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

Lenses for greater than 2:1 macro shooting
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:42 pm    Post subject: Lenses for greater than 2:1 macro shooting Reply with quote
I've become interested in high magnification macro shooting and I've been using a Rodenstock Magnagon 5.6/75 for 1:1 to 2:1 shots, but would like to go higher in magnification,so I'm wondering what lenses would be suitable that won't cost a fortune. I'm thinking a 50mm 6-element enlarging lens like an EL-Nikkor or a Componon-S might do? I'd like to be able to mount whatever lens I buy on M39 bellows, so I'd like te lns to either be in M39 or something that is easily adaptable to M39.

I do have a Wollensak Microfilm Projection 6.3/65, which seems very capable, but I doubt it will be any better than the Magnagon and is probably too long, I'm thinking a 35-40mm lens is what I need.

An example with the Magnagon, I think this is around 2:1:


100% crop:


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
For x2-x3 magnification I use Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon 50mm F/2.8 reversed on some extension tubes. And stacking.

Some examples:



***



***

This entire gallery was shot with it: http://www.holovachov.com/p363956888

***

Even with one of the inner elements incorrectly placed (reversed) - that is how this lens came to me from KEH.com - it still produces acceptable results:



***

There was one discussion here: http://forum.mflenses.com/extreme-macro-lenses-t58819.html with more examples and lens suggestions.

Alex


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cheers Alex. That's basically a 50mm version of the Magnagon I'm using.

I'll see if I can find an APO-Rodagon 50 fairly cheap,my budget is sadly limited however.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There are many other options, but this is the one I use on the regular basis. I do not know if it ever came as "Magnagon", e.g. with fixed aperture.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't know if the Magnagon I have is exactly the same design, probably not, but it's definitely similar.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
+1 about reversing Wink


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What type of lens to reverse? Aren't 6-element enlarger lenses pretty much symmetrical?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Not necessarily. Only those that are optimized for 1:1 reproduction ratio. Which will be copy lenses. Enlarger lenses, depending from the amount of enlarging they are intended for, could be optimized anywhere from x2 to x20. Look up old El-Nikkor brochures - they would have enlarging specifications for the lenses specified.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Aah, of course, makes sense.

So, if I have an enlarging lens optimised for 10x enlargements, does that mean if I reverse it, it's good for 10:1 magnification?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
In theory...


PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I guess I'll just have to put it to the test then. Smile

One more I did today with the Magnagon:



PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I really like reverse-mounting my Nikon Series E 36-72 for macros.


Nearly the magnification limit of a #6 screw.


About 1:1


This is the limit of the magnification.

One issue, though, is that my copy, at extreme magnifications, has three astigmatisms. They only show up on film, however. I don't know why that is yet.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Best lens in the 1.5x-3x range is the Canon 35mm f2.8 Macrophoto (35MP) lens. But they are not cheap. Actually, 2x is a tough magnification. It's beyond the limit of most macro lenses, but not yet into the realm of microscope objectives. Now, there are 2x microscope objectives, but I have not yet found one of sufficient quality to recommend it. The Mitutoyo 2x Apo is nice but the 35MP still beats it and is half the price. Once you get to 3x and above, you are in the realm of the objective, and even a low priced objective will handily beat anything else. A sweet spot for microscope objectives is 4x-5x, and there are a lot of good examples. My favorites are all by Nikon, and indeed this is an area that they have always dominated. For 4x, try a Nikon 4Plan 0.1. For 5x, try an M5. Both have very decent working distances and can produce superb results.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
What is the mount on the Nikon objectives?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-p-M-5X-Microscope-Objective-5-0-1-/190890027523?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c71eeaa03
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-M5-0-1-Microscope-Objective-With-Case-Mint-Unused-Condition-/200952383258?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2ec9b2071a


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nikon1User wrote:
What is the mount on the Nikon objectives?


They are RMS mount. You can get a RMS-M42 adapter in either flat or cone/taper configuration. I prefer the cone/taper as it gives some extra extension but doesn't really get in the way. The adapters will cost you around $25, then adapt from M42 to whatever camera you're using. Note the total extension (from sensor) to get rated magnification is around 160mm. You get 45mm or so from the camera mount, so you need another 120mm, not too tough...Ray


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
So what sort of microscope lens would be a good starting point for 3:1 and higher? I'm guessing 10x would be more suitable than 100x.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
So what sort of microscope lens would be a good starting point for 3:1 and higher? I'm guessing 10x would be more suitable than 100x.


Microscope objectives are optimized for a single magnification, which is why their image quality is better than macro, enlarging, or reversed standard lenses. If you want to do 3x, you need a 3x objective. For various magnifications you end up buying a range of objectives, but you can keep the same configuration of extensions and adapters on the camera because all the objectives are optimized for pretty much a fixed extension.

The Unitron 3x objectives are fairly decent and have a long working distance. Here's an example:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Unitron-NA-0-10-T-L-170-3X-microscope-objective-DP30-/291006593330?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43c1583932

You need to realize that as you go up in magnification, your depth of field reduces, making it very difficult to get a focused shot.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 4:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cheers Ray, I'll see if I can find a 3x or 4x objective.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
So what sort of microscope lens would be a good starting point for 3:1 and higher? I'm guessing 10x would be more suitable than 100x.


Microscope objectives are optimized for a single magnification, which is why their image quality is better than macro, enlarging, or reversed standard lenses. If you want to do 3x, you need a 3x objective. For various magnifications you end up buying a range of objectives, but you can keep the same configuration of extensions and adapters on the camera because all the objectives are optimized for pretty much a fixed extension.

The Unitron 3x objectives are fairly decent and have a long working distance. Here's an example:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Unitron-NA-0-10-T-L-170-3X-microscope-objective-DP30-/291006593330?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43c1583932

You need to realize that as you go up in magnification, your depth of field reduces, making it very difficult to get a focused shot.


Guess it would have helped to also mention about the (ideally fixed) 160mm or 210mm tube length (classic type, not infinity) which they need to be used at (i.e. bellows extension) or the use of a tube lens (or attached to the front of a tele lens) if it is an infinity type...

This mentioned Unitron type is for 170mm tube length (hence has "T.L. 170") written on it.

Best would be to look for objectives without cover glass, like the ones used for metal microscopes (Nikon "M" type for instance).

Many of those objectives have just around 20mm image diameter, so tend to vignette, so beware...


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:


Guess it would have helped to also mention about the (ideally fixed) 160mm or 210mm tube length (classic type, not infinity) which they need to be used at (i.e. bellows extension) or the use of a tube lens (or attached to the front of a tele lens) if it is an infinity type...


I did mention the 160mm total extension in previous post. For photomacrography, I don't usually recommend infinite objectives. Their hardware requirements don't support inexpensive, compact setups.


kds315* wrote:

This mentioned Unitron type is for 170mm tube length (hence has "T.L. 170") written on it.

Best would be to look for objectives without cover glass, like the ones used for metal microscopes (Nikon "M" type for instance).

Many of those objectives have just around 20mm image diameter, so tend to vignette, so beware...


The difference in magnification and image quality between 160 and 170 is minimal. The 210mm objectives tend to be long working distance types, but are more difficult to adapt due to longer extension required, and they are not as common as 160mm. Note that the 3x Unitron is a long working distance type but works in a 170mm system, so can be used with 160mm nicely. It is also very flat field and low distortion since it's intended for measurement applications.

Your point about cover glass is a good one. The objectives you're looking for have markings that will look something like this:

4x 0.1 160/-

This means it is a 4:1 magnification, with numerical aperture of 0.1 (equivalent to f4 lens), requires 160mm extension, and no cover slip.

An infinity-corrected objective which requires a cover slip would be marked like this:

4x 0.1 inf/.17

The "inf" is usually an infinity symbol rather than letters. The 0.17 means it requires a 0.17mm cover slip, so this type is intended for transmitted light biological microscopes.

The M types are for reflected light microscopes, usually for machine shops, measurement, etc. The "M" stands for "metallurgical".

If you maintain rated tube length, you won't see any vignetting on 99% of objectives. Vignetting occurs when the extension length is insufficient to project a large enough image circle onto the sensor. What you will see with the many objectives is a degradation of image quality at the corners of the image. This is why I recommended the "Plan" or "Measurement" type objectives, as they are designed for flat-field use and generally maintain good image quality to the corners. Even so, APS-C will generally give you a better result than FF.

Ray

Last edited by Ray Parkhurst on Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:35 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hmm, sounds to me like a microscope objective is too much hassle, especially to use in m very simple setup.

Thanks for the info guys.

So, if we discount microscope objectives, what other options do I have? Microfilm/microfiche lenses?


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is a list of major "micro" lenses produced by camera manufacturers for larger-than-lifesize magnification: http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/microlen.htm

The list includes recommended magnification range for many of them. Most of them are intended to be used on bellows, or other type of extension.

Other source to look at is Klaus's database.

On a personal note - I have tried Canon 35/2.8 (micro) lens but was not particularly satisfied with its quality. I now have Tominon 35/4.5 lens and it actually works rather well for X3 magnification. At least my copy, as I've read that these Tominons have variable quality.

I also have 75/4.5 (two copies) and 105/4.5 Tominons, which I do not really need. I think I used both for larger-than-lifesize magnification and they worked fine. The shots I used them for were for research purpose for someone else. I still have the shots, but I would not remember which lens did I use, the 75mm or the 105mm. I do not know if they would be any better than the Magnagon though.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Another option? http://www.ephotozine.com/article/yasuhara-nanoha-x5-macro-lens-review-18271 Not cheap, though. Never tried myself so can not comment.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
..So, if we discount microscope objectives, what other options do I have? Microfilm/microfiche lenses?


The reversed enlarger normal SLR lenses are an option - but I suppose not for highest quality. The Biotar 12.5mm film lens should be an acceptable lens too, reversed, and I think at larger magnifications. The EL Nikkor 50mm/2.8 or Konica Hexanon AR 40mm/1.8 seem to work well.
Microfilm lenses could be an option too (for example from Canon or Olympus).


PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yellow/Black Kitchen Sponge at about 3:1

Noritsu 50.7/9.5 on bellows, not reversed, not stacked. I love this little gem. Smile

I had bad experience with reversed Biotar 12.5mm and some other 8mm film lenses (low contrast, smeary look) - but maybe my copy was slightly faulty
El-Nikkor 50/2.8 works quite usable when stopped down up to let's say 4:1 when reversed but for it's not as good as the Noritsu.
I found that the Rodagon 50/2.8 doesn't work as good as the El-Nikkor 50/2.8 for these high magnification while when used for normal B/W enlargements they are about on the same level - I guess that's because the Rodagon less good correct for (>1):5 as enlargement lens.

Last edited by ForenSeil on Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:35 pm; edited 2 times in total
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3