Geranium robertianum. JML 21/3.5 "test"

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Geranium robertianum. JML 21/3.5 "test"

Post by Charles Krebs »

Well, the price of admission to the JML 21/3.5 party was so reasonable I just had to join in! (I've paid more for a single drink in some places) :wink:

These pictures sure don't have the "wow" factor of John's wonderful ant shot, but they were deliberately shot to look at one specific aspect... chromatic correction. That's why I've placed them here in the "equipment" section. These were all taken at 5X.

The cells in the "Herb Robert" petals were like little glass beads and provided many very bright small highlights (255/255/255) right out to the corners. Any chromatic aberrations would normally be very apparent around these highlights. There were virtually none that were noticeable!

The tiny springs parts were left on a dusty piece of black plastic. I deliberately did not remove the light dust particles. Between the white dust particles and the bright metal highlights on the metal it's usually pretty easy to find some "color". Extraordinarily clean. More impressive to me was when I scrolled through the single images used in the stack at 1:1. Often, it's the out-of-focus frames that show a little green or magenta around the bright highlights but these too were very clean. In one or two spots I could find a very slight red edge, but so slight... very impressive in this regard.

It would be interesting to find out exactly what this was originally made for. It's not often you have such an "unknown" quantity, and thus no preconceived notion of what might be expected. Normally you have some idea of what an optics intended use was.

One thing seems certain... it's very well corrected chromatically!


Image

Image

Image

Craig Gerard
Posts: 2877
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 1:51 am
Location: Australia

Post by Craig Gerard »

Charlie wrote:
It would be interesting to find out exactly what this was originally made for. It's not often you have such an "unknown" quantity, and thus no preconceived notion of what might be expected. Normally you have some idea of what an optics intended use was.
I believe Bob^3 has sent an email to JML in regard to this lens and its story?

Craig
To use a classic quote from 'Antz' - "I almost know exactly what I'm doing!"

Bob^3
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:12 pm
Location: Orange County, California

Post by Bob^3 »

Craig Gerard wrote:I believe Bob^3 has sent an email to JML in regard to this lens and its story?
Yep...sent the email last Saturday:
Dear JML,

I have several of these JML, 21mm f/3.5 lenses (please see attached photos). Dimensions: flange dia. = 25.25mm, barrel dia. = 26.90mm, length = 28.80mm. I don’t see an exact match for this lens on your site.

I wonder if you could be so kind as to provide detailed specifications on this part (resolution, intended subject distance, image distance, size of image circle, etc.), along with any information regarding its intended use.

Sure would appreciate any available info.

Thanks and regards,
And got this response, today:
Hi Robert,

Thank you for considering JML Optical Industries as a source for your optical needs. Your request for information is being processed and the answers will be sent to you within 1-3 days.

A capabilities brochure is attached below and a Sales Engineer will be contacting you shortly.

Sincerely,
Looks like they're gonna sick the sales guys on me. Figure I'll probably get an email with price quotes for 1K, 10K, 100K piece lots!

I'll forward their response on the lens specs.
Charles Krebs wrote: One thing seems certain... it's very well corrected chromatically!
Thanks for confirming that observation, Charles. Care to make any comment on resolution at 5x?

Guess I should add, for the record, that I have absolutely no affiliation with the eBay vendor of the JML lens (the rumor that he's my brother-in-law and has offered to put my first born child through college is simply not true! BTW, my sister says there are still 22 lenses left---get 'em while they're hot! :wink: ).

Regards,
Bob in Orange County, CA

pierre
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:37 pm
Location: France, Var, Toulon

Post by pierre »

Hi,

Thanks for this test and analyse Charles.

Bob^3, sorry for the wait: I still wait for the "adaptator".


Regards,
Pierre

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Post by Charles Krebs »

Bob,
Care to make any comment on resolution at 5x?
For that I'd like to do some A:B comparisons. Since it's an f3.5, 5x-6X would probably be the highest magnification I would consider. (And I would expect the drop-off in resolution to become increasingly noticeable above 5X with my APS sized sensor). I'll be playing with it some more. Just looking at the very symmetrical, clean "airy pattern" in the corners (10X in live view) makes me think that it will perform well under scrutiny (ie. limited primarily by the aperture size). The pictures I've seen posted so far, and the few I've taken seem to bear this out.

ChrisLilley
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 6:12 am
Location: Nice, France (I'm British)

Post by ChrisLilley »

By the way, how does this lens mount? Is it RMS?

Edit: never mind, found the JML mounting thread

Cyclops
Posts: 3084
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:18 pm
Location: North East of England
Contact:

Post by Cyclops »

LOL over gere JML is a totally different company!
Great shots of this common flower (I love common stuff getting a different view), altho the first shot seems lacking a little in contrast.
Canon 5D and 30D | Canon IXUS 265HS | Cosina 100mm f3.5 macro | EF 75-300 f4.5-5.6 USM III | EF 50 f1.8 II | Slik 88 tripod | Apex Practicioner monocular microscope

dmillard
Posts: 639
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: Geranium robertianum. JML 21/3.5 "test"

Post by dmillard »

Charles Krebs wrote: These pictures sure don't have the "wow" factor of John's wonderful ant shot, but they were deliberately shot to look at one specific aspect... chromatic correction. That's why I've placed them here in the "equipment" section. These were all taken at 5X.

The cells in the "Herb Robert" petals were like little glass beads and provided many very bright small highlights (255/255/255) right out to the corners. Any chromatic aberrations would normally be very apparent around these highlights. There were virtually none that were noticeable!

The tiny springs parts were left on a dusty piece of black plastic. I deliberately did not remove the light dust particles. Between the white dust particles and the bright metal highlights on the metal it's usually pretty easy to find some "color". Extraordinarily clean.
Charlie,

These shots are indeed "extraordinarily clean" (although that sounds almost like a laundry detergent ad :D ). I wonder what the image circle of this lens is.

David

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Post by Charles Krebs »

David
I wonder what the image circle of this lens is.
Ahhh... "image circle"... makes me think of the old days! When we wondered how much movement ("coverage") a lens could provide on 4x5" we would drag out an 8x10" and take a couple sheets. Very revealing. Might be interesting to dust off a 4x5" or even my Pentax 6x7 and try something similar, but downsized, with this potpourri of lenses we use. But I guess all that really matters these days is how it looks in the corners with either a 28mm or 43mm diagonal format. For this lens, APS size looks good at 5X (and with the way I have it now 5X in the lowest I can get on my bellows!) So once I rig up an adapter that lets me use less extension I'll give it a shot at some lower mags on a full-frame sensor.

Bob^3
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:12 pm
Location: Orange County, California

Post by Bob^3 »

Charles Krebs wrote:Since it's an f3.5, 5x-6X would probably be the highest magnification I would consider. (And I would expect the drop-off in resolution to become increasingly noticeable above 5X with my APS sized sensor).
Thanks, Charles---but I was soooo hoping that JML had found a way around the laws of diffraction---maybe with their $20 lenses? :D
I'm really not a smart-as*, I just play one on TV.

Rik's illuminating test comparing the JML to the Oly 20/2 stopped-down to f3.5, did indicate that the JML may not be quite as well corrected as the Oly.

BTW, I did check the exposure readings between the JML and Olympus 20mm f/3.5 (wide open) at the same magnifications and lighting. They were identical, which presumably indicates that they are operating at the same effective aperture?

Regards,
Bob in Orange County, CA

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23599
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Bob^3 wrote:BTW, I did check the exposure readings between the JML and Olympus 20mm f/3.5 (wide open) at the same magnifications and lighting. They were identical, which presumably indicates that they are operating at the same effective aperture?
Correct. There could be small differences masked by compensating differences in reflection and absorption, but I've always read that those effects are pretty small.

--Rik

Aynia
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:42 am
Location: Europe somewhere
Contact:

Post by Aynia »

Beautiful herb robert shots!!!

Bob^3
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:12 pm
Location: Orange County, California

Post by Bob^3 »

Here's the response from JML:
Dear Robert,

We are 99% sure that the photos are of one of our wide field imaging lenses (part # WFL20414/100)
see attached pages from our catalog.
Image
Image
Image

Still a bit confused. The part number they mention is for an A-series (medium-resolution) lens, but the drawing matches the B-series (high-resolution) lenses.

Also, I don't know how dots per inch translates to lines per mm? Simple conversion from inches to mm gives 15.7 LPM for 400 DPI. Surely this lens is resolving beyond this?

These guys make so many custom lenses, I'm not fully convinced they know what it is!

regards,

p.s. I'll be writing back one more time to thank them for the response. Any additional questions I should ask?
Bob in Orange County, CA

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Post by Charles Krebs »

Bob,
Also, I don't know how dots per inch translates to lines per mm? Simple conversion from inches to mm gives 15.7 LPM for 400 DPI. Surely this lens is resolving beyond this?
I don't think we have sufficient info to analyze this. We don't know what they are using as a definition of resolution (things like the MTF%).

A "B" series #73275 (f2.8 @5X) should, in "theory", be able to resolve far more than it's "B" series sibling #70725 (f5.6 @15x) . Curiously, the #70725 (used f5.6 @15X) at an MTF of about 9%, would be around 16 lp/mm. At least by "formula", this lens would have the lowest resolution potential on the "B" list.

But unless the contrast is very much lower on the "A" series lenses, it would seem there should be some that should easily out-resolve some "B" series lenses. I can't believe that there would be that much difference in design and construction to make up the discrepancy. So I think we need a better idea of the criteria used to come up with these values.
(ultimately... what do the pictures look like... :wink: )

Bob^3
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:12 pm
Location: Orange County, California

Post by Bob^3 »

Thanks, Charles that's what I figured. I've started a new thread on this. So I'll redirect here:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=9630
Bob in Orange County, CA

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic