I have the Raynox 150 and 250 (5 and 8 diopters) and wonder if anyone has a recommendation for an intermediate length tube lens - preferably with FF coverage. Raynox used to do a +5.9 but that was discontinued a few years back. There's "Olympus close-up lens for 80mm MACRO f=17cm" on ebay that might be suitable? http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231923478342
I've used the Mitutoyo 10x/0.28 at about 7x with Raynox by varying distance from sensor but that's not ideal and, if I understand correctly, could seriously degrade images at higher magnification.
tube lens - approx 170mm
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
tube lens - approx 170mm
Geoff
There's a Nikkor 150mm enlarger lens which works.
There were two versions, the later one having a 52mm filter thread, is easier to adapt to.
Next down of course is a host of 135mm camera and enlarger lenses.
At about 180mm there are some Apo Gerogon and similar enlarger lenses, but the one I have is fat and inconvenient to adapt to, so I've never tried it. For APS at least, many 70 - 210mm zoom lenses will work somewhat away from their long end, so would be worth a try.
The little Oly supplementary was mentioned recently but nobody reported trying it as a tube lens. If it's only a single pieces of glass (ie not a cemented achromat) it may not be great.
For physically short tube lenses, vignetting is more likely to be determined by the objective.
I was recently looking at a well covered field on 24 x 36 frame with a 105mm camera lens. The edges weren't very sharp, but adequate for partially out of focus, context material. That type of lack of coverage is likely to occur with a poor tube lens as well.
There were two versions, the later one having a 52mm filter thread, is easier to adapt to.
Next down of course is a host of 135mm camera and enlarger lenses.
At about 180mm there are some Apo Gerogon and similar enlarger lenses, but the one I have is fat and inconvenient to adapt to, so I've never tried it. For APS at least, many 70 - 210mm zoom lenses will work somewhat away from their long end, so would be worth a try.
The little Oly supplementary was mentioned recently but nobody reported trying it as a tube lens. If it's only a single pieces of glass (ie not a cemented achromat) it may not be great.
For physically short tube lenses, vignetting is more likely to be determined by the objective.
I was recently looking at a well covered field on 24 x 36 frame with a 105mm camera lens. The edges weren't very sharp, but adequate for partially out of focus, context material. That type of lack of coverage is likely to occur with a poor tube lens as well.
Chris R
Thanks for the help Chris.
The Oly f=17 is listed as an achromat at http://fuzzcraft.com/achromats.html , but I'm not too sure what that means.
The Oly f=17 is listed as an achromat at http://fuzzcraft.com/achromats.html , but I'm not too sure what that means.
Geoff
Well found. Then it may be a decent option - possibly better reversed because that would provide a better match for the intended focus distances.
Several two element achromat doublets have been reported as giving good results. EG the "original morfanon" and the Sigma Lifesize converter. The Raynoxes are triplets.
Thorlabs, Nikon, Mitutoyo and Olympus tube lenses are all multi element, but I don't know how many!
Extra elements should be particularly helpful at larger apertures than the f/22 or so at which we're often using tube lenses.
Several two element achromat doublets have been reported as giving good results. EG the "original morfanon" and the Sigma Lifesize converter. The Raynoxes are triplets.
Thorlabs, Nikon, Mitutoyo and Olympus tube lenses are all multi element, but I don't know how many!
Extra elements should be particularly helpful at larger apertures than the f/22 or so at which we're often using tube lenses.
Chris R
-
rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23626
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
Thorlabs ITL200 is documented as being 4 elements in 2 groups:Thorlabs, Nikon, Mitutoyo and Olympus tube lenses are all multi element, but I don't know how many!
But note that full frame is FN 43 (43 mm diagonal), and the ITL200 falls off significantly beyond FN 25.The lens will have better overall aberration correction than a standard achromat, especially off axis. The lens also has diffraction-limited performance to field number 25 for visible wavelengths.
In test results with a Mitutoyo 10X objective, the ITL200 is not as sharp as Raynox DCR-150 in the edges and corners of full frame. Of course the DCR-150 is not a "standard achromat" either. The manufacturer describes it as 2-group/3-element.
--Rik