Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

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

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by RobertOToole »

rjlittlefield wrote:
Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:34 am
Perhaps you're already well experienced with using these targets, but if not, then be aware they don't tell you a lot of what you'd like to know.

For illustration, see the lens comparisons at https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 82#p136282 versus real subject comparisons of the same objectives at https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 75#p129875 .

--Rik
Thanks for the message and the links Rik, I had forgotten about the your 10x saga! I enjoyed reading the thread again.

So far I'm still experimenting with the target and the fine details that I was looking for are there but using the target has been very difficult so far. Lighting at 0.2x is the biggest challenge I've encountered so far. Not sure if I will keep it, it's a loaner from a friend.

I'll make notes and post something later to help/warn people about what I've found. I did find some good bits of info online from various sources but nothing really answered the questions I had in using a target like this.

Things should be simple if you buy a Thorlabs or other professional target and you shoot 1:1. But downloading a USAF 1951 target from an online source and comparing two or three lenses to see what can resolve more is fine if they are all the same focal length. But it seems the original USAF 1951 target designed for infinity conjugates on parking lot sized targets. What distance do you use for a 200mm lens? Is the online target the true size? Is your print size correct? If you are shooting at 1:30 what is the correct resolution lp/mm figure? (3.33*object res I'm guessing?)

Hopefully the test comes out okay showing which 80mm lens can resolve finer details and what aperture for each is best. So far its working just okay but its not ideal.

Best,

Robert

bbobby
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2022 12:40 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by bbobby »

I have been shooting USAF 1951 targets for over 2 years. Glass/chrome ones, paper ones printed on commercial printing press, paper ones downloaded in the beginning from web then I just made them on CorelDraw and Inkscape...

When using them it is not so much about the focal length of the lens, but magnification... If you have 3 different macro (lets say 50mm, 100mm and 200mm) lenses and all go to 1:1 the working distance will be different, bokeh and perspective for 3D object too, but this flat target will look the same for every lens... same for 1:2 or 1:5 or whatever...

Downloading and printing such target at home make senses only if magnification is over 1:15... better more like 1:25... just because most of the printers available under few thousands bucks print at 300 dpi or roughly 6 lp/mm... even laser printer which advertise 1200 dpi barely can make repeated black/white pattern of less than 6 lp/mm on paper - 0.084 mm (about Group 2 Element 4)... at 1:15 this translates to 90 lp/mm and most of the lenses can resolve that at least in the center... and you want 1-2 elements not to be resolved... so if you have a lens which can resolve about 120 lp/mm you need some elements past that, lets say 150 lp/mm... and 150/6=25. Now if you have access to commercial printing press then you can go more - Group 4 is the maximum of what can be printed on paper - which means it will be usable at 1:5 magnification.

If you print such pattern there is no need to even print exact size as standard USAF 1951... example Group 3 Element 3 at 1:1 indicates 10.08 lp/mm and the lines should be 0.0496 mm. 1/10.08=0.099 per line 0.099/2=0.0496 line pairs. These are strange numbers... for 10 lp/mm you need 0.05 mm line, for 20 lp/mm - 0.025 mm lines, for 30 lp/mm line should be 0.0167 and so on... You can print arbitrary lines and make the calculations afterwards - for example pattern of lines with width 0.01 mm will represent 50 lp/mm at 1:1, 100 lp/mm at 1:2 and 25 lp/mm at 2:1. The best approach for printing target at home is to play with the printer and see the smallest pattern which this printer can reliably print - as I said for Canon printers 0.084 mm lines is a bit struggle, but can be done. Depending of the printer and the paper half the time 0.042 mm lines can look OK and I never been able to print smaller pattern than that. Theoretically 300 dpi should be able to print 0.0118 mm lines, but this is only achievable for 1 black line and it is not exactly a line, but rather many dots together with jagged edge. Laser printer and transparent plastic folio are better than printers with ink and paper. In my case I am able to print patterns which got 0.042 mm difference - 0.042, 0.084, 0.126, 0.168 and so on. And this is only for horizontal and vertical lines, not for anything rotated...

Anyway, even with good target at 1:1 you have to decide how to shoot the target, usually it is best to be backlit. Then make some screen to block most of it light... even then you may want to use microscope or something else with condensed light which is only limited to the smallest Group/Element resolved.

Other thing is that once you find the best resolution in the center then either the target or the camera must be moved to get reading of any other place...

Another headache is that if you orient the lines horizontally and vertically they will match the sensor pixels everywhere but only the central lines will be match for the sagittal and meridional lines and many times you need to focus 2 times at the same spot. In the past when I tested some lens (Tamron 180/3.5 I think, not sure) Sony A7R showed Group 7 Element 1 resolved in the center. 128 lp/mm is great. Line width 0.00391 mm. Pixels of this sensors are 0.00376 mm. Next element is 0.00348 mm and if the pattern lines so happens that are aligned between 2 pixels even if the lens can resolve more the sensor or the demosaicing algorithm will be problem... so either smaller pixels or minute about 1 micron movement or pixel-shift must be used to go past that... Using pixel shift I was able to see Group 7 Element 3 and 4 on some occasions...

Right now I got in touch with a company which can do custom targets... if I can afford it I will get some made for different magnifications... at the end testing a lens at 1:1 mag will need Groups 5 to 7, even bad lenses @ f/22 are able to resolve Group 4 so nothing to be tested there and even best lenses on best micro 4/3, APS-C and full frame sensors available today probably will not be able to resolve Group 7 Element 6. The new Fuji with 40 Mpix sensor with pixel shift is maybe candidate to do that...

This become longer than I wish it to be... good luck with the target and please share your findings. I see you got positive target, if you need I can provide negative one for additional tests.

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

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by RobertOToole »

bbobby wrote:
Sun Dec 18, 2022 8:42 pm
I have been shooting USAF 1951 targets for over 2 years. Glass/chrome ones, paper ones printed on commercial printing press, paper ones downloaded in the beginning from web then I just made them on CorelDraw and Inkscape...

.......This become longer than I wish it to be... good luck with the target and please share your findings. I see you got positive target, if you need I can provide negative one for additional tests.
Thanks for detailed reply. I have seen a few of the issues you pointed out. I'll start a new thread on this topic to help others out there, once I get this test done, or should I say if I never get this test done. #-o

Best,

Robert

dmillard
Posts: 637
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by dmillard »

Somewhat tangential to the original topic, but I have used the 35mm target slides offered at the site below to inexpensively provide a qualitative assessment of lenses intended for slide duplication.

https://www.film4ever.info/vtt#h.3b4dfm4hmbm5

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

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by RobertOToole »

Quick update. Sat Dec 24th. Happy Holidays.

Final results are taking a little longer than expected. I just got back home last night from an unplanned trip to the ER>ICU>progressive care unit.
Another MI (commonly called a heart attack). It happened training at the gym Thurs. I'm now back home and feeling strangely a-okay, famous last words maybe? #-o I'll finish up and post all the results ASAP now that I'm back in front of the computer.

Just wanted to say thank you and Happy New Years to all the forum contributors over the years, and rik for continuous support, just in case something happens AGAIN before I get a chance to post the final results. Seems like I'm joking a bit but you never know! :-k


Best,

Robert

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1619
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by Scarodactyl »

I'm really sorry to hear that. I'm glad you're feeling better and I hope it stays that way!

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

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by RobertOToole »

Scarodactyl wrote:
Sat Dec 24, 2022 1:21 pm
I'm really sorry to hear that. I'm glad you're feeling better and I hope it stays that way!
Thanks

Robert

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23564
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by rjlittlefield »

Likewise! Take care and heal well!

--Rik

lothman
Posts: 959
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:00 am
Location: Stuttgart/Germany

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by lothman »

Robert,
all the best for these few 2022 days and at least the next 10000 days coming :D

best regards
Lothar

chris_ma
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 2:23 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by chris_ma »

hi Robert,
very sorry to hear that, but glad that things seems to be stable.
all the best wishes and hope you have a merry christmas time and many more to come!
chris
chris

Lou Jost
Posts: 5948
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by Lou Jost »

O nooo Robert....I hope you recover fully and quickly!

dolmadis
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: UK

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by dolmadis »

Take care Robert with my best wishes.

“God Rest You Merry Gentlemen” as the Carol goes with the emphasis on Rest!!

Best, John

typestar
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:45 am
Location: Austria

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by typestar »

Dear Robert,

I am very sorry to hear that and I hope all will
be best again soon and for the future. :arrow:

Take care, dear friend!

All the best,

Christian

jvanhuys
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2023 9:24 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by jvanhuys »

RobertOToole wrote:
Sat Dec 10, 2022 7:01 pm
chris_ma wrote:
Sat Dec 10, 2022 5:23 pm
ah, looking forward to this one!

how much is the HR 80?
the inspec.x L 60mm (which looks to be in the similar series) lists as 2660EUR net on digikey.
Qioptiq has not gotten back to me with a price yet. I need to send them another email.

It seems like corporate customer service has really declined since the pandemic, or is it just me? The Qioptiq email answer rate has been abysmal lately for some reason. An engineer at Mejiro told me early in the pandemic that all the Tokyo staff was working remotely so he had no pressure and had plenty of time to answer all of my questions, Qioptiq has been the opposite. :-k Mejiro customer service gets a 5 out of 5 rating from me, Qioptiq gets a big zero.

Best,

Robert
Hi Robert,

Not sure if this is moral or not, but here goes...

Qioptic's Korean distributor came back to me less than a day after I told them I have a Korean number. They just called me and asked what it was for, then sent the quote immediately. Let me know when you see this then I'll send the quote through to you. It's bloody expensive.

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

Re: Qioptiq LINOS d.fine HR-M 2.8/80 0.2x Lens Test Results

Post by RobertOToole »

jvanhuys wrote:
Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:15 pm
RobertOToole wrote:
Sat Dec 10, 2022 7:01 pm
chris_ma wrote:
Sat Dec 10, 2022 5:23 pm
ah, looking forward to this one!

how much is the HR 80?
the inspec.x L 60mm (which looks to be in the similar series) lists as 2660EUR net on digikey.
Qioptiq has not gotten back to me with a price yet. I need to send them another email.

It seems like corporate customer service has really declined since the pandemic, or is it just me? The Qioptiq email answer rate has been abysmal lately for some reason. An engineer at Mejiro told me early in the pandemic that all the Tokyo staff was working remotely so he had no pressure and had plenty of time to answer all of my questions, Qioptiq has been the opposite. :-k Mejiro customer service gets a 5 out of 5 rating from me, Qioptiq gets a big zero.

Best,

Robert
Hi Robert,

Not sure if this is moral or not, but here goes...

Qioptic's Korean distributor came back to me less than a day after I told them I have a Korean number. They just called me and asked what it was for, then sent the quote immediately. Let me know when you see this then I'll send the quote through to you. It's bloody expensive.
Hi,

Thanks for the info. I appreciate any assistance with this.

The Qioptiq situation is a strange one, they sent me a new lens to test (without duty fees this time) but they refuse to help me with any technical support or information. After 2 or 3 emails I'm now on some kind of shadow unofficial black list! Qioptiq replies to my email but without any help that I'm requesting.

In years past I communicated with the EU sales manager without any issues, now? I'm dealing with sales manager's boss and 2 or 3 others. Maybe its some kind of interoffice politics involved. I feel like I'm asking for some kind of illicit technology or asking for help circumventing some technology embargo? #-o Its just a line scan lens!

I've decided to hold off posting the final results.

Best,

Robert

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic