Printing Nikkor vs Schneider Macro Varon?
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
-
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
I do expect the 105PN to significantly outperform the 85MV out to the corner of at least FF at 1:1 given its larger aperture, but as magnification moves away from 1:1 the 85MV can be re-optimized with the beta ring, while the 105PN cannot.
From my tests, the 85MV is best wide open in center and in the corners, given correct beta adjustment.
One thing I saw is the beta adjustment changed the focal length of the lens a bit, and that it had a strong effect on CA. When set correctly, the lens has indiscernible longCA.
I can't do any more testing on the 85MV right now as I have sent mine to Mark Goodman. His results should show conclusively/quantitatively how well the 85MV compares with the 105PN.
From my tests, the 85MV is best wide open in center and in the corners, given correct beta adjustment.
One thing I saw is the beta adjustment changed the focal length of the lens a bit, and that it had a strong effect on CA. When set correctly, the lens has indiscernible longCA.
I can't do any more testing on the 85MV right now as I have sent mine to Mark Goodman. His results should show conclusively/quantitatively how well the 85MV compares with the 105PN.
I am proceeding with the plan to build a stepper to automate the beta ring.
Apart from Mitutoyo objectives it is one of the few lenses that I use that is in current production. Luminars, photars, m-componons and their ilk are all things of the past.
It's nice to see that optical designers have some capabilities now that they didn't have back then.
Apart from Mitutoyo objectives it is one of the few lenses that I use that is in current production. Luminars, photars, m-componons and their ilk are all things of the past.
It's nice to see that optical designers have some capabilities now that they didn't have back then.
nathanm
Just came across this thread and can say that I can confirm the MacroVaron is an outstanding lens.
I own both lenses (MacroVaron and PN) and it comes down to a choice of focal length which I would choose for 1x. I shoot with an PhaseOne IQ150/XF setup (44x33mm sensor) which means lenses like the 105PN work well at 1X but suffer horribly at the corners below 1X. The MacroVaron covers much more than it's quoted IC. I'm glad to hear it covers the larger sensor!!
The 105 PN was designed for 65mm/70mm motion picture cameras where the film runs through vertically. The 54-60mm image circle of the 105mm PN covers this format size. It does not cover 70mm IMAX which is closer to the full frame MFD sensors like the IQ 60,80 or 100MP.
I own both lenses (MacroVaron and PN) and it comes down to a choice of focal length which I would choose for 1x. I shoot with an PhaseOne IQ150/XF setup (44x33mm sensor) which means lenses like the 105PN work well at 1X but suffer horribly at the corners below 1X. The MacroVaron covers much more than it's quoted IC. I'm glad to hear it covers the larger sensor!!
The 105 PN was designed for 65mm/70mm motion picture cameras where the film runs through vertically. The 54-60mm image circle of the 105mm PN covers this format size. It does not cover 70mm IMAX which is closer to the full frame MFD sensors like the IQ 60,80 or 100MP.
-
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
Mark has just posted his results on coinimaging.com macro lens testing page.
The 85mm Macro Varon did very well indeed vs the Printing-Nikkors. the PN's have the MV beat for ultimate sharpness and resolution numbers, but the MV has superb coverage. So with a combination of 95PN and 105PN, you can beat the 85MV, but not by a lot.
As I expected, the 85MV is either apo or such a well-corrected achromat that it just doesn't matter.
Thanks Mark for doing the tests!
The 85mm Macro Varon did very well indeed vs the Printing-Nikkors. the PN's have the MV beat for ultimate sharpness and resolution numbers, but the MV has superb coverage. So with a combination of 95PN and 105PN, you can beat the 85MV, but not by a lot.
As I expected, the 85MV is either apo or such a well-corrected achromat that it just doesn't matter.
Thanks Mark for doing the tests!
-
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Hi DavidsDavids wrote:Nathan,
I received a quote today from a distributor of this lens -the price is just as spectacular as the specs - $4,241. Sigh.
I know that it was offered on ebay at one point by one of the members on this forum, but I have a feeling it will be hard to come by used.
Just FYI Schneider does sell a fixed magnification non-CAS (CA suppression)
version of the Macro Varon for a lot less but no sure if that helps. I posted more info on the fixed version my site if you are curious.
The fixed version would really be a better comparison to the Printing Nikkors.
The Macro Varon really only has a couple of competitors in the same class like the Rayfact VF and Linos inspec.x. Float 5.6/105. Both of these feature magnification correction rings like the Macro Varon CAS ring!
www.Closeuphotography.com
https://www.closeuphotography.com/macro-varon/
-
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Re: Printing Nikkor vs Schneider Macro Varon?
Owning a Macro Varon but not owning any printing Nikkors ( the PNs dont really suit my shooting needs) I can't make any actual comparisons but you should look at Mark Goodman's lens test comparison tool if you have a chance.Davids wrote:Does anyone have experience with both of these lenses? I realize that the printing nikkors come in different focal lengths but am curious how they compare to a macro varon from .5x-1.5x .
Thanks!
David
http://coinimaging.com/lens_compare.html?
For those that haven't used it you really need to check it out but give yourself lots of time because if you are like me, you will spend way too much time on it.
Its really interesting that if you compare the MV and PN 105 the biggest difference is corner performance once you leave 1x. The MV almost no change in corner sharpness from 0.5x to 2x where the PN drops to a visible loss once you leave the designed for 1X. It looks terrible on the graph but I am not sure what it actually looks like on a file (since I dont own a PN) The comparison is not really fair anyway since the two lenses are designed for different ranges.
Also interesting is to comparing PN and MV with sharpness vs aperture. The PN is optimized to perform best wide open so the MV cannot match the 105 PN at f/2.8 or even f/3.3, of course, but at f/4.5 - f/5.6 the MV is a tiny bit sharper. To f/8 they are pretty much even with the MV actually slotted in between the performance of the 2 PN versions.
Anyway hope others find the comparisons on the coinimaging site interesting.
Robert
It's great to have this additional information. I had previously looked for machine vision lenses to see if there was anything interesting, but you (and others on the forum) have clearly done a much better job.
The Rayfact lens seems to be from a Nikon subsidiary. It seems very similar to the Macro Varon - i.e. it is a 90mm f/4 with a correction ring from 0.5 to 3X, so it goes to higher mag than the Macro Varon.
http://www.tochigi-nikon.co.jp/en/products/lens/vf.htm
However, given that it is f/4 versus f/4.5 for Macro Varon it seems unlikely to match faster lenses like the PN 105 mm - at least in their sweet spot.
Rayfact has a current lens that appears to be a modern version of the PN 105
http://www.tochigi-nikon.co.jp/en/produ ... Ver4.0.pdf
The Inspec lens seems much less interesting - it is a 105mm f/5.6 with an adjustment ring from 0.3X to 3X so it is also a wider range than macro varon.
However, at f/5.6 it seems like it would be hard for it to compete with either PN 105mm or macro varon due to diffraction, especially at 3X.
http://www.qioptiq-shop.com/en/Precisio ... float.html
All of these lenses are designed for line sensors which have a single line of pixels - up to 16,000. For comparison, my PhaseOne has 11,000 pixels in the long direction.
So, I have
macro varon 0.5X to 2X
PN 105 1X and nearby
Mitutoyo 5X and higher
I have lenses that will work from 2X to 5X but no favorite at the moment.
I also shoot close but not macro at 0.05X to 0.5X and could use a great solution there
The Rayfact lens seems to be from a Nikon subsidiary. It seems very similar to the Macro Varon - i.e. it is a 90mm f/4 with a correction ring from 0.5 to 3X, so it goes to higher mag than the Macro Varon.
http://www.tochigi-nikon.co.jp/en/products/lens/vf.htm
However, given that it is f/4 versus f/4.5 for Macro Varon it seems unlikely to match faster lenses like the PN 105 mm - at least in their sweet spot.
Rayfact has a current lens that appears to be a modern version of the PN 105
http://www.tochigi-nikon.co.jp/en/produ ... Ver4.0.pdf
The Inspec lens seems much less interesting - it is a 105mm f/5.6 with an adjustment ring from 0.3X to 3X so it is also a wider range than macro varon.
However, at f/5.6 it seems like it would be hard for it to compete with either PN 105mm or macro varon due to diffraction, especially at 3X.
http://www.qioptiq-shop.com/en/Precisio ... float.html
All of these lenses are designed for line sensors which have a single line of pixels - up to 16,000. For comparison, my PhaseOne has 11,000 pixels in the long direction.
So, I have
macro varon 0.5X to 2X
PN 105 1X and nearby
Mitutoyo 5X and higher
I have lenses that will work from 2X to 5X but no favorite at the moment.
I also shoot close but not macro at 0.05X to 0.5X and could use a great solution there
nathanm
-
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Printing Nikkor vs Schneider Macro Varon?
If you use the comparison tool, be sure to include the 95PN for 0.5x and also the 150PN (old). The 150PN is actually a better comparison to the 85MV since it has a magnification adjustment ring as well.RobertOToole wrote:Owning a Macro Varon but not owning any printing Nikkors ( the PNs dont really suit my shooting needs) I can't make any actual comparisons but you should look at Mark Goodman's lens test comparison tool if you have a chance.Davids wrote:Does anyone have experience with both of these lenses? I realize that the printing nikkors come in different focal lengths but am curious how they compare to a macro varon from .5x-1.5x .
Thanks!
David
http://coinimaging.com/lens_compare.html?
For those that haven't used it you really need to check it out but give yourself lots of time because if you are like me, you will spend way too much time on it.
Its really interesting that if you compare the MV and PN 105 the biggest difference is corner performance once you leave 1x. The MV almost no change in corner sharpness from 0.5x to 2x where the PN drops to a visible loss once you leave the designed for 1X. It looks terrible on the graph but I am not sure what it actually looks like on a file (since I dont own a PN) The comparison is not really fair anyway since the two lenses are designed for different ranges.
Also interesting is to comparing PN and MV with sharpness vs aperture. The PN is optimized to perform best wide open so the MV cannot match the 105 PN at f/2.8 or even f/3.3, of course, but at f/4.5 - f/5.6 the MV is a tiny bit sharper. To f/8 they are pretty much even with the MV actually slotted in between the performance of the 2 PN versions.
Anyway hope others find the comparisons on the coinimaging site interesting.
Robert
-
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
Re: Printing Nikkor vs Schneider Macro Varon?
Good point Ray, forgot about that.ray_parkhurst wrote:
Robert
If you use the comparison tool, be sure to include the 95PN for 0.5x and also the 150PN (old). The 150PN is actually a better comparison to the 85MV since it has a magnification adjustment ring as well.
The 150 PN is a interesting and attractive lens, but rare, over the past 5 years I have seen only one for sale!
The Rayfact VF would also be really interesting with a 0.5x - 3.0x range: http://www.tochigi-nikon.co.jp/en/products/lens/vf.htm
Robert
Robert
One thing I love about this forum is that there is always so much to learn.
First I learned about the macro varon - and got one.
I had been vaguely aware of other line sensor lenses, but Robert's post about the macro varon competitors by rayfact and linos prompted me to look closer.
So I just bought on ebay a rayfact mj90mm f/4, which is optimized for 0.05X to 0.5X. And I bought a Linos inspec 105mm f/4 optimized for 3.5X.
These are two magnification ranges where I am not altogether happy with my current lenses. Indeed I mentioned both in the post above.
So, one way to look at it is that this has been an expensive thread for me! But I'm glad to learn more.
Also, note that there seems to be the rayfact new version of the PN105mm on ebay at the moment.
First I learned about the macro varon - and got one.
I had been vaguely aware of other line sensor lenses, but Robert's post about the macro varon competitors by rayfact and linos prompted me to look closer.
So I just bought on ebay a rayfact mj90mm f/4, which is optimized for 0.05X to 0.5X. And I bought a Linos inspec 105mm f/4 optimized for 3.5X.
These are two magnification ranges where I am not altogether happy with my current lenses. Indeed I mentioned both in the post above.
So, one way to look at it is that this has been an expensive thread for me! But I'm glad to learn more.
Also, note that there seems to be the rayfact new version of the PN105mm on ebay at the moment.
nathanm
-
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact: