Comparing macro lenses using MTF - part IV - 1x

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Miljenko
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 11:53 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Comparing macro lenses using MTF - part IV - 1x

Post by Miljenko »

Another modest magnification that should be an easy task for most enlarger lenses. According to my tests it isn't. Other lenses like microfiche, scanner and small industrial lenses are not even close to perform at this low magnification.
During testing at 1:1 I've stumbled upon one tiny obstacle: figuring out in which direction should I point the lens in reference to the camera. Some prefer normal orientation (about 75% of them) and some reverse (25%). There is a third kind, those with simetrical optical design which perform identically both ways. Incidently, one with such simetrical design is a winner of 1x magnification comparison: Rodenstock Apo Rodagon D 75mm f4 1x.

Image

Not a big surprise because it is designed for exactly this magnification. Other enlarger lenses actually struggle with this particular magnification; many perform ok below 1:1 and equally decent over 1:1 (reversed), but not that good at 1:1. I have assembled a list of all the lenses tested at 1x magnification, some with values measured in both directions in order to ilustrate the effect of changing orientation:

Image

This time there were two unexpected positive surprises: Tominon 50mm f4.5 lens from Polaroid series and Minolta C.E. 50mm f2.8 enlarger lens. Both are cheap (selling from $35 on Ebay) but performed better than some costing ten times more. Again Rodenstock Rodagon 80mm f4 performed very well but it is still more expensive than those two. Ancient Leitz Focotar has very high central resolution but is not that stellar at the edges. Another oldie, Fujimoto E-Lucky 75mm f4.5 Anastigmat has nicely balanced resolution across the frame with somewhat higher CA than average, despite it's name. This tiny but heavy lens is beautifuly crafted so if you find it at reasonably low price, buy it for your display case. Beside nice surprises there were couple of ugly ones as well; here I have entered only one: Tominon 35mm f4.5. Tested it at 3 different apertures, it simply performed well below average. I thought at first 1:1 is out of it's design frame but unfortunately, it didn't shine at any magnification. Since I've read positive reviews for this lens, it might be that I'm stuck with a lemon sample.

Image

There were couple of other enlarger lenses I've tested at 1:1 but none of them worth mentioning because of their inferior performance: Vivitar 75mm f3.5, Fujimoto E-Lucky 75mm f3.5, Meopta Anaret 50mm f2.8, Wetzlar Wilon 50mm f4.5 and Zeiss Jena Tessar 75mm f6.3.
If you need 1x lens and money is not an issue, get Apo Rodagon D 75mm f4 but even if 1x is not exactly your priority, do buy Tominon 50mm f4.5 because it's unrealistically cheap (for now).
Hoping this 1x part of my testing series gave you some useful info.
Next week: 2x shootout. Have a nice weekend.
Miljenko
All things are number - Pythagoras

mjkzz
Posts: 1681
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:38 pm
Location: California/Shenzhen
Contact:

Post by mjkzz »

Thanks for all the hard work. It seems lenses (not sure about obj) do perform the best for their designed magnification. Can't wait for 2x info next week because I am thinking to get some 2x lenses.

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3402
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

Indeed the 50TT is a sharp lens. I believe it is symmetric, though your testing only showed it one direction. I have used it for coins from ~0.35:1 up to 2:1 with good results. A few years ago I was so pleased with the 50TT that I had Raf build an adapter that would replace the 48mm dovetail on front of Vivitar bellows, offering 40mm threading rather than the standard T-Mount. This gives a few extra mm less extension and allows the 50TT to be used at a bit wider mag range, down to ~0.3:1 IIRC. I should put one of these together again and check. FYI Raf also makes a 39mm version of this adapter.

Edited to add: Miljenko, you say about the 75ARD1 performance: "Not a big surprise because it is designed for exactly this magnification. Other enlarger lenses actually struggle with this particular magnification; many perform ok below 1:1 and equally decent over 1:1 (reversed), but not that good at 1:1".

The 75ARD1 is not an enlarger lens, but a Duplication/Reproduction lens. That's what the "D" stands for. Rodenstock earlier name for the lens was "Apo-Rodagon R", ie Reproduction. I think they changed to "D" when they added the 75ARD2 and 120ARD to the lineup because the word "Reproduction" is generally associate with 1:1 specifically. It's exactly opposite of logic, but that's marketing for you.

The 75ARD1 was made to fill the gap you describe from 1:2 up to 2:1. Enlarger lenses are generally designed for 1:20 up to 1:2 (or 2:1 up to some max in reverse). Some longer focal length lenses could cover lower mags and larger formats, but the 2-20 range is pretty ubiquitous.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic