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

Micro-Nikkor 55 and tubes on 5D II
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:03 am    Post subject: Micro-Nikkor 55 and tubes on 5D II Reply with quote

I decided to give the Micro-Nikkor-P a go with 56mm of extension tubes (the lens was originally supplied with a fairly long tube) to see what it can manage on a 5D MkII.
The target was a small beetle, about 5mm long, which has been feeding on my rosemary plant.





The top image is a 100% 72dpi crop from the frame, the second one is resized to show the whole insect (about a 50% reduction) and at the bottom is the entire frame, to show how large the subject would be on a 35mm neg.

I was using off-camera diffused flash close to the side of the lens, I tried to introduce a small reflector but the insect kept moving so I doubt if it did anthing, and this was shot at f16, ISO 250 (f11 might have been slightly sharper).

It looks to me like a pretty impressive performance for a 1960s lens (that is still ridiculously cheap - mine cost about $55 plus shipping). If anybody is looking for one, the serial number is important as there are a couple of different designs listed - I have serial number 664xxx.

Here's one more shot from the series:



I estimate the antennae at less than 1/10mm and the compound eye elements, which are just visible at full size, at less than 1/100mm. I'm not sure how to convert that into line pairs per mm.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What kind of flash are you using?

Maybe you would need some kind of diffuser to make the light shot softer and avoid the white reflections...

Regards,

Jes.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I only have a Vivitar 285 with me, which I used with a plastic diffuser in front of it, but it's not ideal. Avoiding reflections off an insect's carapace is a considerable skill which I haven't managed to master yet.

Anyway, my point was not to promote these as great photos, it was to show the sort of resolution the micro-Nikkor 55 offers.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The nikkor micro 55/3,5 is one of the best values in the market. For some reason its price has not reflected its quality, possibly due to age.


patrickh


PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patrickh wrote:
The nikkor micro 55/3,5 is one of the best values in the market. For some reason its price has not reflected its quality, possibly due to age.


patrickh


+1 I think price is low due very common and people like longer macro better due longer working distance. Quality is NR 1 indeed.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
patrickh wrote:
The nikkor micro 55/3,5 is one of the best values in the market. For some reason its price has not reflected its quality, possibly due to age.


patrickh


+1 I think price is low due very common and people like longer macro better due longer working distance. Quality is NR 1 indeed.


Possibly this is so, but won't a longer working distance give less magnification or require longer tubes, bringing you closer to the subject again? I must try different tubes on different length lenses to see what happens.

In any case, it is absurd for people to overlook this lens which not only offers you superb macro ability (even without a tube it can project an image 50% of the actual size on to the film or sensor - compared with the 10% or so that makers today call "macro") but is also a ridiculously cheap and very sharp standard lens with excellent bokeh and colour rendition.

In the old days "macro" was used to mean projecting the image at full size on to the film and with its original tube the micro-Nikkor 55 was a true macro lens. Today the word has been diluted (by manufacturers?) to mean producing an image that will give 1:1 reproduction after being enlarged to some print size or other, which is a far less useful capability if you want to explore the tiny details of our world.