Chironomid (non-biting) midge
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Chironomid (non-biting) midge
About the size of a mosquito (just a tad bigger) this chironomid midge has amazing antennae, and a wonderful "wrap around" eye.
Nikon D200. Tominon 17mm f4 lens. 32 image stack
Nikon D200. Tominon 17mm f4 lens. 32 image stack
- Erland R.N.
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:20 pm
- Location: Kolding, Denmark
- Contact:
- Carl_Constantine
- Posts: 304
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 am
- Location: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
- Contact:
- georgedingwall
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:15 am
- Location: Invergordon, Scotland
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:52 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
Tominon 17mm
Hi Charles ,
I have Nikon CFI 160 10x and El-Nikkor 50 2.8 N.
Is Tominon better than these ?
Thanks,
Saul
I have Nikon CFI 160 10x and El-Nikkor 50 2.8 N.
Is Tominon better than these ?
Thanks,
Saul
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Saul,
The Tominon 17/4 would be "competing" more with the 10X microscope objective. (The 50/2.8 El-Nikkor really serves a different magnification range). As you can see it is capable of very fine results, but its primary drawback is the f4 maximum aperture. So when it is cranked out to about 10X (for this shot it is somewhat less) the effective aperture is in the f45 range. Here you will see significantly more resolution loss due to diffraction than with a 10/0.25 objective (which is probably closer to effective f22 at 10:1).
At lower magnifications it might be worth trying if you can get a really good deal on buying one. As I recall, initially it presented some really significant flare issues until I worked on the interior surfaces of the adapters I used in order to to eliminate reflective surfaces. (But that is something that should be done with any set-up... just got a bit lazy. Just seemed a bit more crucial in order to to get best results with this optic).
Better?...in a word.. no. As you can see this was done about 4 1/2 years ago and I was curious to try stacking with some of the lenses I had accumulated over the years.I have Nikon CFI 160 10x and El-Nikkor 50 2.8 N.
Is Tominon better than these ?
The Tominon 17/4 would be "competing" more with the 10X microscope objective. (The 50/2.8 El-Nikkor really serves a different magnification range). As you can see it is capable of very fine results, but its primary drawback is the f4 maximum aperture. So when it is cranked out to about 10X (for this shot it is somewhat less) the effective aperture is in the f45 range. Here you will see significantly more resolution loss due to diffraction than with a 10/0.25 objective (which is probably closer to effective f22 at 10:1).
At lower magnifications it might be worth trying if you can get a really good deal on buying one. As I recall, initially it presented some really significant flare issues until I worked on the interior surfaces of the adapters I used in order to to eliminate reflective surfaces. (But that is something that should be done with any set-up... just got a bit lazy. Just seemed a bit more crucial in order to to get best results with this optic).
Tominon
Hi Charles,
Thank you for your extremally fast reply !
Already bought - price was too good
What is the best range to shoot with Tominon ? I found info - around 20x.
Thanks
Saul
Thank you for your extremally fast reply !
Already bought - price was too good
What is the best range to shoot with Tominon ? I found info - around 20x.
Thanks
Saul
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Saul,
I don't know what magnifications Polaroid suggested (10-34X based on this page: http://www.macrolenses.de/objektive.php?lang ). But you need to remember that this was used on their stands that were primarily intended for use with the 4x5" format (and naturally no image "stacking"). So the large format could stand smaller effective f-stops, and since everything was "one-shot" (no stacking for DOF purposes) there was additional room for some compromise of resolution in order to get a little more DOF.
With a DSLR anything over about 7X (with a 24X36mm sensor) and about 5X with an APS-C sized sensor are probably better done with a lens that can provide good quality at an aperture larger than f4.
I don't know what magnifications Polaroid suggested (10-34X based on this page: http://www.macrolenses.de/objektive.php?lang ). But you need to remember that this was used on their stands that were primarily intended for use with the 4x5" format (and naturally no image "stacking"). So the large format could stand smaller effective f-stops, and since everything was "one-shot" (no stacking for DOF purposes) there was additional room for some compromise of resolution in order to get a little more DOF.
With a DSLR anything over about 7X (with a 24X36mm sensor) and about 5X with an APS-C sized sensor are probably better done with a lens that can provide good quality at an aperture larger than f4.
Tominon 17mm
Hi Charles,
Got Tominon, but strange thing-tried on the camera with no bellows/rings, with flash. I'm getting white blurred spot (unfocused) at the center of the frame, more pronounced on the darker objects, looks like some kind of flare. Glass is clean, camera is Nikon D7000. Same is without flash-less visible, but still here. Could it be flare ? Inner black coating of this lens is not perfect...
Any ideas from your experience with this lens ?
Thank you very much,
Saul
Got Tominon, but strange thing-tried on the camera with no bellows/rings, with flash. I'm getting white blurred spot (unfocused) at the center of the frame, more pronounced on the darker objects, looks like some kind of flare. Glass is clean, camera is Nikon D7000. Same is without flash-less visible, but still here. Could it be flare ? Inner black coating of this lens is not perfect...
Any ideas from your experience with this lens ?
Thank you very much,
Saul
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Saul,
Remember my earlier post...
Remember my earlier post...
You need to really check out the inner surfaces of any tubes and adapters used. You should also avoid any strong light entering the front of the lens from outside of the subject area. I seem to remember that the rear element had a very flat and/or unusually colored coating that didn't seem to help matters in the flare department either.As I recall, initially it presented some really significant flare issues until I worked on the interior surfaces of the adapters I used in order to to eliminate reflective surfaces