www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Lomo 3,7 Objective vs Canon MP-E 65MM Macro Photo at 3.7X
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Lomo 3,7 Objective vs Canon MP-E 65MM Macro Photo at 3.7X

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RobertOToole



Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 670
Location: United States

PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:08 pm    Post subject: Lomo 3,7 Objective vs Canon MP-E 65MM Macro Photo at 3.7X Reply with quote

After seeing how well a loaner Lomo 3,7 performed in the 4X I recently ran, (thanks to zzffnn) I ordered a Lomo for myself, and I got it right before the weekend. Images from the new lens are great, CA free and sharp corner to corner on an APS-C sensor.

I had some free time and I couldn't resist comparing the Lomo to my MP-E 65 via a Sigma MC-11.

MPE at f/2.8.
Identical settings.
2 X Godox TT350 flash.
All manual settings on a Sony A6300.
MPE single frame, Lomo image is stacked.





Center:


Far left corner:


Left edge:


To my eyes the MP-E has a small lead in resolution but also has CAs. The Lomo is free of CAs and looks sharper in some areas thanks to the APO correction.

For larger images and more info follow this link to the Lomo 3.7x page on my site.

FYI, next week I am working on adding code to my site that will open the thumbnails at 100% view, not to fit the browser window was it does not.

https://www.closeuphotography.com/lomo-3-7x-objective

Questions and comments welcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 2367
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That is very impressive for the Lomo. On the basis of your results I got one of these as well. There is also a Lomo 3.5x that (unlike the 3.7x) has flat-field correction. This might induce CA, but who knows? It was even cheaper than the 3.7x. I should get it in late February and will report on it then.

Does anyone know if there are higher NA objectives (by any maker) in this range of 3-3.5x, that do not require corrective eyepieces?
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RobertOToole



Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 670
Location: United States

PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lou Jost wrote:
That is very impressive for the Lomo. On the basis of your results I got one of these as well. There is also a Lomo 3.5x that (unlike the 3.7x) has flat-field correction. This might induce CA, but who knows? It was even cheaper than the 3.7x. I should get it in late February and will report on it then.

Does anyone know if there are higher NA objectives (by any maker) in this range of 3-3.5x, that do not require corrective eyepieces?


Hi Lou,

I do know of a lens thats faster than NA 0.11 at 3x, thats the Mejiro 3x f/2.5 called the FLH-300. (I have two of their lenses, and they are very high image quality, up there with the best.)

http://cgi3.genossen.co.jp/en/products/product-list/flh-300/



They also make a float lens version 1-3X but its slower.

Emailed them twice for a price but they would not give me a quote.

All the best,

Robert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 2367
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That looks very interesting but pricey!!! Thanks for pointing me to it. I had never heard of the company before.
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ray_parkhurst



Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 1291
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was having trouble seeing that the 65MPE was higher resolution vs the Lomo due to the high CA levels, so edited the corner comparison photos:
- cropped to an area that shows fine detail
- removed the R and B channels
- equalized the brightness
- output as monochrome and 200% size
- animated the two for pixel peeping

Indeed the 65MPE is showing a higher MTF on G channel. I guess this is mostly due to the f/13 effective vs f/17.

Would the 65MPE CA improve at f/3.3, or f/4?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RobertOToole



Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 670
Location: United States

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ray_parkhurst wrote:
I was having trouble seeing that the 65MPE was higher resolution vs the Lomo due to the high CA levels, so edited the corner comparison photos:
- cropped to an area that shows fine detail
- removed the R and B channels
- equalized the brightness
- output as monochrome and 200% size
- animated the two for pixel peeping

Indeed the 65MPE is showing a higher MTF on G channel. I guess this is mostly due to the f/13 effective vs f/17.

Would the 65MPE CA improve at f/3.3, or f/4?



The does make it easy to see a difference.

Thanks Ray.


With a bayer sensor, don't forget, there are 2X of the green photo-sites, compared to red and blue, that should have something to due with the increased contrast.

Yes, the MP-E CAs do improve at f/3.5 or 4 at this magnification, but the sharpness drops. Next time I run the MPE I will include the stopped down apertures.


All the best,

Robert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RobertOToole



Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 670
Location: United States

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lou Jost wrote:
That looks very interesting but pricey!!! Thanks for pointing me to it. I had never heard of the company before.


I was lucky to snag two Mejiro lenses over the years, a 1X and a 0.75x and they are up with the best in terms of IQ, and I wouldn't hesitate to grab another one if I hade the chance.

All the best,

Robert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 2367
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But I think you prefer your Scanner Nikkor, right?
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RobertOToole



Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 670
Location: United States

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lou Jost wrote:
But I think you prefer your Scanner Nikkor, right?


Yes. The scanner Nikkor is on my favorites.

Mejiro makes a fast 1-3X floating lens, the FLH-VAR, with great looking specs, 1.3x, f/2.5-4, v-mount:

http://cgi3.genossen.co.jp/en/products/product-list/flh-var/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ray_parkhurst



Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 1291
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RobertOToole wrote:

With a bayer sensor, don't forget, there are 2X of the green photo-sites, compared to red and blue, that should have something to due with the increased contrast.

Yes, the MP-E CAs do improve at f/3.5 or 4 at this magnification, but the sharpness drops. Next time I run the MPE I will include the stopped down apertures.


Looking at just G channel is good for assessing resolution, since each pixel site is more fully covered and the G wavelength is in the middle of the visible spectrum. I did the same color processing to images from both lenses so this should be a good comparison.


Last edited by ray_parkhurst on Wed Dec 27, 2017 8:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lou Jost



Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 2367
Location: Ecuador

PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ray, what did you mean when you said that with green light, each pixel is fully covered? Only half the pixel sites in the original image are fully covered. Are you reducing the image's pixel dimensions by a factor of two by actually removing the R and B pixels from the image? Perhaps that's what you meant when you said you removed the R and B channels?
_________________
Lou Jost
www.ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com
www.loujost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ray_parkhurst



Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 1291
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 8:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lou Jost wrote:
Ray, what did you mean when you said that with green light, each pixel is fully covered? Only half the pixel sites in the original image are fully covered. Are you reducing the image's pixel dimensions by a factor of two by actually removing the R and B pixels from the image? Perhaps that's what you meant when you said you removed the R and B channels?


Sorry, typo. Meant to say "more fully" covered. Corrected.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group