Mitutoyo 5x Plan Apo vs Nikon Plan Apo 4x/0.20

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Davids
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 2:20 pm

Mitutoyo 5x Plan Apo vs Nikon Plan Apo 4x/0.20

Post by Davids »

I was hoping to hear what people think of these two objectives. Obviously one is infinity corrected and the other is not. But, what about overall resolution and image quality if either were to be used at a range of 3-6x?

David

dmillard
Posts: 639
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Post by dmillard »


Online
Macrero
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Davids,

In my experience the Nikon has an outstanding resolution in the center, noticeably better than the Mitutoyo, as is logical, given its higher NA.
Unfortunately the coverage is not as good compared to the Mitu, especially at lower magnification 3-4X. It covers just so-so an APS-C sensor.

I don't know what camera (sensor format) was Dmillard used for that comparison, but out of my experience the corner performance of the Nikon is considerably worse in APS-C at nominal magnification.

On the other hand the Mitutoyo has more than twice the working distance of the Nikon, as I just said, better coverage and better color correction, especially out of the center.

Best,

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 4057
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Chris S. »

Davids,

I also have both of these objectives, and value each of them highly. I'd note, however, that there also exists an infinite version of the Nikon apo 4x/0.20. I have not tried it--mine is the finite that you asked about. I've been tempted to get a specimen of the infinite version, as these days I work more often on the tube lens than the bellows. I would have zero problem justifying ownership of both a 4x and a 5x in either my finite or infinite arsenals.

Agreed that the Nikon out-resolves the Mitty in the center, and the Mitty out-resolves the Nikon toward the edges. Either behavior is preferable, depending on the shot; horses for courses.

However, in my experience, neither the Nikon nor the Mitty display any meaningful chromatic aberration. And while the working distances of these lenses differs, both are so large that each lens is very easy to use.

In short, you will not go wrong with either lens.

--Chris

harisA
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:31 am
Location: Greece

Post by harisA »

I own the infinite version of nikon 4x plan apo and is a brilliant lens recording very fine detail.It will cover an aps sensor without problems

Online
Macrero
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Chris S. wrote:
However, in my experience, neither the Nikon nor the Mitty display any meaningful chromatic aberration. And while the working distances of these lenses differs, both are so large that each lens is very easy to use.
Chris,

I do see some color fringing with the Nikon, especially on the periphery at lower magnifications, never seen noticeable fringing with the Mitu however, even pushed down below 3X.

I would not call 16mm a large WD though, while it is enough to properly illuminate the subject, it may result in unpleasant reflections/shadows with certain subjects/insects.
When it comes to working distance, the more the better.

Best,

- Macrero
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic