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

Extremely high resolution lenses for 35mm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting thread!

Does anyone have experience converting an old slide duplicator for negative DSLR "scanning"? Im interested if there are any recommendations from those who tried it.

Since I stubbornly tend to use manual lenses on DSLRs, I have recently been thinking about resolution. Many lenses that look great on b/w film, also enlarged, look quite blurry and too glowy on modern DSLR with 18+mp. Some of this is perhaps due to the problem of focusing accurately on a DSLR (which I am trying to fix in another thread here), but I also thought that perhaps the sensor resolution is just too good (compared to say Tri-X) so that a slight inaccuracy in focusing becomes more apparent.

My favourite lens, the Nikkor Ais 35/1.4 looks wonderful and sharp at its biggest aperture on film, but not really that fantastic on digital until I stop down. There is no need to focus perfectly on a large grained film, and if the lens has a lot of glow and blur it anyway gets hidden by the grain structure. Which I do find estethically pleasing, I like a pretty grain Smile


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
Using a microscope to examine negs would be a great way of comparing lenses, but if I don't fit a camera to the microscope people wont just take my word without proof, when saying "one lens is superior to another".


It's actually quite easy to do this, but you might want to look at it the other way around: fit a microscope objective to the camera. All it takes is proper extensions and adapters. I cover this extensively in threads on a couple other forums, primarily related to coin photography but no reason it won't work just as well for ultra-high-res negative scanning.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now that piques my interest Ray. So what do I need - a set of M42 bellows, an RMS-M42 adapter and an RMS thread microscope lens? What kind of working distances and magnifications does that give? If i wanted to digitise a 35mm negative this way, how would I do it - by taking multiple pictures, moving the negative a bit each time then joining them together afterwards?

I do have a set of M39 bellows and a lens that I think is for a microscope, it says 'Meade OR 6mm Multi-Coated' on it and has an adapter on it to make it M39, glass looks nice and clear.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Now that piques my interest Ray. So what do I need - a set of M42 bellows, an RMS-M42 adapter and an RMS thread microscope lens? What kind of working distances and magnifications does that give? If i wanted to digitise a 35mm negative this way, how would I do it - by taking multiple pictures, moving the negative a bit each time then joining them together afterwards?

I do have a set of M39 bellows and a lens that I think is for a microscope, it says 'Meade OR 6mm Multi-Coated' on it and has an adapter on it to make it M39, glass looks nice and clear.

Yup, M42 bellows, RMS-M42 adapter + microscope lens will work as extreme high resolution macro lens.
Only problem is focusing at high magnifactions with a bellows is very fiddly... and vibrations of your NEX-3 shutter might be a problem aswell (it was a main-reason for me to change from NEX-3 to NEX-5N because it has a vibration free shutter).

If you wan't to play with microscope lenses buy a decent microscope lens! CZJ microscope lenses are all crap in my experience bye the way (even the achromatic plan ones are light sabers with heavy focus shifting and vignetting to the corners). Try to get at least russian LOMO lenses - they have effectivly much better price/performance ratio. Best are made by Nikon, Olympus, Leitz.... or buy a cheap Chinese lens - some of them a very good (copies from the Olympus lenses etc.) - some are very crappy so it's always a bit gambling.

Working distance depends very strong on lens and magnification...
On a 4x or 10x microscope lens you usually only get 2-15mm etc.
Larger magnifications than 20x-40x are generally made for direct contact with optical oil or sometimes water for better contrast.

Be careful - many especially modern microscope lenses have an infinity symbol on their build - they need a further so called "tube lens" (any good lens with ~200mm focal length will work, shorter focal length would lead to strong vignetting) to produce a sharp picture. A 200mm+ enlarger or repro lens should be perfect for that job (G-Claron, Rodagon, etc.) as they don't add much CAs.

Once I've modified an cheap used Euromex RMS microscope (25€ on Ebay.de) with M42 mount (slaughtered from an M42 lens and glued with two-part epoxy metal glue).
I used Tokina RMC 200/3.5 focused to infinity as tube lenses for microscope lenses with infinity symbol and normal M42 extension tubes or bellows for microscope lenses without infinity symbol.




with bellows for normal lenses


with "tube lens" for infinite lenses






Here around 1:1 magnification! Look at the E from "EURO"!


That's around 10:1 with an Nikon 10x "infinite" lens. Notice the insanely small DOF!


crop, slight PP
If you would use a 100x microscope lens instead you could count bacterias here Smile

PS: Meade OR 6mm sounds more like an eyepiece, not like a lens.
Before you start to buy a bunch of crappy microscope lenses, expensive adapters, heavy tripod/mounts/microscopes etc. - try your Micro-Nikkor reversed first! No gambling, you can be pretty sure that you will get a usable IQ for (~4:1) magnfications. And as said the best way might be to use a repro stand or an enlarger to mount your camera.

Last edited by ForenSeil on Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:07 am; edited 9 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
On my microscope it looks like it needs step down ring to fit onto it:-



PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh, I love this thread Smile
One thing that bothers me, though: Ian, if you scan something, what file format
will you get? Does the scanner have a magic scan-to-jpeg-transformer?
Built-in jpeg transformers sometimes are not especially trustworthy,
to put it mildly...


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cheers Forenseil, that's given me something to think about.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
With pleasure!
Here that might be also helpful (in German lang. though):
http://www.dslr-forum.de/showpost.php?p=8556645&postcount=23
He uses a Rodagon 80/5.6 on belows as lens, am external flash behind a white paper (50cm between flash and paper) as light source and his results are looking very nice!

Rodagon 80 and Rodagon 105 are working better for repro work (~1:1,5) than most 50mm enlarger lenses bye the way, as 50mm enlarger lenses are optimized for higher enlargements.

Last edited by ForenSeil on Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:06 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
On my microscope it looks like it needs step down ring to fit onto it:-



If I guess the eyepiece diameter correctly such an adapter should work without further modification: http://www.ebay.de/itm/T-T2-Mount-Adapter-to-fit-23-2mm-23-biological-compound-microscope-Eyepiece-Tube-/140902247311?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20ce6dab8f or this if you have a NEX or MFT etc.: http://www.ebay.de/itm/C-mount-to-Microscope-black-23mm-eyepiece-adapter-/160892906162?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2575f6eab2
Depending on your sensor size the tube might cause a little vignetting though - you have to try it.

Or simply remove the tube for the eyepiece and glue (with 2-component epoxy!) an slaughtered M42 etc. mount on it instead, just like shown above. You can use the eyepiece-tube to make an M42-eypiece adapter afterwards if you want, so that you could still use it as microscope without camera, for example similar to this DIY adapter, made from the eyepiece tube, an "funnel" slaughtered from the same M42 lens I got the mount, an M42 extension tube and silicon joint compound:


Last edited by ForenSeil on Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:14 pm; edited 6 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Forenseil for showing interest, it look like I need a male thread to fit into the microscope (where the knurled ring is?)


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
Thanks Forenseil for showing interest, it look like I need a male thread to fit into the microscope (where the knurled ring is?)

Is the eyepiece not interchangable?
If it's not a T2 thread etc. it will be very hard to find an native adapter for such an old "school microscope".
(Or do you know someone who could drill such an adapter for you?)

As said, an easy option should be to glue an M42-mount with epoxy on it instead of the "eyepiece tube" and get/"add" the correct distance with M42 extension tubes.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
Excalibur wrote:
Thanks Forenseil for showing interest, it look like I need a male thread to fit into the microscope (where the knurled ring is?)

Is the eyepiece not interchangable?
If it's not a T2 thread etc. it will be very hard to find an native adapter for such an old "school microscope".
(Or do you know someone who could drill such an adapter for you?)

As said, an easy option should be to glue an M42-mount with epoxy on it instead of the "eyepiece tube" and get/"add" the correct distance with M42 extension tubes.


The thread is 34mm so maybe I need a male 34mm\42mm adapter and then look through the viewfinder to see if anything is in focus otherwise I'd need a bellows (well I have some rings). erm It seems it would have to be something like step up 34 to 52mm then step down 52 to 42mm Shocked



PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would not recommend going over 4x. This will require you to shoot something like 16 images across the field as you need to have a bit of overlap. You might even consider running a 4x objective at lower extension and magnification, perhaps 3x. This will slightly improve the sharpness (larger effective aperture) and reduce the total number of images to complete a full 35mm field. I personally recommend the Nikon 4 Plan 0.1 for this. It is sharp enough for the work you're doing and if you push it down to 3x it will still have enough coverage. Plus, they are pretty cheap and easy to get.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
and vibrations of your NEX-3 shutter might be a problem aswell (it was a main-reason for me to change from NEX-3 to NEX-5N because it has a vibration free shutter).


I considered the NEX5N when I bought my Canon but at that time I heard the tethering software was poor. How well does tethering work on the NEX5N?


PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
ForenSeil wrote:
and vibrations of your NEX-3 shutter might be a problem aswell (it was a main-reason for me to change from NEX-3 to NEX-5N because it has a vibration free shutter).


I considered the NEX5N when I bought my Canon but at that time I heard the tethering software was poor. How well does tethering work on the NEX5N?

Do you mean control via computer? That is slightly poor on NEX-5N, "only" cheap IR-Remote for most functions (shutter, playback, etc.) and full HDMI output of everything, but no control via PC. For that gadget you need a NEX-6 - that even has Wifi etc. and can be fully controlled even via smartphone as far as I know including live view.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I work in a camera store, and work in the lab (mostly film related work), and have access to a Flextight 949, as well as many demo cameras and lenses, which can fit on film cameras.

Own the RB67 ProS with 50mm floating element Sekor C, 90mm C, 180mm C. A variety of other stuff. We do have Zeiss ZF and ZM stuff.. though might be a tall order to convince manager to let me try it out.. plenty of Nikon stuff though can easily grab.

Anything you want to see tried/tested? Also considering the microscope attachment idea.


I also do have a large can of Vision Print Film in 35mm (ECP-2 film), which Kodak has stated resolves over 220 lp/mm @ 1.6:1 contrast, and over 500 lp/mm at 1000:1 contrast iirc. It's a colour copy film, for making movie prints.

Have been trying to find a way to put that to colour pictorial use with various formula.


iangreenhalgh1 wrote:


So the scanner is the bottleneck in the system. Sad



Bit of a bump.. but you can exceed the resolution of an optical system, and diffraction, by using superresolution techniques, in regards to film scans, I found just 2 passes works extremely well for this.

So that will eke out more detail if you wanted it.

Here is an Epson flatbed 3200 dpi scan crop (terribad)



Here is a resulting superresolution image, using PhotoAcute



Here is a similar area comparison from the same slide, from other scanners




poilu wrote:
the biogon reach 400lp/mm, but as it is diffraction limited, nobody know how much more it could resolve



Left-handed/negative-index refractive materials don't experience that limit, so if the Biogon were redesigned around those materials.. then that would be interesting.. well any lens actually.. you could simply continue to stop down a lot more to keep improving detail rendition.

A simpler way to achieve that, is 35nm lens coating of silver, which helps propagate evanescent waves in the visible spectrum, rather than having them decay.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4