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

Testing Macro lenses pt. 1
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:28 pm    Post subject: Testing Macro lenses pt. 1 Reply with quote
Thanks to the wonderful advice and guidance of Ray Parkhurst, I've built a macro setup, It uses an EOS 650D a set of Russian bellows, some ARCA Swiss bits, a chopping board, some aluminium extrusions and some cheap LED lights. Seems to work very well.



I have quite a few lenses that might work well in this application so today I tried out four different candidates to see which does the best job for shooting really tiny things. I used part of my spider's shed shell as the subject - the part where the eyes are, which you can see as white ovals. Two of the lenses did well one is a bit crap and one is awful. To make these images I had to take between 40 and 50 photos then stack them together in Zerene Stacker software, so it took a few hours. Most enjoyable way to spend a dull, wet day though.





The candidates, from left to right:

Carl Zeiss Projection Luminar 4.5/40
Olympus 3.4/40 (microfiche lens)
Wollensak 6.3/65 Microfilm Projection
Rodenstock Magnagon 5.6/75



I won't tell you which shot which, see if you can guess.

#1


#2


#3


#4


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very interesting Ian, and compliments on your technique. Like 1 small I started doing a bit of a classic macro lens (mostly vivitars and tamrons) comparison, but that was just shots of a banknote. #4 looks clearly the best.
Which one....no idea!


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cheers, I can certainly improve my technique, at the moment I'm very much learning.

#4 is definitely the best, I think the two crappy ones may be due to using the lens outside the intended magnification range for that lens design, I'll try to figure out if that's the case as I learn more.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cool number 4 Like 1 small maybe rodenstock that one? but olympus also comes to mind Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Kind of hard to tell with such different magnifications of the first two (40mm) vs the last two (65 & 75mm, the order you listed them).
Looks like you shot all 4 at full extension of the bellows, I wouldn't mind seeing the first one at the same magnification as the last two to better compare them.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lightshow wrote:
Kind of hard to tell with such different magnifications of the first two (40mm) vs the last two (65 & 75mm, the order you listed them).
Looks like you shot all 4 at full extension of the bellows, I wouldn't mind seeing the first one at the same magnification as the last two to better compare them.


Yes, they are in the order I listed them, the Rodenstock is last and has produced the best result, but as I said, I think the others could do better if I found the best magnification for them.

I need to figure out how to do that, so far I have only been able to get the lenses to focus at a single magnification, no matter how much I move the camera and bellows up and down using the ARCA Swiss rail and trying different amounts of bellows extensions.

I've got a lot to learn about this extreme macro work, this is just my first attempt.

Here's a stacked image I shot today with the Rodenstock Magnagon, it's a dead housefly.



PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Yes, they are in the order I listed them, the Rodenstock is last and has produced the best result, but as I said, I think the others could do better if I found the best magnification for them.

I need to figure out how to do that, so far I have only been able to get the lenses to focus at a single magnification, no matter how much I move the camera and bellows up and down using the ARCA Swiss rail and trying different amounts of bellows extensions.

I've got a lot to learn about this extreme macro work, this is just my first attempt.


Looking at the Luminar image, there is quite a bit to be gained from improved stacking. Either smaller steps or different parameters for the stacking process. I am not an expert in the stacking field, you should ask at the photomacrography.net/forum, but I have seen enough of these kind of images to recognise the bands of unsharpness and slight halos around some hairs as a stacking problem.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, I noticed the stacking issues on the Luminar image and I have no idea why as all four images were done the same exact way. I'll see if I can get better results from the Luminar.

Here's some other, unstacked shots with the Luminar.


#1


#2


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Is the wooden table reflecting light and colouring the image?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Luminars are quite susceptible to flare as well, which could be compromising your images - those are some bright lights close to the end of the lens. Could you rig up a little bit of a baffle to act as a lens hood?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dickb wrote:

Looking at the Luminar image, there is quite a bit to be gained from improved stacking. ...the bands of unsharpness and slight halos around some hairs as a stacking problem.


I agree, there were several technical flaws, but the image #1 is the best in terms of resolution in the object domain.

Image #4 seems to have a higher resolution, but this is simply the result of a much lower magnification being used, producing a higher resolution in the image domain.To make this clearer, imagine two landscape photos, one taken with the best 50mm lens in the world and the other with a mediocre 500mm telephoto lens. The picture taken with the 50mm lens will appear to be sharper (better resolution in the image domain) than the one taken with the 500m lens, but the image produced by the 500mm lens will show objects (better resolution in the object domain) that will not be visible in the image produced by the 50mm lens.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
Is the wooden table reflecting light and colouring the image?


The LEDs lights are very warm, I didn't bother trying to get the colours right in PP because they were just test shots.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
JMC wrote:
The Luminars are quite susceptible to flare as well, which could be compromising your images - those are some bright lights close to the end of the lens. Could you rig up a little bit of a baffle to act as a lens hood?


It's got a long, approx 3cm hood built into it as it's the projection version from the Zeiss Ultraphot.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
JMC wrote:
The Luminars are quite susceptible to flare as well, which could be compromising your images - those are some bright lights close to the end of the lens. Could you rig up a little bit of a baffle to act as a lens hood?


It's got a long, approx 3cm hood built into it as it's the projection version from the Zeiss Ultraphot.


Ah right, perfect. The Luminars I've got are much shorter than that with the elements right at the front of some of them. They really do have a tendancy to flare unless the lighting is just right.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's good to know. This one, the hood can be unscrewed and then you have a more normal looking Luminar, albeit without an iris.

I made a few more stacks with the Luminar and the results are not great, which I put down to operator error. I think this lens needs such tiny movements between each exposure when stacking that the bellows I'm using can't do it and it needs micrometer-like movements.


#1


#2


PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ian, here are my Luminars - the 40mm one is in the middle.

#1


For those last 2 images, #2 looks really good to me. Are you not happy with that one?

Using these lenses takes practice. I'm still learning, but the Photomacrography forum which was mentioned above, would be worth a look if you're not on there already. And yes, as you mentioned, very small movements are required. I use an old microscope stage and fine focusing system as a basis for some of my macro work.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I am happy with that last one, yes, it was the only one of 5 stacks I did that day with the Luminar that I was happy with though, so I'm not sure what I'm doing right/wrong.

I shall indeed join that forum, best to ask the experts!

Lovely line up of Luminars, I am most jealous.

I am really enjoying the Magnagon 5.6/75 though, it seems perfect for my setup and skills, here's the same subject - Teasel spikes, done with the Magnagon and a single frame from that stack that I kept as I really liked it for it's 'artsy' aesthetic.


#1


#2


PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Ian, it's taken me a while to get all 5. I got the 25mm one first, and found it had really good UV transmission, which made me interested in the others. There's a quick writeup on that here if you're interested - https://jmcscientificconsulting.com/uv-macrophotography-with-zeiss-luminar-25mm/

The 100mm had pretty rubbish UV transmission unfortunately, but was nice for macro work in the visible (http://forum.mflenses.com/garden-shots-with-zeiss-luminar-100mm-f6-3-t81567,highlight,%2Bluminar.html).

Then a few weeks ago a microscope dealer I know contacted me to say he had the other 3. They all turned out to be between the 25mm and 100mm in terms of UV transmission - https://jmcscientificconsulting.com/uv-transmission-of-zeiss-luminar-lenses/

Your stacking is much better than mine. I only recently got Zerene, and need to spend more time with it.

That Magnagon looks pretty good - nice find.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have read that the Schneider & ISCO cine projection lenses have very good UV transmittance. They are generally 20-50 quid on ebay, I have several, very good lenses indeed.

I've had the Magnagon 7 or 8 years, bought it NOS on ebay for about 25 quid, the seller had loads, they sold out fairly quickly I seem to remember. It's basically the APO-Rodagon-D with a fixed iris, apparently it's got exotic low dispersion glass inside. It certainly works well, so I'm very happy I got one so cheap.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1