Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Macro imaging
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:50 pm    Post subject: Macro imaging Reply with quote

I do not know if this is the right spot to ask this question. If it is the wrong place please forgive me.


I normally use a regular lens to get images by using an EMCCD camera. However, I am considering buying a macro lens to get macro images. I was checking macro lenses listed in the webpage below.

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/schneider-macro-imaging-lenses/13668

I want mm range depth of field. And also I am wondering how working distance affects the image quality. As far as I know in macro photography, if the working distance is 4x of the focal length, the magnification would be 1:1. However, if the magnification differs, what would be the effect on image quality?

I would be appreciated if anyone gives an idea.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:34 pm    Post subject: Re: Macro imaging Reply with quote

oksuz wrote:
I do not know if this is the right spot to ask this question. If it is the wrong place please forgive me.


I normally use a regular lens to get images by using an EMCCD camera. However, I am considering buying a macro lens to get macro images. I was checking macro lenses listed in the webpage below.

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/schneider-macro-imaging-lenses/13668

I want mm range depth of field. And also I am wondering how working distance affects the image quality. As far as I know in macro photography, if the working distance is 4x of the focal length, the magnification would be 1:1. However, if the magnification differs, what would be the effect on image quality?

I would be appreciated if anyone gives an idea.


1x magnification is when the sensor is 4x focal length from the subject (this is the focusing distance).
Working distance is usually used to mean the clear distance from the end of the lens to the subject which will be considerably less!

Working distance is typically greater for long focal lengths but it depends on the lens design. With many wide angle lenses the front surface of the lens hits the subject before 1:1 magnification is reached.

Photography certainly gets more difficult as magnifications increase - you get more issues with vibration, diffraction, DOF, lighting...

I'm not aware of any correlation between working distance & IQ, but I know the optics become more awkward as working distance is increased at a particular magnification.

There are microscopes designed to have significantly increased working distances - unfortunately I don't have access to one of them - using the weakest objective on my microscope the working distance is only a cm or two.

If your subject is static there is a microscopy trick that can increase the effective DOF of your images without introducing issues with diffraction (which closing the aperture will do). In the hands of an expert 'Focus stacking' can work wonders see http://extreme-macro.co.uk/two-fly-macro/. Johan also has loads of other useful macro information on his website.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 30, 2018 12:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Klaus will undoubtedly weigh in shortly. He is one of our resident macrophotography experts. His work is extroardinary. He is also one of the mods.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:55 pm    Post subject: Re: Macro imaging Reply with quote

oksuz wrote:
I do not know if this is the right spot to ask this question. If it is the wrong place please forgive me.


I normally use a regular lens to get images by using an EMCCD camera. However, I am considering buying a macro lens to get macro images. I was checking macro lenses listed in the webpage below.

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/schneider-macro-imaging-lenses/13668

I want mm range depth of field. And also I am wondering how working distance affects the image quality. As far as I know in macro photography, if the working distance is 4x of the focal length, the magnification would be 1:1. However, if the magnification differs, what would be the effect on image quality?

I would be appreciated if anyone gives an idea.


Hi oksuz,

Those Schneider macro lenses are very specialized animals. They do not have focusing capability, so need to be put on a separate focusing helicoid or bellows. Is this the path you want to go down? If so, I can suggest some much less expensive alternatives to get started.

If you're just looking for macro capability from your camera, you might consider a standard macro lens like the Nikon 55mm. It would require an adapter for your camera, but it has built-in manual helicoid. It can go natively up to 1:2 and up to 1:1 with an extension. It can go beyond that but image quality and working distance both suffer.

Do you want to go beyond 1:1 magnification? Technically (at least today), "macro" starts at 1:1. It used to start at 1:2 due to the weirdness that happens with extension vs working distance as you go from 1:2 up to 1:1, but the lens mfrs figured out how to solve this long ago and redefined "macro" as 1:1. But even still, most "macro" lenses only go up to 1:1 natively. They can go farther with extensions but quality suffers. If you want to go beyond 1:1, then something like the Schneider lenses you linked to will do better for you, yet again there are less expensive options to choose from.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, not much to add to what Ray has already mentioned!

Except that I would possibly also consider focus stacking to get the wanted DOF:
http://extreme-macro.co.uk/focus-stacking/


PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:17 pm    Post subject: Re: Macro imaging Reply with quote

Ray Parkhurst wrote:
oksuz wrote:
I do not know if this is the right spot to ask this question. If it is the wrong place please forgive me.


I normally use a regular lens to get images by using an EMCCD camera. However, I am considering buying a macro lens to get macro images. I was checking macro lenses listed in the webpage below.

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/schneider-macro-imaging-lenses/13668

I want mm range depth of field. And also I am wondering how working distance affects the image quality. As far as I know in macro photography, if the working distance is 4x of the focal length, the magnification would be 1:1. However, if the magnification differs, what would be the effect on image quality?

I would be appreciated if anyone gives an idea.


Hi oksuz,

Those Schneider macro lenses are very specialized animals. They do not have focusing capability, so need to be put on a separate focusing helicoid or bellows. Is this the path you want to go down? If so, I can suggest some much less expensive alternatives to get started.

If you're just looking for macro capability from your camera, you might consider a standard macro lens like the Nikon 55mm. It would require an adapter for your camera, but it has built-in manual helicoid. It can go natively up to 1:2 and up to 1:1 with an extension. It can go beyond that but image quality and working distance both suffer.

Do you want to go beyond 1:1 magnification? Technically (at least today), "macro" starts at 1:1. It used to start at 1:2 due to the weirdness that happens with extension vs working distance as you go from 1:2 up to 1:1, but the lens mfrs figured out how to solve this long ago and redefined "macro" as 1:1. But even still, most "macro" lenses only go up to 1:1 natively. They can go farther with extensions but quality suffers. If you want to go beyond 1:1, then something like the Schneider lenses you linked to will do better for you, yet again there are less expensive options to choose from.


Actually when the term 'macro' was first proposed in 1902 (in "THE A B C OF PHOTO-MICROGRAPHY / A Practical Handbook for Beginners", W. H. Walmsley,) it was for images between one and ten diameters.
1x to 10x is also by far the most common definition in the books I have on macro photography.

Subsequently lens manufacturers chose to make that the final image rather than the negative to allow them to describe 1/4x capable close focusing lenses as 'macro', but as prints can be made in a huge range of sizes this makes a mockery of the term. Back in 1902 prints were made as contact images of the negative without further enlargement.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:03 am    Post subject: Re: Macro imaging Reply with quote

DConvert wrote:
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
oksuz wrote:
I do not know if this is the right spot to ask this question. If it is the wrong place please forgive me.


I normally use a regular lens to get images by using an EMCCD camera. However, I am considering buying a macro lens to get macro images. I was checking macro lenses listed in the webpage below.

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/schneider-macro-imaging-lenses/13668

I want mm range depth of field. And also I am wondering how working distance affects the image quality. As far as I know in macro photography, if the working distance is 4x of the focal length, the magnification would be 1:1. However, if the magnification differs, what would be the effect on image quality?

I would be appreciated if anyone gives an idea.


Hi oksuz,

Those Schneider macro lenses are very specialized animals. They do not have focusing capability, so need to be put on a separate focusing helicoid or bellows. Is this the path you want to go down? If so, I can suggest some much less expensive alternatives to get started.

If you're just looking for macro capability from your camera, you might consider a standard macro lens like the Nikon 55mm. It would require an adapter for your camera, but it has built-in manual helicoid. It can go natively up to 1:2 and up to 1:1 with an extension. It can go beyond that but image quality and working distance both suffer.

Do you want to go beyond 1:1 magnification? Technically (at least today), "macro" starts at 1:1. It used to start at 1:2 due to the weirdness that happens with extension vs working distance as you go from 1:2 up to 1:1, but the lens mfrs figured out how to solve this long ago and redefined "macro" as 1:1. But even still, most "macro" lenses only go up to 1:1 natively. They can go farther with extensions but quality suffers. If you want to go beyond 1:1, then something like the Schneider lenses you linked to will do better for you, yet again there are less expensive options to choose from.


Actually when the term 'macro' was first proposed in 1902 (in "THE A B C OF PHOTO-MICROGRAPHY / A Practical Handbook for Beginners", W. H. Walmsley,) it was for images between one and ten diameters.
1x to 10x is also by far the most common definition in the books I have on macro photography.

Subsequently lens manufacturers chose to make that the final image rather than the negative to allow them to describe 1/4x capable close focusing lenses as 'macro', but as prints can be made in a huge range of sizes this makes a mockery of the term. Back in 1902 prints were made as contact images of the negative without further enlargement.


Thanks for the further historical context. Seems "macro" has always been 1x and larger, except sometime mid-20th century when lens manufacturers pushed the limits for marketing purposes.

I agree that the term is mocked by the allowance of the final print (or digital image) to conform to the 1x standard. In some forums (maybe all) folks will call an image "macro" if it is cropped such that the final FOV would conform to 1x. I think this is ridiculous since it's possible to take very low mag images and make a small crop. I believe the definition should be that the 1x is on the original film/negative/sensor.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 4:40 am    Post subject: Re: Macro imaging Reply with quote

oksuz wrote:
I do not know if this is the right spot to ask this question. If it is the wrong place please forgive me.


I normally use a regular lens to get images by using an EMCCD camera. However, I am considering buying a macro lens to get macro images. I was checking macro lenses listed in the webpage below.

https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/schneider-macro-imaging-lenses/13668

I want mm range depth of field. And also I am wondering how working distance affects the image quality. As far as I know in macro photography, if the working distance is 4x of the focal length, the magnification would be 1:1. However, if the magnification differs, what would be the effect on image quality?

I would be appreciated if anyone gives an idea.


Forgot to mention, if you are after macro lenses, have a look at my older site http://macrolenses.de
as it has quite a few dedicated macro lenses listed with data and images of them.

Btw. which EMCCD camera are you using, and if I may ask, to image which objects?