Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 Lens Test at 1.2x

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

zzffnn
Posts: 1896
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 1:25 pm
Location: Houston, Texas, USA
Contact:

Post by zzffnn »

Sorry, I DID totally miss the "100% crop" :shock: :roll: I should quit speed reading forums at late night on a smartphone.
Selling my Canon FD 200mm F/2.8 lens

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23561
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

zzffnn wrote:Sorry, I DID totally miss the "100% crop"
No worries. Actually your question did help to clarify what the picture shows. I see that Smokedaddy's post has now been edited to show the entire frame, with the chip in the middle of it. It now seems that the 100% crop was the lower left corner of the chip, but essentially the center of the lens's image.

--Rik

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

This is a different wafer (1970's Syncronar LED watch) than the one I posted above. Same camera and same magnification (about 2.25x). Since my flash setup arrived I wanted to give them a try. I used two Godox TT350s along with the Godox X1C wireless transmitter. I have no previous experience with flashes so I was winging it. I prefer Roberts images by far compared to my equipment with my current skills. I seem to have much better results photographing a wafer with a microscope objective and epi illumination.

I also tried photographing this with and without a dome and saw no difference.

Image

Below is the overall 4752 x 3168 image resized to 1024 for posting here;

Image

Below is a crop of the middle section of the die which ended up being 33 percent (if I remember correctly) then resized to 1024 for posting;

Image

Below is a 100% view, cropped to 1024 for posting;

Image

-JW:
Last edited by Smokedaddy on Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:22 am, edited 3 times in total.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23561
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Smokedaddy wrote:Below is a 100 percent crop of the die then resized to 1024 for posting
The combination of words is troubling: "100 percent crop...resized to 1024".

When trying to show actual pixels, 100 percent crops should never be resized, only cropped.

See FAQ: What is '100% crop' or 'actual pixels crop' ? for more discussion.

--Rik

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

... yea, poor wording, I edited it.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

I think it looks very good for 2.25x.

I may have the same wafer BTW! I can check when I am back in the office.

Is that a Nikon tilt stage+ rotation, and XY stage below it?

Robert

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

RobertOToole wrote:I think it looks very good for 2.25x.

I may have the same wafer BTW! I can check when I am back in the office.
It's a 1970's Syncronar LED watch wafer.
RobertOToole wrote: Is that a Nikon tilt stage+ rotation, and XY stage below it?
Yes

-JW:

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

Don't mean to screw up this thread (if I am). Dunno why but I thought I would give the 28mm Schneider Kreuznach Componon a try. This is the same wafer, the same flash setup and orientation. The magnification was about 3.5x with the SKC, f/5.6 and my particular setup, meaning the minimum or shortest tube is attached to my camera and MM-11 dovetail.

I figured I would put the DiMAGE here for a visual'
Image

Below are the SKC images;
Image

Image

-JW:

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

Hi JW,

Nice colors in the crops BTW.
Smokedaddy wrote:Don't mean to screw up this thread (if I am). Dunno why but I thought I would give the 28mm Schneider Kreuznach Componon a try. This is the same wafer, the same flash setup and orientation. The magnification was about 3.5x with the SKC, f/5.6 and my particular setup,

Over the years I have owned at least a dozen S-K 28/4s, 28/2,8, makro iris, chrome, black, plastic fantastic versions and they are all the same, sharp in the middle and they die in the corners on APS-C.

The Canon MP35 beats them all. I have a test someplace on my Hdd at 2-3x, Rodenstock 28/4, 28/2.8, SK 28/4. 28/2.8, 35/4 and in the center it is interesting but at the edge and corners, the Canon beats every last one.

28/4s are a fun lenses but the Canon MP35 is a much better overall in my experience having owned quite a few of all of these lenses I mentioned.

I used to buy the 28/4s for cheap, sometimes even free, and selling them when the prices jump. I have paid $30 and sold the same lens for $250 later.

Best,

Robert

Lou Jost
Posts: 5943
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I'd like to reinforce what Robert says about the quality of the Canon 35mm on larger-than-MFT sensors. Using butterfly wing edges (which are good at revealing LoCA issues), yesterday I did a stacking test of a number of lenses at 2x on APS sensor, including the following:
Canon 35mm f/4
Yashica 32mm f/3.5
Lomo 3.7x
Lomo 3.5x
-60mm Nikon D macro at f4
-60mm Olympus macro at f4
-70 Sigma

I found that some of these were great in the center, and had more contrast than the Canon, but like Robert (and Ray Parkhurst in his 2.4x shoot-out), I found that the Canon was best in the corners and overall, and the cleanest with respect to chromatic aberration. It is quite a lens! Ray had suggested I get one a few years ago, so I did, and I'm glad.

Ray's tests are here:
www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopi ... c55fc432bc

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

Lou Jost wrote:.....
I found that some of these were great in the center, and had more contrast than the Canon, but like Robert (and Ray Parkhurst in his 2.4x shoot-out), I found that the Canon was best in the corners and overall, and the cleanest with respect to chromatic aberration. It is quite a lens! Ray had suggested I get one a few years ago, so I did, and I'm glad.
Hi Lou, Thanks for sharing the good info!

I should probably stop promoting the MP-35 so much since the supply has seemed to dry up on Ebay. They were common for years and years, I bought and sold quite a few, now they are scarce. I even sold my 2 back-up units.

On a positive note, I just ran a 2x test on a wafer and the MP-35 came in second behind, this surprised me,, the little Minolta 5400! They were close but the 5400 had better corners and zero CAs.

At least there are lots of the Minolta scanners available now.

Will post the test results when I get a chance. I am off to the airport now.

All the best,

Robert

Lou Jost
Posts: 5943
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I'm thrilled to hear that the Minolta will be so good in that magnification range! I'm eager to pick up the one I bought that is waiting for me in the US... have to wait until July to get it. Thanks for turning us onto that lens.

Have a great trip!

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

Lou Jost wrote:I'm thrilled to hear that the Minolta will be so good in that magnification range! I'm eager to pick up the one I bought that is waiting for me in the US... have to wait until July to get it. Thanks for turning us onto that lens.

Have a great trip!
Sounds good. Glad to help with the info on the lens.

Don't forget to order an adapter BTW.

https://www.rafcamera.com/adapter-18mm-id-to-rms-male

I just leave it attached on the lens all the time.

Robert

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

I finally 3D printed a dovetail by RAFcamera adapter for my MM-11 so I could eliminate the microscope nosepiece. This allowed me to get a 1.2x magnification. I'm totally new to using flashes so maybe I could do better. Still nowhere near visually the quality as the OP'er ... Robert.

Below is the 1024 100% crop;
Image

Below link is a 100% crop also but 1776 x 901.
https://squattingdog.smugmug.com/Semico ... -zv5FQsZ/O

-JW:

mawyatt
Posts: 2497
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater, Florida

Post by mawyatt »

James,

May be repeating things from others, so sorry if so.

I've found that light source diffusion is required for chip images. A small (30cm) light tent works well as does white styrofoam cups (varying size based on subject).

I haven't tried the Godox plastic dome yet (it's in my cart on eBay), however the cups and tents mentioned have worked well. I use many strobes (Adorama Studio AC 300) to help distribute the light and control the gradient.

Also should mention to make sure you've allowed the focus rail movement, mirror flip (if not using MUP) and shutter vibrations to die off before the flash fires. A long shutter exposure (1~2 seconds) and rear curtain flash trigger can help reduce the curtain vibrations.

Best,
Research is like a treasure hunt, you don't know where to look or what you'll find!
~Mike

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic