Hi Saul,Saul wrote:Robert, would you like to test Reichert tube lens ( for me it showed very close results comparing with Sigma LSA) ?
Yes, that would be great. I will PM my email address.
Thanks
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
I have never tried a 200/4 AF-D as a tube lens but a couple of things that would make me think twice.sweedlepipe wrote:Why not test the Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4 AF-D? It's the more modern of the Nikon options and likely to be the best performer, at least from what I've heard.
I have a micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4 AF-D, and when I first purchased Mitutoyo objectives, happily used this lens to converge them. I noticed no fault with it in this role. I agree, though, that it is an expensive lens. So I wanted to return it to my field kit, ready for outdoor use and travel. I also wanted a macro rig permanently set up in the studio, and built that around a Mitutoyo MT-1 tube lens. I've never compared these setups directly, but did not notice any sea change migrating from the one to the other (in terms of picture quality, that is--in terms of operating convenience, there are differences).RobertOToole wrote:I have never tried a 200/4 AF-D as a tube lens but a couple of things that would make me think twice.sweedlepipe wrote:Why not test the Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4 AF-D? It's the more modern of the Nikon options and likely to be the best performer, at least from what I've heard.
It was chromatic aberration king at 1X stopped down
Its a macro lens optimized for close-ups not long distance
Its very expensive.
Someone here tried one as a tube lens and didn't see good results, I forgot who that was!
Not sure but I would guess a normal prime would be more suitable but I could be wrong!
Robert
I completely agree with your choice of Mitutoyo. What I wonder is: Which magnification Mitutoyo objective would tell use most?RobertOToole wrote:I thought of Mitutoyo since it seems to be is the most popular here I think, and its one of my favorites :-)Chris S. wrote: Wondering--is the Mitutoyo 5x objective the most illuminating choice for this test? I have no idea, but suspect whichever Mitty objective has the largest exit cone might be the most demanding. If so, which one would that be?
--Chris S.
Thats right Lou, I looked that one up onceLou Jost wrote:Yes, that was the Raynox 5320 with a focal length near 170mm. nathanm here tested it and found it to be the best tube lens, tested on a medium format sensor I think.Near 200mm, wasn't there a less-common but rather expensive Raynox which was found to be a leader??
Have that one Chris. I will throw it on the setup to test but I already tried it, and It was a waste of time and money spent on the the CY>E-mount adapter.ChrisR wrote:If we're getting exotic there's the CONTAX Carl Zeiss Tele-Tessar 200mm F/3.5 T* which, though perhaps not common, could be good. The 135mm Zeiss certainly gets top marks (Beatsy & others) version.