Tube lens comparisons for MFT with Mitu 10x

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

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

mjkzz
Posts: 1237
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:38 pm
Location: California/Shenzhen
Contact:

Post by mjkzz »

Mike, that is with normal orientation. The problem was with a 12-17mm helicoid I used to make sure that the Raynox focuses to infinity, it seemed OK, but when looked closer, it was loose enough to make the lens move around, particularly heavy lens, now I glued it up and it is much better (you have seen that 50x image I did)

Lou Jost
Posts: 4581
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Mike, mine is also in the normal orientation. But I liked the shorter Raynox (DCR-250) in reverse. There is not much difference, and there may be tradeoffs, so that one orientation might seem slightly sharper in the center, but the other orientation might have slightly sharper corners....

billjanes1
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:59 pm
Location: Lake Forest, IL, USA

Infinity focus required for tube lens?

Post by billjanes1 »

As a retired pathologist, I am quite familiar with photomicroscopy, but I am interested in getting into extreme macrophotography where I am a complete novice. I plan to get either the 10x Nikon infinity corrected objective or perhaps the 10x Mitutotoyo apo long working distance objective.

I use the Nikon D800e and will need a tube lens. The SMC Pentax-M 200mm lens is highly recommended on extreme-macro.co.uk, but this would require a M42 to Nikon F adapter and I understand that this would not allow focus at infinity. Would this be a serious limitation, or should I look for a vintage 200 mm Nikkor?

Thanks,

Bill Janes

Charles Krebs
Posts: 5859
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
Contact:

Post by Charles Krebs »

Bill,

I can't answer as to the specific lenses you mention. I just want to point out that since you are using a full frame camera (24x36mm sensor) you are likely going to find that you can experience vignetting (and/or poor corner performance) with certain lenses when they are used as the tube lens. This includes some that function just fine on a smaller APS-C sensor. Try to find recommendations specifically made for 24x36mm sensors. I haven't been keeping tabs on what (tube) lenses full-frame camera users have had success with, perhaps some will chime in here.

This thread may be of interest if you have not seen it already:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=23898

billjanes1
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:59 pm
Location: Lake Forest, IL, USA

Post by billjanes1 »

Charles Krebs wrote:Bill,

I can't answer as to the specific lenses you mention. I just want to point out that since you are using a full frame camera (24x36mm sensor) you are likely going to find that you can experience vignetting (and/or poor corner performance) with certain lenses when they are used as the tube lens. This includes some that function just fine on a smaller APS-C sensor. Try to find recommendations specifically made for 24x36mm sensors. I haven't been keeping tabs on what (tube) lenses full-frame camera users have had success with, perhaps some will chime in here.

This thread may be of interest if you have not seen it already:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=23898
Charles,

Thanks for the link. it does have some valuable material. The D800e does have a crop mode (DX in Nikon parlance) or on can simply crop the image in post.

However, my main question that has not been answered is if it is necessary that the tube lens be focused at infinity, which is not possible with the adapter I mentioned. PhotodioX does make an adapter with a correction lens that enables focusing at infinity, but it is reportedly of low quality.

If tube lens can not focus at infinity, it might not work well with an infinity objective.

Happy new year!

Bill

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8561
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

I used a Nikon 200 f/4 pre-AI for a while on a D700 with no problems. I think it's a lottery whether the rear ring rubs the camera body or not - tight tolerances.
Then I found an AI converted (by Nikon) one so I used that.
I moved to APS-C long ago, and can't remember tbh if/how much vignetting there was. Some darkening maybe but not more.
Someone recently complained about it though (same lens, 24 x 36).

I tried a Raynox and a Thorlabs ITL200. I preferred the last of those but it's more of a faff to use.

High NA objectives "go off" if you take the tube lens far from infinity focus, but a little is OK at NA 0.25, 10x.
Chris R

johan
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Infinity focus required for tube lens?

Post by johan »

billjanes1 wrote:As a retired pathologist, I am quite familiar with photomicroscopy, but I am interested in getting into extreme macrophotography where I am a complete novice. I plan to get either the 10x Nikon infinity corrected objective or perhaps the 10x Mitutotoyo apo long working distance objective.

I use the Nikon D800e and will need a tube lens. The SMC Pentax-M 200mm lens is highly recommended on extreme-macro.co.uk, but this would require a M42 to Nikon F adapter and I understand that this would not allow focus at infinity. Would this be a serious limitation, or should I look for a vintage 200 mm Nikkor?

Thanks,

Bill Janes
I should add a note to my pages to make it clear that I tested it all with APSC. I don't have the Pentax fullframe so I've never tested it with that.
My extreme-macro.co.uk site, a learning site. Your comments and input there would be gratefully appreciated.

mawyatt
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater

Post by mawyatt »

Bill,

I've used the various Mits with the Raynox 150 and 250 on the D800e. I found that if you use 52mm dia extensions tubes vignetting wasn't a serious issue. I now use a Nikon PB-6 bellows instead of the 52mm extension tubes with the Raynox tube lenses.

The Raynox 150 and 250 as tubes lenses are quite good with the Mits.

Happy New Year,

Best,

Mike

mawyatt
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater

Post by mawyatt »

Lou and other optical gurus,

From your previous excellent work it seems the Nikkor 200 Q F4 is slightly better than the Raynox 150 as a tube lens with Mitutoyo objectives. I have the Raynox 150 & 250, so not sure if getting the Nikkor 200 is worth the cost and effort, although they are very reasonable on eBay now.

I also would like to get a ~100mm tube lens to supplement the Raynox 250 and have a Nikon 105mm Macro VR, although not sure if this a good option for a tube lens.

What are considered good tube lenses in the 100mm range that will fit a Nikon DSLR? Is the 105mm worth trying? I ask because my setup is in a bit of disarray right now, so asking rather than testing :roll:
Anyway, thanks for great work and information.

Best,

Mike

Lou Jost
Posts: 4581
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Mike, the difference between the Raynox and Nikon 200mm was very small. I could post some crops here next week when I get back home. But it's important to note that I have not tried either on a full-frame sensor.

I think 100mm might be too short as a tube lens for a Mitu on full frame.

mawyatt
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater

Post by mawyatt »

Lou,

I thought that's what the result would be, only very slightly better with the Nikkor 200 Q vs. the Raynox 150.

I use a D500 now mostly, so more concerned on Nikon's DX format (similar to APSC size) rather than full frame FX.

Considering I'll be on a DX format what do you think would be a good tube around 100mm, or is that still pushing the Mit's too far off the design 200mm length?

Best and safe travels,

Mike
Last edited by mawyatt on Wed Feb 15, 2017 6:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Lou Jost
Posts: 4581
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I get decent results with a Mitu 10x + 125mm lens on a DX sensor. I get corner deterioration with a 90mm lens. That's all I can say from my own limited experience, but I'm sure other forum members have direct experience with a 105mm lens. I would like to get one myself if yours works out.

mawyatt
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater

Post by mawyatt »

Lou,

Thanks.

BTW I thought the Nikon 105mm Macro VR was a sharp lens, that was until I got he Rokinon 135mm F2 last year. The Rokinon is absolutely stellar in sharpness, thus my hoping it would be equal as a tube lens..which I found out not to be the case!! Since the 250 Raynox (125mm) had worked so well I had great expectations since the 135mm is closer to the 200mm design point than 125mm, well it seemed like a good thought.

I may have messed things up, so would be interesting to hear from others about using the Rokinon (Samyang) 135mm as a tube lens with the Mits. I recall some others ordered the Rokinon after my initial report on it's sharpness but haven't seen any posts in that regard.

Best,

Mike

Lou Jost
Posts: 4581
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I think Beatsy made a comment about the Rokinon 135mm to the effect that it was amazingly sharp but that it was not a good tube lens. I might be misremembering though. He preferred the very inexpensive Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm.

On the other hand Royal Winchester has found that his 125mm Apo-Lanthar is an exquisitely good tube lens.

mawyatt
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater

Post by mawyatt »

Lou,

Think that was me back in December, thus my request for other inputs.

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... okinon+135

Looks like Beatsy found the same result I did, maybe others can chime in with any experience they have?

Best,

Mike
Last edited by mawyatt on Wed Feb 15, 2017 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic