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

Cheap ~200mm lens which is good wide open?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:12 pm    Post subject: Cheap ~200mm lens which is good wide open? Reply with quote
Hello!
I want to mount *infinity* microscope lenses on my DSLR exactly like it can be seen here:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9664
And achievment can be seen here: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15480

I'm searching for a lens around 200mm (could be also a zoom) wich is sharp wide open (stopping down would cause vignetting for this purpose I guess) and of course as cheap a possible Smile

Last edited by ForenSeil on Tue Jan 10, 2012 7:05 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
How about a Bronica?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bronica-200mm-F4-5-120-Lens-/300643781225?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item45ffc40a69#ht_500wt_1413


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
How about a Bronica?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bronica-200mm-F4-5-120-Lens-/300643781225?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item45ffc40a69#ht_500wt_1413

Is it sharp wide open`Smile ?


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Cheap ~200mm lens which is cheap wide open? Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
Hello!
I want to mount *infinity* microscope lenses on my DSLR exactly like it can be seen here:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9664
And achievment can be seen here: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15480

I'm searching for a lens around 200mm (could be also a zoom) wich is sharp wide open (stopping down would cause vignetting for this purpose I guess) and of course as cheap a possible Smile


"Cheap" and "sharp wide open" .......hmmmm. Not easy.

Maybe a Pentax 200?


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
How about a Bronica?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bronica-200mm-F4-5-120-Lens-/300643781225?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item45ffc40a69#ht_500wt_1413

Is it sharp wide open`Smile ?


Probably.

However, as it's a medium format lens it won't cause vignetting problems so you should be able to stop it down.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pentax 200mm f4 M42 SMC Takumar sharp wide open, Meyer , Pentacon 200mm lenses also pretty good. Russian 200mm Jupiter lens also


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Meyer/Pentacon 200mm. About £20-40GBP if you look around.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have an Auto Cosinon F3.5 200mm that is quite sharp WO.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice! Wow that is a clean setup.

I remember this link Let's Build a STEREO-ZOOM MICROSCOPE


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If all you need is 10x, why go to all that trouble? If you can manage to get the extension, a 35/4.5 Tominon will shoot better -- if you get a good one, in my experience they're somewhat variable, possibly due to being variably dirty -- and will cost a lot less.

If you have the money, get a used Wild Photomakroscope.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks to all
I think I will give the Meyer Orestegor 200 F4 a try as I can get one for free Smile

danfromm wrote:
If all you need is 10x, why go to all that trouble? If you can manage to get the extension, a 35/4.5 Tominon will shoot better -- if you get a good one, in my experience they're somewhat variable, possibly due to being variably dirty -- and will cost a lot less.

If you have the money, get a used Wild Photomakroscope.

A photomacroscope costs new about 4000€ and used maybe 1/4 or something, right?
Why taking a lens and a "body" when I can reach the same quality with a used microscope lens you will get the same or bette quality for a lot less. And now, I don't have the money Smile

Another reason is because I already have some microscope lenses avaiable and the shorter Tominon Macro lenses don't go very often on Ebay. I'm a little impatient Smile. Also I like to test some Carl Zeiss Planapochromat and Planachromat Microscope lenses, which a very cheap on Ebay Germany (30€ upwards) and all pretty unknown for macrographie.
Why do you think the Tominon will shoot better? The Tominons are decent, but with a good microscope lens I think it's easy to beat them.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You need fixed focal lens which will not be cheap! Sharp lenses are expensive. From those who I have tested - forget about the pentacon 200 4.0! Maybe the cheapest lens for the job will be CZJ Sonnar 180 2.8 or 200 2.8. You can try also Tair 300 4.5 ... The lens must be extra sharp to achieve this kind of magnification!


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
simbon4o wrote:
You need fixed focal lens which will not be cheap! Sharp lenses are expensive. From those who I have tested - forget about the pentacon 200 4.0! Maybe the cheapest lens for the job will be CZJ Sonnar 180 2.8 or 200 2.8. You can try also Tair 300 4.5 ... The lens must be extra sharp to achieve this kind of magnification!

Hmm I have a Tair 3S or 3C somewhere around here Smile
Also a Tokina RMC 70-XXX (don't know) F4.5 Macro is lying around here somewhere; I have no clue if it's sharp wide open, I never used it.

DSC00285 von Chloressigsäureethylester auf Flickr


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That is a 75-260, I have the same lens badged as a Hoya. Not tried mine either.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
Another reason is because I already have some microscope lenses avaiable and the shorter Tominon Macro lenses don't go very often on Ebay. I'm a little impatient Smile. Also I like to test some Carl Zeiss Planapochromat and Planachromat Microscope lenses, which a very cheap on Ebay Germany (30€ upwards) and all pretty unknown for macrographie.
Why do you think the Tominon will shoot better? The Tominons are decent, but with a good microscope lens I think it's easy to beat them.


Ah! The corrupting influences of "what I have," "what I know (and don't know)," and "I want it now!"

Re the Tominon, it has several advantages over microscope lenses. The big one is coverage at low magnification. Coverage includes flatness of field. The examples you linked to had poor image quality in the corners.

FWIW, I did once try out a 10x NA 0.17 Beck flat mount microscope lens, found that it was very good 25:1. Not so good at 10:1, among other things poor coverage on 24x36.

And I have tried out three 35/4.5 Tominons at 6:1 - 18:1. They're better at higher magnification than at lower, are acceptable. No coverage issues on 24x36.

Re what you may not know, buy and read Brian Bracegirdle's book Scientific Photomacrography. Has much the same content as Lester Lefkowitz' The Manual of Closeup Photography, is drier.

If I recall correctly, you recently posted a request for advice on inexpensive lenses usable from 1:1 to 20:1. Are you still trying to work at that range of magnifications?


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
Pentax 200mm f4 M42 SMC Takumar sharp wide open, Meyer , Pentacon 200mm lenses also pretty good. Russian 200mm Jupiter lens also


+1


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I found a new solution, a cheap "tube-lens". Gives stunning results
Setup: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12535&
Results:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15159
Now beat that with a Tominon Wink

I will try Orestegor 200/4 and the Tair 3S while looking for a cheap tube lens.
Thanks to all Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
Now beat that with a Tominon Wink


Tominons are just too slow for that kind of magnification and the resulting quality is heavily influenced by the diffraction, among other things.
The Tominon 17mm is F/4 while the Mitutoyo BD Plan Apo 10/0.28 used in those shots You linked to is approximately F/2.5-3. Also, Tominon 17mm is not described as apochromatic. Still, here is what I've got with it on bellows at 10X:



Alex


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Alex H wrote:

Quote:
Tominons are just too slow for that kind of magnification and the resulting quality is heavily influenced by the diffraction, among other things.
The Tominon 17mm is F/4 while the Mitutoyo BD Plan Apo 10/0.28 used in those shots You linked to is approximately F/2.5-3. Also, Tominon 17mm is not described as apochromatic. Still, here is what I've got with it on bellows at 10X:


Interesting. The relationship between f/# and NA is F/# = 1/(2*NA). The Mitutoyo lens' f/# is 1/.56 = 1.8. The f/4 Tominon's NA is .125

All of the Tominon macro lenses' maximum apertures are towards the slow end of the range of macro lenses of the same focal lengths. The fastest ones run around f/2 (NA .25). They're all too slow to do what they do, which suggests there's something wrong with the claim.

Without knowing the magnifications at which the fly shots were taken its impossible to know effective aperture and the diffraction limit.

More seriously, Alex, did you show us the result of stacking a series of shots? I ask because it shows greater depth of field than I'd have expected given apparent magnification.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sorry, I was wrong with the F stop for the Mitutoyo lens - I just guesstimated.

In my original post I was merely referring to the picture of Winter bug Boreus hyemalis, shot at 12X and stacked from multiple shots. The picture from this link:

ForenSeil wrote:
I found a new solution, a cheap "tube-lens". Gives stunning results
Setup: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12535&


What I am trying to say that with Tominon 17mm at F/4 my results are already influenced by diffraction at 10X, see the crop from the same fly here (50% magnification):



The Mitutoyo with its F/1.8 will perform better at the same magnification and will definitely outperform Tominon at higher magnification, but will require smaller step between individual pictures in the stack.

In my personal experience, 35mm Tominon will perform very good at X3-6 and 17mm Tominon will perform acceptable at X10 and they do not cost as much as Mitutoyo. But for higher magnification the Tominons will not perform well. I am using them on 16 and 24 Mp APS-C cameras and the diffraction is the main problem here. Of course, when used with the cameras with lower pixel density (6 Mp APS-C, 12 Mp Full frame) the influence of diffraction will be less noticeable.

However, it is becoming a bit confusing here as we do not really know what kind of magnification the OP wants to achieve. So all I can recommend for now is the book "Digital photography for science" http://savazzi.freehostia.com/dp.htm. It has a lot of information on photomicrography, lenses and the relationship between aperture, magnification and diffraction limits for cameras with different pixel density.

And yes, the picture in my previous post is a stack, just like all pictures in the links OP linked to before. At these magnifications stacking is the only way to get good results as far as I know.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1