 3,7x on Sony A7Riv

and some other lenses on 5x
Laowa 2,5-5x @5x

Mitutoyo 5x

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Quick Test: Nikon E-Plan 4

Post by ray_parkhurst »

I shot the same coin with the E Plan 10 that came with the microscopes I bought. The 10x objective shows more rolloff at the FF corners, but is still looking pretty good at the APS-C corners. Working distance is short, around 4-5mm, but its field is quite flat, and has sufficiently narrow DOF to give a very realistic 3D rendering:

Full Frame
22-12-07_160004_M=B_R=8_S=4_8.JPG
APS-C Crop
22-12-07_160004_M=B_R=8_S=4_9_10.JPG
3D on FF
2022_12_07_160640_8.JPG

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Quick Test: Nikon E-Plan 4

Post by Scarodactyl »

My impression of most Nikon E and E plans has been that they are surprisingly decent for the money but I might need to upgrade that assessment.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic