Is it? I understood the "D" to stand for "duplication" so that it is indeed originally designed as a projection lens. Duplication is taking, not projection. The 1:1 was designed for taking pictures of 35mm slides with 35mm film, creating movie prints from originals, etc. Thanks for the explanation,...

I'm puzzled why they have 30 patches instead of the 24 patches that the normal sized ones have.

For the M=2 version, I've only owned 1 copy. I tried it both forward and reversed, and it was sharper and had flatter field at M=2 in forward orientation. However, as with the M=1 these may have variations since the sharpness of the M=2 (at M=2) was inferior to a good copy of the M=1 version (at M=...

I'm not so sure. The 75/4.5 M=2 is not an enlarging / projecting lens, but a taking lens. From that perspective it should be used forward for 2X, and reversed for 0.5X. My testing seemed to back this up, but I may have been subjected to an inferior copy. The lens is also fairly symmetric looking, s...

rjlittlefield wrote: Except for the easy case of 1:1, I'm never sure what M:N means. Does 2:1 mean 2X or 0.5X?

2x.

Hello, I have just bought this lens and I intend to use it in the field and at home from 1X to 3X I have found little information about the lens so anything you can say would be apreciatted. The lens should be used reversed or normal position?, it is not an enlarger lens but a duplicating lens opti...

Recently Craig said Regarding a monitor; buy the best you can possibly afford. High-end, big name monitors with a dead pixel can be purchased at significant savings. The dead pixel is virtually irrelevant. Apparently, my main monitor has a dead red pixel somewhere in the bottom right-hand corner. I ...

If one were to avoid impulsively throwing in too many "extras" like blu-ray DVD burners, and if one were to (probably wisely) stick with a single video card instead of the dual-video-cards I splurged on, a maxed-out Intel i7-2600K-based, air-cooled tower as I described would run about $3000 or so. ...

Superb, crystal clear images. Wonderful.

lauriek wrote: So for instance if the objective is designed for 160mm and you have 200mm of total extension then you'll be achieving 200/160x10 =12.5x

If the objective is marked 160 then it is designed for 150mm extension, so
200/150x10=13.3x

This seems to be a recent addition and may be of interest to members here. Chris Hejnar now makes a 122mm (~ 4.8") arca-compatible clamp. It has three 3/8"-16 threaded holes on 35mm centres. It looks like a great clamp for attaching something long and heavy to a macro rig, such as a microscope focus...

In your review of the Nikon 135mm f/4 bellows lens , my monitor shows prominent magenta fringing on some portions of the example image, while your findings indicate: "Chromatic Aberration: This lens show minimal color fringing in the center (about 0.25 pixel) and minimal on the periphery (0.10 - 0....

Doing numerical testing has taught me a lot over the last couple years. I just wanted to say that your macro-range ematest results are very interesting and I am not aware of any other sites where this is done - congratulations. Very clear and informative. A post on what adaptations you needed to do...

The wings remind me of a very large insect I found in my room once, which I was told was an antlion. The antennae and other details were different from this.

Also regarding your PB-5, am I correct in assuming that both the front and rear bellows standards can be moved? If so, this is a very good thing. But from the pictures I’ve seen of PB-5 bellows, the front and rear portions of the bellows base are not connected by anything. PB-5 is a essentially a c...