Sharpest lenses for 0.3x...1.2x??

[ray_parkhurst]

Ray, can you show this mystic E36C lens (Kyocera??) -I have never read this before. Is it a part out of a copy-machine? Where did you got it? Pictures? price-range?

Thankyou

I bought them on eBay. I don't have much info on them or what they came out of. I think I paid around US$30 or so for each of them. Will post an image when I get home later today...Ray

edited to add...

Photo below shows the 3 Scitex lenses (67/4.9, 89/5.0, 110/5.0), the 60mm E36C, and 58mm E36. The Scitex and E36C lenses are fixed-aperture. The E36 has a narrow f4...f8 aperture range. I assume these are all scanner/copier lenses but I can find very little info on the web about them...Ray

[Harold Gough]

I took some shots of coins with it this morning. The intention is to post them in my topic about the lens. Then you can look there but not need to have them here...

Nice pics Harold. But they do point out my concern about lighting with large diameter, short focal length lenses as the light is coming in at a fairly low angle on these. What you see with low angles is highlighting on the edges of the features of the coin rather than the top surfaces. The features have a "halo" around them, opposite of what I strive for which is for the features to be outlined with shadow. With the large diameter lens, and small working distance, you basically have few options...Ray

I was aware that special lighting, which I do not have, would be required to photograph coins. I was just using available light to show what detail the lens might capture.

Harold

[Babylonia]

I don't expect much better sharpness for full frame since both higher magnification and larger image circles are involved,.......

The image circle for most of your listed lenses (75mm and up) are even far wide enough to cover medium format "film" (specially the APO lenses), so far adequate within FF DSLR format. As for coin photography you don't use the borders at the long side, and corner areas.

You can test by your own camera what you can expect as a reference for a FF camera using about the same pixel density, just by increasing the magnification by 1.5 (1.6) in comparison to your normal enlargements. So for 0.8x now you could make a test at 1.2x The increasing in detail is what you can get by a camera using about 2.25 x 18 Megapixel = 40.5 Megapixel FF camera. The Nikon D800 is not far down to it. (But you have to change your personal work around to avoid the shutter vibration).

........ I find it a sad state of affairs that the lenses that give the best performance I have tested to date were made in the 1970's!!

It's not that amazingly for me. IMO it has to do with far other priorities today in designing lenses for use on a DSLR camera. Priorities has more to do with "handy usage" and a broad general usage in first place, instead of optimum optical performance for a special purpose. E.g. today "dedicated" macro lenses are designed to have no change in size / dimensions during the complete route of focussing from 1:1 to infinity. The other priority is using fast internal micro-drive Auto Focus by a tiny group of lenses, plus vibration control (VR). The lens has to be "good" for a great range in subject distances (1:1 to infinity). All these changings in the sake of "handy and a broad usage" makes a lens very complex within its design, with culprit to pure optical performance for a small banded area of close subject distances.

In this regard I am very amazed with the first tests I did with an APO Rodagon-N 105mm/4.0 in far tilted settings to see what quality it brings at far out image circle. Where as in centre is not that much difference with other lenses (but ARN 105 still more sharp, specially by more wide aperture settings and do have a better "micro contrast"). Within the outside region of the image circle you see the lack of the other lenses (EL Nikkor, and Tominon), where the APO Rodagon shines. But that was that lens meant for. Enlarger lens for medium format film (6x9 cm), sharp from corner to corner, plus good performance for colour.

[typestar]

Photo below shows the 3 Scitex lenses (67/4.9, 89/5.0, 110/5.0)....

The Rodenstock lenses are labeled Scitex. These had been made for the Scitex (later CREO, finally bought from Kodak) High-end Supreme /Supreme II Scanners (45.000 $ scanners), which are of real highend quality. They all have a rear M39x1 thread). They should be - as I had been informed APO corrected, because of the high needs in colour reproduction and also sharpness for film-scanning.
I did not know this Kyocera lens, thankyou.
If you find the time, it would be interesting to see the final picture results in the tests ...

Thankyou

[dickb]

in order of sharpness result in the critical range I've specified, are:

Nikon Printing-Nikkor (tested 105PN and 95PN)
Nikon Apo-EL-Nikkor (tested 105AEL)
Rodenstock Apo Rodagon D (tested 75ARD1 and 75ARD2)
Rodenstock Scitex S-3 (tested all 3, 67S3, 89S3, 110S3)
Tominon E36 (tested several from 58mm to 94mm)
Kyocera E36C (tested several from 67mm to 94mm))
Schneider-Kreuznach Apo Componon HM (tested 45ACHM and 90ACHM)
Nikon EL-Nikkor (tested all from 40mm to 150mm)

My question for the forum...are there other lines of lenses, or specific single lenses, that I should look at for this magnification range?

Other lenses I've heard about but not tested are:

Zeiss 74mm S-Planar
Zeiss 60mm S-Orthoplanar
Nikon Macro-Nikkors (65mm??)
Nikon Ultra-Micro Nikkors

So what am I missing? I'm still searching for a few lenses listed above, but maybe there are other lines I am not aware of?

You've tested some lenses which have a stellar reputation. I expect some of these outresolve the sensor you're using at the moment. Maybe buying a Nikon D800e will give you a much bigger leap in image quality than getting another great lens. Of course, a camera is a far worse investment than quality glass..

Anyway, my suggestions for your ultimate glass are:
Zeiss S-Orthoplanar 50mm, 60mm, 105mm
Zeiss S-Planar 60mm, 74mm, 120mm
Nikon Printing Nikkor 150mm
Nikon Macro Nikkor 65mm, 12cm
Rodenstock Apo Rodagon N 80mm, 105mm, 150mm
Leitz Photar II 80mm, 130mm

I've got a few of the lenses mentioned above, more rigorous testing is needed to say which is best. The 74mm S-Planar for instance is a lower contrast but high resolution lens.

The Voigtländer 125mm f/2.5 may be the best regular macrolens, and the Canon MP-E 65mm is very practical to use with a Canon camera.

What is your present routine for photographing coins? Maybe stacking images focussed on the top and the base of the coin face gives you what you're looking for.

[ray_parkhurst]

You can test by your own camera what you can expect as a reference for a FF camera using about the same pixel density, just by increasing the magnification by 1.5 (1.6) in comparison to your normal enlargements...

18MP is giving me enough detail for now, and the larger sensor will degrade my sharpness, so not sure what I will gain. The pixel size is the same on the larger sensors versus smaller, and thus diffraction limits are the same at a given magnification, so increasing magnification will probably give a worse image quality. Or am I missing something? Most of my personal coin imaging is of Cents at 0.8x, so very near the 1:1 optimum for the duplication lenses anyway. Going to 1.3 would likely not help from optics perspective. [/quote]

...All these changings in the sake of "handy and a broad usage" makes a lens very complex within its design, with culprit to pure optical performance for a small banded area of close subject distances.

I agree on the camera-mount dedicated macros, but what about the industrial market that the 105PN was built for?

In this regard I am very amazed with the first tests I did with an APO Rodagon-N 105mm/4.0 ...Enlarger lens for medium format film (6x9 cm), sharp from corner to corner, plus good performance for colour.

Of course enlarging lenses needed to be the very best possible optics. Even the low-end enlarging lenses I've tested are better than most dedicated macros in the macro range. I have not tested a 105ARN but I assume it is superb. But the enlarging market has been dead for some time and little or no new development has occurred. Those lenses that could be re-purposed for duplication, macro or industrial use have made the transition, and are apparently good enough for the modern purposes such that newer and better lenses are not needed.

You've tested some lenses which have a stellar reputation. I expect some of these outresolve the sensor you're using at the moment. Maybe buying a Nikon D800e will give you a much bigger leap in image quality than getting another great lens. Of course, a camera is a far worse investment than quality glass..

I am very interested in the D800E with removed AA filter, though I may just have the filter removed from the Canon. Anyone know if this is feasible on a T2i? Based on the pics I've seen published on the web, this would give a bigger boost to resolution and sharpness than almost anything else I could do. But I don't know what to believe...

Anyway, my suggestions for your ultimate glass are:
Zeiss S-Orthoplanar 50mm, 60mm, 105mm
Zeiss S-Planar 60mm, 74mm, 120mm
Nikon Printing Nikkor 150mm
Nikon Macro Nikkor 65mm, 12cm
Rodenstock Apo Rodagon N 80mm, 105mm, 150mm
Leitz Photar II 80mm, 130mm

I have heard conflicting stories on the 60SO. One review said it is more famous than sharp, so I'm loathe to pay the exorbitant collector prices. I own a 120SP, and am not impressed. It performs about the same as my 120AMED, good but not in the same league as the best lenses. There are penalties to pay for big image circles. The 150PN looks excessively interesting, but ONLY the old model. The new model is just a 1:1 duplication lens with bigger image circle and poorer resolution than the 105PN. But the old model had provision for user-adjusted magnification optimization. I've never seen one for sale anywhere but would love to test one. Would be nice to dynamically-optimize the optics for any magnification used. I bought a 74SP once, but it had coating problems and very poor contrast. It sounds like part of the contrast problem may be present in a perfect copy? That is disappointing. 65MN looks very interesting but optimized for higher mags so might not do as well at 1x. I own a 120 Photar and am not impressed with it either.

One lens not mentioned that from my tests is about the sharpest dedicated macro out there is the 40 year old "Bokina" (Tokina-made Vivitar 90mm f2.5). I hate the 1:1 adapter and get better performance on APS-C with extensions but this lens is way up there on sharpness scale. Unfortunately its contrast is poor. I've tested at least 5 copies of this lens and all were the same.

What is your present routine for photographing coins? Maybe stacking images focussed on the top and the base of the coin face gives you what you're looking for.

I've done a few stacks to see if I can get better results and it is definitely required for best resolution. Most of my coin photos are not stacked, and taken at f5.6 which gives enough DOF at 0.8x to sharply resolve a Cent. Most coins have low relief in the devices so don't need a lot of DOF as long as the coin is flat vs sensor. That said, here is an image of a toned Lincoln Cent I took with the 105PN with (IIRC) a 5-image stack. By the way, I use CZP and have never tried the other stackers I've read about. Would I do better with Zerene or Helicon vs CZP???

[dickb]

I have heard conflicting stories on the 60SO. One review said it is more famous than sharp, so I'm loathe to pay the exorbitant collector prices.

Mine was as sharp as it is famous, and my 50SO is impressive as well. The advantage of exorbitant collector prices is that when selling you are bound to get at least as much for it as you paid, if not a lot more. A much better investment than cameras..

I own a 120SP, and am not impressed. It performs about the same as my 120AMED, good but not in the same league as the best lenses. There are penalties to pay for big image circles.

Is your 120SP the f/5.6 or the f/4.0?

I bought a 74SP once, but it had coating problems and very poor contrast. It sounds like part of the contrast problem may be present in a perfect copy? That is disappointing.

High contrast and high resolving power are mutually exclusive when pixelpeeping at extreme levels. You can always add contrast, not resolution.

65MN looks very interesting but optimized for higher mags so might not do as well at 1x. I own a 120 Photar and am not impressed with it either.

The 130 Photar II is supposed to be superior to the 120 Photar.

One lens not mentioned that from my tests is about the sharpest dedicated macro out there is the 40 year old "Bokina" (Tokina-made Vivitar 90mm f2.5). I hate the 1:1 adapter and get better performance on APS-C with extensions but this lens is way up there on sharpness scale. Unfortunately its contrast is poor. I've tested at least 5 copies of this lens and all were the same.

My Vivitar S1 90/2.5 is lower in contrast than my Tokina 90/2.5. The newer version may be more to your taste.

[SONYNUT]

may as well have a picture of coins

[Babylonia]

But the enlarging market has been dead for some time and little or no new development has occurred. Those lenses that could be re-purposed for duplication, macro or industrial use have made the transition, and are apparently good enough for the modern purposes such that newer and better lenses are not needed.

Lenses as APO Rodagon lenses at one hand are of a more old design, but from my lately bought AR-N 105mm/4.0 I could see it is improved by tiny things as more matte aperture blades as e.g. my AR-D 75mm/4.0 M1, and also a better lens coating (multi coated). I could not test it if is also better in optical performance as an older type (I have no other copies), but still it could be possibility that todays production of the same lens is more optimized.

At the other hand I also do see more new lens designs, that with some customization I do expect can be used for today industrial market to.
http://www.rodenstock-photo.com/en/main ... r-digital/
Rodenstock lenses for industrial usage (PDF):
http://www.optoscience.com/maker/linos/ ... Lenses.pdf
http://www.qioptiq-shop.com

Schneider:
https://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommer ... px?CID=203

Schneider lenses for industrial usage:
https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommer ... x?CID=1353
https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommer ... x?CID=1347
https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommer ... x?CID=1551
https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommer ... x?CID=1440
https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommer ... x?CID=1758

I guess Nikon has a line up to, for industrial purposes (see what parts are used in the "Precision Equipment" and "Instruments Products" area):
http://www.nikon.com/index.htm

But do you see these lenses used within our photographic field, or spare parts of it and has somebody tried these?

[Peter De Smidt]

One thing to note, the definition of APO used for microscope objectives may not be the same definition used by Rodenstock and Schneider for photography lenses.

[Babylonia]

One thing to note, the definition of APO used for microscope objectives may not be the same definition used by Rodenstock and Schneider for photography lenses.

I only know the mening for "photographic" lenses: http://toothwalker.org/optics/chromatic.html
I can imagine that the designation "APO" does not necessary mean it is 100% fully corrected / free of chromatic aberrations. But still a more high correction as none APO designs. Especially in the field of longitudinal chromatic aberration. As a bonus I find that the APO lenses are better in sharpness / contrast as well when used at more wide aperture openings, than the non APO lenses.

[ChrisLilley]

One thing to note, the definition of APO used for microscope objectives may not be the same definition used by Rodenstock and Schneider for photography lenses.

This is unfortunately common for photographic lenses (Sigma call a lot of their lenses 'apo' which seems to mean 'uses some low dispersion glass elements', what Nikon would call ED lenses).

Going by the usual definition (fully corrected for axial chromatic aberration at three widely spaced wavelengths, and corrected for spherochromatism between two widely spaced wavelenghts), if the manufacturer or a reviewer provides a plot of focus distance vs. wavelength (few do) it is easy to see if a lens is apochromatic - the graph will have three crossing points.

Rodenstock, to their credit, do produce such a graph - which for the APO-D 75's clearly shows two crossing points thus making these lenses achromatic rather than apochromatic

The standard definition says nothing about what the curve does outside of the three crossing points. Naturally a curve which is flat and close to the axis indicates better correction than one which sweeps widely. The 'apo' Rodagon-D 75/4.5 2x does better than the 'apo' Rodagon-D 75/4 1x here.

[ray_parkhurst]

The 75ARD1, while an excellent lens and in fact one of my favorites for coin photography, is definitely NOT apochromatic. You can see color shifts when focusing. They are small in comparison with many lenses, but they are definitely there and more noticeable than the true apochromats like the 105PN...Ray

[ChrisR]

Ray have you looked at Coastal Optics?
Some chat here with some links including to MTF.
I know it's not optimized for 1:1, but even so...

I remember seeing a demo of its CAs, which was very impressive, longitudinal particularly. Perhaps it was a video?
They do a 60 and a 100.

http://www.jenoptik-inc.com/index2.php? ... d=99999999
http://diglloyd.com/articles/CoastalOpt ... index.html
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/716974

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/ ... 09#7120748

As far as the Leica/Zeiss/Voigtlander Lanthars go, the only comparitive test I've seen is here:
http://www.slrlensreview.com/web/entry/ ... ison-part2

The Zeiss wins just on resolution at 10 metres.
(The Canon lens included in the test is not the better L series one) It's not the best of tests perhaps - the fellow admits he's "not much into macro". He just happens to have these lenses lying about the place.
(The page is very slow to load)

[Peter De Smidt]

I seem to remember the Coastal Optics lens being designed by Dr Brian Caldwell. He used to occasionally show up on one of the photography forums. Apug, I think.