Nikon CFI plan achromat 10x from China?

banania · Post by **banania** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 8:44 am

Hello all,

I am progressing slowly towards photomicrography and just bought my first microscope objective. I searched for a used MRL00102 but ended up purchasing a new one. I just received the objective and wonder a bit as it is not identical to any other specimens of MRL00102 I have seen in photos.

The package states that it is CFI plan achromat 10 x anti-mould made in China with the code MRL00102.

In the objective there are the following texts:

Nikon
Plan 10x
10x/0.25
OFN22 WD 10.5
MRL00102 MADE IN CHINA

It does not have the normal "infinity-slash-minus" text at all as that part is replaced with the text "OFN22".

My very first attempts at testing the objective resulted in very soft photos, but that does not mean much as this is all new to me and I will certainly make all the possible mistakes and blunders before hopefully some day learning the tricks. Still, I wonder if I got the objective I was after. Any of you guys familiar with this version of MRL00102?

The setup I am testing is the following: canon 5d mark II, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro and Kenko 2x teleplus pro 300 dgx for canon-eos ef. In addition i have 4 adapter rings from 67 mm to 25 mm. This is OK for the 10x?

Thanks in advance.

Henri

johan · Post by **johan** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 8:51 am

Could you put up a photo?

Pau · Post by **Pau** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:04 am

Take a look at:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 439#140439

This will indicate that it's a new series objective (not necessary a new model)

banania · Post by **banania** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:19 am

johan wrote:Could you put up a photo?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aarnijaheka/12749382225/

johan · Post by **johan** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:55 am

Hm - I'm curious, the old MRL00102 had, according to their brochure, "incredible image flatness over the entire 25mm field of view" - but this new one has OFN22 - although same material code, WD, NA. Can anyone shed any light on that 3mm difference?

banania · Post by **banania** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:34 am

johan wrote:Hm - I'm curious, the old MRL00102 had, according to their brochure, "incredible image flatness over the entire 25mm field of view" - but this new one has OFN22 - although same material code, WD, NA. Can anyone shed any light on that 3mm difference?

Here is picture of the sensor coverage. I used 100mm + 2x telecoverter (+ some extra adapter rings) and focused on infinity.

Now I have to do some calculations... it may take a while,

Thanks for taking an interest. I have been a regular reader of your macrophotography site and want to thank also you for the wealth of information you provide there for wannabees like me.

p.s. So I cant display images from flickr here as the URL does not end with .JPG, but must just give link to flickr?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aarnijaheka/12750971344/

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:32 am

banania wrote:Here is picture of the sensor coverage. I used 100mm + 2x telecoverter (+ some extra adapter rings) and focused on infinity.

...
p.s. So I cant display images from flickr here as the URL does not end with .JPG, but must just give link to flickr?

I don't know the current procedure on Flickr, but I think there is a link or button you can press to get the URL to the .jpg .

Here I have gotten it by hacking:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7396/1275 ... cdf0_z.jpg

Obviously your lens setup is vignetting badly. The 100mm will have a small entrance pupil, so even though 100mm + 2X has the same FL as a single 200mm, it will vignette worse.

By the way, what are those "extra adapter rings" you mention?

--Rik

banania · Post by **banania** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 12:18 pm

rjlittlefield wrote:
banania wrote:Here is picture of the sensor coverage. I used 100mm + 2x telecoverter (+ some extra adapter rings) and focused on infinity.

...
p.s. So I cant display images from flickr here as the URL does not end with .JPG, but must just give link to flickr?
I don't know the current procedure on Flickr, but I think there is a link or button you can press to get the URL to the .jpg .

Here I have gotten it by hacking:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7396/1275 ... cdf0_z.jpg

Obviously your lens setup is vignetting badly. The 100mm will have a small entrance pupil, so even though 100mm + 2X has the same FL as a single 200mm, it will vignette worse.

By the way, what are those "extra adapter rings" you mention?

--Rik

I have a 25 to 52 mm adapter but miss at the moment a single 52 to 67 mm adapter and used a combo of 4 adapters taking me from 52 mm to 67 mm.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 1:04 pm

banania wrote:I have a 25 to 52 mm adapter but miss at the moment a single 52 to 67 mm adapter and used a combo of 4 adapters taking me from 52 mm to 67 mm.

OK. That string of step rings will make your vignetting problems worse, by pushing the objective farther away from the rear lens.

Reading more carefully your first post, I see that you're using the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro. For me that lens works OK on APS-C sensor with a flat adapter 67-->52 and then 52-->25. It gives a little corner darkening but nothing serious. I would expect it to work OK on full frame with a 2X teleconverter. So, now I am thinking that your vignetting problems are due to either 1) the multiple step rings, or 2) running the 100mm at something other than wide open. With the 2X teleconverter, be sure to set your camera to f/5.6 so that the 100mm will stay wide open.

--Rik

banania · Post by **banania** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 1:40 pm

Thanks Pau!

I did spend several hours trying to figure out this OFN stuff but found absolutely nothing about it.

Thanks Rik!

My rail from cognisys should arrive in a couple of days. Still missing a few bits and pieces like a 67 to 52 mm step down adapter and a 230V light source from Schott/Fostec and some clamps for fibers, and a quality tripod is also in my Santa Claus wish list, but otherwise my first micro setup is starting to materialize.

Soon I will be creating fantastic pictures, nothing can stop me now...

Henri

banania · Post by **banania** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 8:20 am

Received my rail yesterday. Here are my very first testing attempts at microphotography

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aarnijahek ... 1611736414

I know this is going to be fun!

Henri

banania · Post by **banania** » Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:31 pm

Did some test for sharpness, here are the results

EFSC + focus step size

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aarnijahek ... otostream/

Pause after stepper movement

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aarnijahek ... otostream/

And here is an attempt at sharp picture of a flower of hazel. The flower is maybe 3 mm in width.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aarnijahek ... otostream/

As mirror is locked up, EFSC is enabled, focusing steps are adequate and there is a pause after movement of the stepper motor, I don't know if there is still some other camera related issues that I could try in order to diminish still further vibration/get sharper photos.

Any hints very much appreciated.

Henri

banania · Post by **banania** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:52 am

One more test which might be of interest to other beginners in microphotography like myself. I tested whether using image stabilizer makes a difference in sharpness. Here are the testphotos

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aarnijaheka/13217925254/

Here is my present understanding after the tests:

Shooting a stack in Live View is equivalent to locking the mirror up. As the mirror stays up all the way through shooting of the stack there are no vibrations coming from movements of the mirror. One can just forget about mirror induced vibrations while using Live View.

Having EFSC ON means that there is no shutter movement prior to taking a picture and no shutter induced vibrations to deal with. This makes a huge difference in terms of sharpness, when shooting without flash. There is still mechanical movement of the second curtain shutter but this movement happens after exposure has ended. This movement could be dealt with pausing after stepper movement, if necessary.

I have mounted stackshot on a tripod and thought that stepper movement might introduce vibrations to tripod, but pausing after stepper movement 1s or 8s made no difference with regard to sharpness.

So these are the optimal parameters in my setup with regard sharpness issues originating from camera/tripod/stepper vibrations:

-Shooting stack in LiveView
-EFSC ON
-No need for pausing for more than a second after stepper movement
-IS makes no difference

Hope this makes sense and is helpful to someone. It is very basic stuff but it took some effort to get even here. If you think that I am mistaken I would appreciate very much a word of correction.

Henri

Pau · Post by **Pau** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:04 am

Some modern lenses have a "tripod auto detect function" that efectively disables IS, so in this case no difference is to be expected. If IS was normaly working it would induce vibrations.

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:54 am

I didn't know that!
Might be worth looking at the EXIF to see if it was actually On or Off.