1mm WD

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

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

1mm WD

Post by Macrero »

So this morning I received the Oly UMPlanFl 50/0.80 BD. Just for the record I tried it as-is. As expected, lighting was extremely difficult and unacceptable.

I tried to remove the housing in a non destructive way, but it was impossible.

Then, without thinking it twice, I sawed the front part of the metal housing by the blue ring.

After the mod, difference in lighting is night and day. Haven't made any stacks yet, but here is a single test shot with 105mm tube lens at 29X on APS-C sensor, continuous light.

https://images2.imgbox.com/e5/ba/ZiBMg0Ue_o.jpg

I think lighting is more than acceptable. Will make some stacks tonight.

I bought the objective for a fraction of the Mitty 50/0.75 HR second hand market price. As I commented in other thread, I haven't tried the Mitty 50 HR. Chris S. sent me a comparison with the the "regular" Mitty 50 and difference is obvious.

Yet I think that the ELWD of the Mitty might be misleading, since the 5.2mm on 50X HR objective may seem a lot, but you have to take into account the huge barrel/front element, which seriously limits the angle of light and
makes lighting difficult.

And vice versa: 1mm WD might seem unacceptably short, but when it comes to bullet-shaped objectives with tiny front part/element, lighting is not such of a problem.

Long story short: I am quite happy with what I have seen so far in the test single shots. Also it seems that coverage is more than acceptable even at 29X on APS-C sensor. I am gonna make some test stack tonight.

Best,

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Scarodactyl
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Post by Scarodactyl »

Wow, I can't wait to see a stack off of that!

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1710
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Contact:

Re: 1mm WD

Post by Smokedaddy »

Macrero wrote:I tried to remove the housing in a non destructive way, but it was impossible.

Then, without thinking it twice, I sawed the front part of the metal housing by the blue ring.
I'd like to see the objective if you don't mind. BTW, did you mean saw off or did you turn it off using a lathe?

If you don't mind me asking, what did you pay for it?

-JW:

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8564
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

Well here's one like it perhaps:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Olympus-UMPL ... 7675.l2557

It certainly LOOKS like a tool with 2 pins would undo something at the front.
Did you try any solvent or heat?
It would be nice to know how well the light is diffused if it's sent down the illumination collar as nature intended.
Chris R

RobertOToole
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 1mm WD

Post by RobertOToole »

Macrero wrote:
......
After the mod, difference in lighting is night and day. Haven't made any stacks yet, but here is a single test shot with 105mm tube lens at 29X on APS-C sensor, continuous light......


Best,

- Macrero
:shock: 29x 0.80, I had to read the numbers twice for that to sink in.

Impressive, and the image quality in the sample would make me happy, well done Macrero!

Robert

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Smokedaddy,

will take some pics of the objective tomorrow, it's early morning here.

I just sawed it by hand, I am a brave guy :lol:

The objective Chris linked is the one I bought, 300 EUR shipped.

Chris,

have you studied at Hogwarts? :shock: :D That's the exact objective I got.

I managed to unscrew the front part, but that's not enough. You have to unscrew the whole housing, but I was unable to do so.

I am afraid I can no longer try the BD ilumination with this objective, since I already modded it.

Robert,

yep, you read it right :P And what's more impressive to me is that coverage seems to be near perfect at 29X :shock:

I am stacking a quick test stack, though I had not realized that the diffuser was slightly touching the wing :x so there is some movement :( Hope Zerene could fix it...

Will do more tomorrow anyway...

Best,

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Well, Zerene kinda fixed it. Here is the first test stack at 29X at high-res.

Coverage is indeed perfect. There is room for pushing it down even more. 20X/0.80? :shock: UHR? :D

https://images2.imgbox.com/9e/8d/cHB0UUvi_o.jpg

Will try something better tomorrow, winter is long... :( Luckily I have a new toy :lol:

Edit: steps are kinda long: 0.65µm. I will do tests with shorter steps.
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Here is the objective after the surgery, barrel is quite thick:

Image

Image

Not the beautiest thing, but hey, I will not be shooting weddings with it...

- Macrero
Last edited by Macrero on Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Adalbert
Posts: 1194
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Post by Adalbert »

Hello Macrero,
Then, without thinking it twice, I sawed the front part of the metal housing by the blue ring.
well done, it is the best solution :-)
But illumination is still not easy :-(
BR, ADi

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Hi Adi,

sure, it's not easy, 1mm is... 1mm, but it is viable and I am quite satisfied with the result. The excellent coverage was a great (and unexpected) bonus.

I need more light though, in order to use better/stronger diffusers and get better lighting, while working at a reasonable shutter speed.

Best,

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Adalbert
Posts: 1194
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Post by Adalbert »

Hello Macrero,
I need more light though, in order to use better/stronger diffusers
if I use 1/128 power of the flashes then the diffusor is really thin made of the transparent tracing paper.

BR, ADi

Macrero
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

I'll pass on flashes for now, I prefer continuous ilumination, I find it much more comfortable and easy to work with. Another factor is the scales jolt issue I was not aware of.

I'll add an additional couple of light sources to my continuous light setup.

Best,

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

MacroLab3D
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 11:40 am
Location: Ukraine

Post by MacroLab3D »

Amazing results! Thanks for sharing!

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic