Q1 2024 (Jan-Mar) — Through Your Adapted Lens

I tend to shoot a fair amount at 1:1 or more magnification. Past 1:1 I usually get better results with a Nikon EL-Nikkor 50mm enlarging lens on bellows. This makes me think a lot of macros aren't optimized for 1:1, that is pushing them to their max.
I need to try more focus stacking to improve my high magnification results. Would love to have a motorized macro rail to make it more consistent and less tedious
Thanks,
barondla

It would be very nice to see your photos at 1:1 or at higher magnification.
Which version of the EL-Nikkor 50mm do you use? I searched, there's many: deltalenses.com/page/3/?s=EL-Nikkor
Do you use it reversed? Or stacked?

That's interesting. I've heard several people mention that the El-Nikkor 50 mm N f/2.8 (I assume that's what you use, given how common these lenses are) is not particularly good for high magnification macro work. Reading up on it now, it seems that's only true at faster f-stops though... Stopping it down to f/8 makes it a pretty good option across the full frame image circle, when reversed. For my kind of shots corner sharpness is not particularly important most of the time, but I also haven't really used an El-Nikkor 50 mm for more than a couple of test shots, so I don't have any real experience on the matter... Where it shines (according to Marks tests on deltalenses) is in the close-up to infinity range, where it is among the best enlarging lenses ever, if memory serves me right.

I agree. Would love to see some high magnification shots! 👍

Here's a recent (around 2:1) of mine:

Color de-livery by simple.joy, on Flickr

I have the older metal body EL-Nikkor 50 F2.8. Bought it years ago for the darkroom. Repurposed it for macro. Was considering getting the newer version and found out it wasn't as good for UV. So I haven't picked one up - yet. I was posting this to show the lens reversed on a bellows at 1:1 or greater. Looking at the info, I'm not sure it counts. The bugs were on the front window. The whole colony was the size of a nickel and this isn't the whole colony. So on a full frame it is more than lifesize. This was an experiment using the Pentax Q7 with reversed EL-Nikkor. Q7 has a 4.6X crop factor. So the sensor is probably smaller than the image. On the other hand a 4.6x crop works the lens very hard with 12mp focused in a very small area.

Wish the window could have been cleaned before the shot :).

Thanks for looking,
barondla

A great shot!😍
Your EL-Nikkor looks very good in this. My newer EL-Nikkor N version is slightly soft and has an awful Chromatic Aberration at 1:1. Unfortunately I can't mount it reversed (yet).

I made a comparison with three enlarging lenses EL-Nikkor N 50mm f/2.8, Focotar 50mm f/4.5 and Rodagon 50mm f/2.8. Mounted normally, non-reversed.

The subject was some lichen on a small branch. Magnification around 1:1 with small variation coming from my different DIY lens mountings. I tried to focus at the greenish area in the yellow circle.

There's small variation in brightnes too although the exposure time was the same - camera at M mode - and aperture was set to the same number 8 with every lense's aperture ring. Nikkor was almost 1/3 stop brighter than the two others.

I thought to compare the Straight Out off Camera Jpegs but due to that exposure difference and CA problems in Nikkor I used RAWs processed them in my usual way in RawTherapee.

Here EL-Nikkor SOOC

EL-Nikkor converted from raw

Focotar from raw

Rodagon from raw

There's RT's automatic CA correction in every pic and the same amount of sharpening; in EL-Nikkor picture I manually added CA correction until it looked good. CA correction made it also a little sharper than the jpeg from camera; still not as sharp as the others.

Thanks for the information and your sample shot - looks good! It's interesting that some of the older El-Nikkors are significantly better at UV. From what I've heard it's the same with the 63 mm f/3.5 (older) and the 63 mm f/2.8 (newer) El Nikkors. However there are different reports about their qualities as taking lenses. Some seem to claim the older lens has higher resolution, others say the newer one is better. I only have the newer, so I can't compare it, but I can say for sure that that's a pretty great lens.

Thanks a lot fore the comparisons - it seems to confirm the findings of some of the macro experts I follow, that many El-Nikkors don't hold up quite as well for macro work. It's interesting and somewhat surprising, but probably can be explained in part by their optimization. After all they were not intended as taking lenses. It's similar for the Computar DL line of lenses btw. They're pretty good close-up lenses but not nearly as good at high magnification macro and (interestingly) also infinity...

Here's the kind of shot they're really good at:

Red carpet treatment by simple.joy, on Flickr

Red dot design by simple.joy, on Flickr

Look at those fall colors - all SOOC!!! by simple.joy, on Flickr

Vita-min-imalism. by simple.joy, on Flickr

@TimoK thanks for the excellent comparison. You put a lot of work into this shoot out. Much appreciated. You probably mentioned in a previous thread which version Focotar 50 this is?

Lens coatings are likely one reason the newer EL-Nikkors are worse at UV. My metal 50 has very little coating. Faster lenses also tend to use thicker, or more elements. Glass doesn't pass UV well, so more is bad. The "accidental UV" 35mm F3.5 wideangle lenses all fail when moving to the F2.8 models.

The reason some of the same model EL-Nikkors perform better than others could come down to unit to unit variation. We aren't using the lenses for their designed purpose and Nikon's quality control tests might not even measure these parameters. The difference in brightness between different lenses is because F stops are theoretical. T stops measure the actual light transmitted.
@simplejoy I really like the creativity of your paint brush image.
Superb images everyone,
Thanks for sharing,
barondla

I agree, we are outside of their optimal range. But we can try. Some lenses are good at close-ups and landscapes. EL-Nikkor N 80mm is said to be one of those. imaging.nikon.com/imaging/information/story/0064/index.html

It is this deltalenses.com/product/leitz-wetzlar-focotar-50-lfe-4-5-v5/
Maybe it's a Schneider lens.

My Rodagon looks like this and serial number is between numbers they mention but there's a lot of flare for a multicoated lens.
deltalenses.com/product/rodenstock-rodagon-50-2-8-2-v1/

That is very probably the reason.

Because I was a little disappointed with my EL-Nikkor I made some shots at their optimal focus distance around 1:10. These pictures are cropped from OOCjpgs. I used quite hard led spotlight.

EL-Nikkor at f/2.8 very little CAs visible at the unsharp area left

Rodagon 50mm at f/2.8 I like this flare as an effect but it was almost impossible to focus.

EL-Nikkor at f/8 looks good, usable quality.

Rodagon 50mm at f/8 This was the sharpest, no flare

Super comparison. Have you ever tested the EL-Nikkor at F4-5.6? I've heard they are optimized 1-2 stops down.
Thanks,
barondla

Yes I did. In my test at 1:10 magnification F8 was the best aperture for every three lens. Unfortunately I did not take F11 shots.
At 1:1 and bigger magnifications bigger apertures are recommended due to diffraction. I don't have my own experience of that enough.

EL-Nikkor 50mm at f/4

EL-Nikkor 50mm at f/5.6

I forgot the Focotar shot from my previous post. It was the weakest performer in my comparison at 1:10 magnification. But there's so many possible sources of errors. Don't take these too seriously.

Focotar 50mm F4.5 at f/8

Here are a couple of shots with one of my recent favorites, a Schneider Kreuznach Xenon 35 mm f/2 lens:

Com-four-table-top by simple.joy, on Flickr

Connected through light by simple.joy, on Flickr

Reflections on writing about lenses... by simple.joy, on Flickr

Gotcha! by simple.joy, on Flickr

Can you see why I love that rendering? Schneider Kreuznach really got one of the most impressive line-up of lenses ever...

I particularly like the second and third ones here 😍 👍🏻

In my books the name Xenon means money! Or even much more money! They are no more cheap lenses because the movie makers love them.
Your pictures show why.

Thank you!

Thanks a lot! Yes, the various Cine-Xenons are not cheap usually... however these industrial versions are pretty much unknown, so from time to time you can be lucky and find one for reasonable prices. They don't have the coverage to be used as taking lenses at infinity (at full-frame) but for close-up shots, they are certainly highly interesting lenses.

They're also very good high magnification macro lenses, when used reversed:

You know this Un-Sung Buddy? by simple.joy, on Flickr

Tear‘o‘rise by simple.joy, on Flickr

The gear colors are exceptional and I like the composition. The lens is a fine performer.
Thanks for sharing,
barondla

A shadow on the wall. (Empty glass)

Sinaron Digital 5.6/135mm

Very moody image. I like it. @TimoK the B&W is great with this subject.
Thanks for sharing,
barondla

I've not yet shot a negative through my Delta77 projector lens, (which gives roughly a 120 degree FOV on my 5x4) but here's one showing an image on the ground glass
delta 77 - deluxe & GG by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

Unfortunately shooting square on with digital exaggerates the vignetting, but hope fully film will be more tolerant.