Nikon CFI BE Plan Achromat 4X (MRN70040)

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Nikon CFI BE Plan Achromat 4X (MRN70040)

Post by Matthew »

Hello everyone, this is my first post here. :)

I'm pretty new to all this, the most I've ever done is take some close-up pics with a Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro (which I don't have anymore). I never thought I'd be able to afford something as good as the Canon MP-E 65mm, so imagine my surprise when I found out I could get something with better IQ for under $100! :D

After doing lots of searching and thinking I decided to buy the Nikon CFI BE Plan Achromat 4X NA 0.10 objective (MRN70040) based on Rik's post here. It's already in the mail. I used coupon code OPIV5OF for 5% off (which saved me $2.95). I'll be using it on a Canon 60D with a Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS lens (if that doesn't work out I'll try to find a decent retro lens).

So now I'm trying to figure out what to get so I can mount it on that 55-250mm lens (58mm filter thread). It's turning out to be more frustrating than I thought it would be. Ideally I'd like a single adapter that does RMS -> 58mm but I'm finding that to be pretty much impossible unless I get it custom made for lots of $$$. I'm also not sure about it being DIN. Will any female RMS adapter work?? I rarely see a listing that specifies DIN or JIS.

The best I've been able to come up with so far is an RMS -> M42 adapter, and then M42 -> 58mm (this was the only one I could find that specifically states the pitch is 1.0). Unfortunately that costs about half of what I paid for the objective itself. :( Any ideas for a cheaper solution? :)
Last edited by Matthew on Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Matthew, welcome aboard. :D

As far as I know, you've found the best available solution: RMS to M42, then M42 to 58mm filter thread. Any female RMS adapter will work. DIN and JIS use the same thread (RMS, specified HERE). They just differ in some details of the optics (parfocal distance and tube length). Strictly speaking the Nikon CFI BE isn't a DIN objective either (because it's an infinity design instead of finite for a 160mm tube length), but again it uses the same threads.

--Rik

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Post by Matthew »

Thanks for the welcome and the speedy reply Rik. :)

I'm glad to see I was right about the RMS adapter not being DIN or JIS specific, that's at least one less headache to worry about. Is it also right that the M42 -> 58mm adapter must specifically say the 42mm pitch is 1.00? It would be a lot cheaper if I could just get any ol' standard 42mm female -> 58mm male step adapter.

EDIT: Looks like a standard 42mm filter thread has a pitch of 0.75, darn it. Hmm, if I could find a cheap RMS -> T-mount adapter that might work. I haven't been able to find any cheap ones yet.

EDIT 2: I went ahead and ordered the two adapters I shared earlier. They will take a couple of weeks to get here though.. *sigh* Once I try it out and take some test photos I'll come back here and share my personal findings with everyone. :)

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Post by Matthew »

I finally have both adapters, it took forever for both of them to get here. They were stuck in customs for a couple of weeks, I really hate that.. The objective lens came within only a couple of days.

Anyways, the adapters fit perfectly together, everything fits as expected. I've only performed a minimal amount of testing so far. I'm using it with a Canon EF-S 55-250mm lens, which is an APS-C only lens. The vignetting starts at around 190mm or so for me. I'm guessing this is mostly due to it being an EF-S lens. Rik reported he could get down to 135mm (was it also an EF-S lens??), so I guess the 55-250mm isn't very ideal. The image stabilization feature on the lens doesn't help at all so it stays turned off.

The images below were all stacked with CS5. No cropping. A slight amount of sharpening was applied after resizing. Direct light only, no diffuser. Oh, I also used the latest version of Magic Lantern to assist with focus changes. I can't imagine going back to the way things were before I started using the Magic Lantern hack, it has so many incredibly useful features!

229mm, ISO-320, 13 images, just a plain rock:
Image

225mm, ISO-320, 6 images, back of a quarter (eagle's claws):
Image

200mm, ISO-320, 9 images, penny:
Image

Here's a 100% crop of the penny, no sharpening or anything:

Image

It's possible there was some vibration that caused some of the blurriness you see in the 100% crop. These shots were quick and dirty, I just wanted to try it out as soon as possible. Hopefully I can get it a bit sharper in my next attempt. I have electronic first curtain shutter enabled, but I didn't use mirror lockup so I'll try that next.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

First light -- looks good!

My 135 mm test would have been with an ancient prime, either f/2.8 or f/3.5.

Can you tell us more about the Magic Lantern hack and how you're using it?

--Rik

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Post by Matthew »

Magic Lantern was originally intended only for video on the 5D Mark II back in 2009. It has since then evolved into something I find indispensable. The code is open source and has a few developers constantly working on it. It doesn't replace the firmware on your camera, it runs alongside it. If you take out your memory card with ML on it then ML is no longer on the camera. Currently the following cameras are supported (Canon only): 5D MkII, 550D, 60D, 600D, 50D, 500D.

It has a lot of features made with video in mind, but a lot of them are useful for still photography as well. Zebra stripes (for monitoring over/under-exposure in real-time) as well as other exposure helpers (false color, histogram, waveform, spotmeter), focus tools (focus peaking, trap focus, focus stacking), finer control for ISO/Shutter/WB and other settings, intervalometer, silent pictures without shutter actuation (the resolution is lower, but it's really great for long timelapse videos), bulb timer (exposures up to 8 hours), more info (such as equivalent focal length; e.g. 250mm is shown as 400mm), motion detection (good enough to capture lightning!), and lots of other stuff. It'll make you feel like a kid in a candy store (and all the candy is completely free!). :D

Official site: http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Magi ... mware_Wiki

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Which of these features did you use for this stack? How did you step focus?

--Rik

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Post by Matthew »

Hmm, well I used the focus stacking feature for focus stepping. It only works with AF lenses since ML changes the focus. You tell it where the focus should begin and end, and how many steps in-between, it does the rest. I keep zebra stripes turned on most of the time, so I guess I used that a little bit too.

Here's a video someone made demonstrating how to use the focus stacking feature: http://vimeo.com/groups/magiclantern/videos/34582618

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Sorry for pestering you with all these questions, but now I'm curious about the lens.

I presume that Magic Lantern works by stepping the focus motor inside the lens. Some lenses are "internal focusing" in which case the front of the lens and the objective that's attached to it will stay in one place while elements inside move to change the focus. Other lenses are "front focusing" in which case the front of the lens would extend, carrying the objective with it.

Internal focusing works quite well with a 10X objective, but my own experiments with front focusing haven't been so great because the minimum step size of my 55-200 lens moves the objective too far.

Your results look good, so I'm presuming that either your lens is internal focusing or it has a finer step size than mine does. But I'm curious to know for sure.

Can you tell me more to satisfy my curiosity?

--Rik

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Post by Matthew »

You're not pestering me at all, ask a hundred questions if you want. :)

The lens I used, the 55-250, is front focusing. Unfortunately all of my current lenses are front focusing or MF so I can't make any tests with an AF internal focusing lens at the moment. ML works great with manual focus lenses except for the focus stacking feature which as you said uses the motor inside the lens.

If I remember correctly I used a step size of 2 in ML for these three pics, so I imagine a step size of 1 would be even finer. I remember reading in one of your posts you used Canon's EOS Utility on your computer to change the focus. It's possible ML has finer control than the EOS Utility, but don't quote me on that. I wouldn't be surprised though because the whole point of ML is to improve everything and add more functionality.

Here's the official development forum: http://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgro ... m/ml-devel

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

rjlittlefield wrote:Internal focusing works quite well with a 10X objective, but my own experiments with front focusing haven't been so great because the minimum step size of my 55-200 lens moves the objective too far.

Your results look good, so I'm presuming that either your lens is internal focusing or it has a finer step size than mine does.
There's a third possibility. The actual cause is that I was confused about what objective you're using. My tests were with a 10X NA 0.25, but you're using a 4X NA 0.10. The 4X has about 6 times more DOF, so it works OK with a coarser focus step.

I just now measured the front element movement of my 55-200. It gives 10.5 mm physical extension divided by 290 steps when driven by either Canon EOS Utility with the "<" button or Magic Lantern with stepsize "1". The corresponding focus step size is 36 microns, which is fine for use with a 4X objective, but not for use with a 10X objective. Everything now makes sense.

--Rik

(Edited to correct an error in using Magic Lantern with default stepsize "2" instead of the smaller stepsize "1".)

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Post by Matthew »

I was considering getting the 10X instead of the 4X, but I decided on the 4X for this reason. I'm glad I made the right decision. Since I'm just starting out I didn't want to have to spend more money on a focus rack, etc..
Last edited by Matthew on Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Matthew
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Mill Creek, WA

Post by Matthew »

At first I screwed the RMS->M42 adapter in the way you see at the top of the following image. Today I had an idea; what if I put it around the other way to put the objective closer? Would it hit the lens? As you can see below, it worked! Now obviously it might be different with other adapters and lenses (so far I've only tried the Canon 55-250 IS), but I wanted to report this worked for me with that lens and the adapters linked in the first post. :)

Image

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic