himenoptero (Wasp)

jotafoto · Post by **jotafoto** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:24 pm

Some time ago I do not put anything and it's time.

It is a small wasp about 7 mm from head to abdomen (the hind legs are much larger than the body). The first picture is taken with stackshot 320 shots with a 4X Nikon Plan Apo, 110 mm in length to the sensor = 3X, with a classical 5D. This is why the antennas are not completely clear. There is much difference between the center and corners.

The second is a 10X with a Nikon M Plan 10X / 0.25. 170 shots. Both with Zerene stacker.

I wonder what will be a lens that covers well, trabajando betwen 3.5 X- 2.5 X? with the quality that gives in east central Nikon Plan Apo.
What is the best lens for this?.Thanks

Regards

Javier Replinger

Large file

The stereo is not the same image, the first is composed of two different stacks, and then taking the best from each one. Doing this in the stereo brings a lot of work.

large file

thartl · Post by **thartl** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:36 pm

REALLY COOL! If I tilt my screen to the right I like the first one even more (horizontal view.) I dig it!

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:41 pm

Nice shots!
The background is very nice I think.
The appearance of the antennae are not bothering me in this picture.

Regards,
Barry

morfa · Post by **morfa** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:52 am

Very nice stacks Javier and what a beautifully shaped wasp!

Best lens for 2.5-3.5X on a 5D? More experienced studio shooters on this forum can correct me if I'm wrong but I think a high quality (50mm or so) enlarger lens (reversed) should be able to almost out resolve your sensor with very even performance across the frame at that magnification.

seta666 · Post by **seta666** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:44 am

These are very nice shots and I agree with John; the head shape is very nice, almost square. I love the portrait one, the light and the background colour
Jotafoto and I spend hours talking about what lens is better for what task. I think it depends on the subject; some hairy subject will benefit from using lenses like the JML 21 3.5 with good resolution and moderate aperture, good for avoiding transparncies and halos. Some other with lenses like Summar 65mm or luminar 63mm and their good working distances. When taking pictures with flat surfaces like ladybirds or beetles the a lens with wide aperture shoul give higher resolution. I have yet to trie some 50mm or 35mm primes I own, either reversed or extended for low mags like 2-4x
I also tried the canon 100mm with some raynox lenses like the DCR-250 and the MSN-202 but the results in the full frame 5D where quite disappointing, with extreme aberrations and distortions in corners

jotafoto · Post by **jotafoto** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:12 pm

Thank you all for your comments.

Tharti, maybe a horizontall crop would work best, however I would have done it drawing a diagonal, so the head was higher than the abdomen. It is true that this kind of shot asks for a horizontall framing

Barry, it is a question of whether we can improve the corners or not, but it is not strictly necessary.I appreciate your point of view.

John, Do you think that a 50mm enlarging lens would give the same quality in the center than the Nikon plan apo? or do you mean a componon apo or something alike. I have a 50 mm rodenstook Rodagon 2.8, a componon-s 80 and a 100, and I'm waiting for the nikkor EL 50mm 2.8 old version. I'll do a comparison, if you're right I threw $ 800 hahaha.

Seta , there is more work to do. First let us test all our 10x lenses against each other. Today my nikon 10X/0,30 arrived, when your olympus 10 0.30 arrives weÂ´ll star the party

regards

Javier.

morfa · Post by **morfa** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:28 pm

jotafoto wrote:John, Do you think that a 50mm enlarging lens would give the same quality in the center than the Nikon plan apo?

My guess is that at 2.5-3.5X on a 12MP 5D sensor you would be hard pressed to see a difference, even in the center! I'm sure that someone (other than me

) can plug the pixel pitch, magnification, and effective apertures into a formula or spreadsheet and tell you if it's even theoretically possible to see a difference. If it is, it remains to be seen if you can tell the difference in real world tests. And if it can, it remains to be seen if it justifies the current prices of the Plan apo's ;-)

morfa · Post by **morfa** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:36 pm

BTW – please keep us posted: I'm eager to learn what you guys find out from your testing!

jotafoto · Post by **jotafoto** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:51 pm

morfa wrote:
jotafoto wrote:John, Do you think that a 50mm enlarging lens would give the same quality in the center than the Nikon plan apo?
My guess is that at 2.5-3.5X on a 12MP 5D sensor you would be hard pressed to see a difference, even in the center! I'm sure that someone (other than me ) can plug the pixel pitch, magnification, and effective apertures into a formula or spreadsheet and tell you if it's even theoretically possible to see a difference. If it is, it remains to be seen if you can tell the difference in real world tests. And if it can, it remains to be seen if it justifies the current prices of the Plan apo's ;-)

.

You're right, I think the price difference is too much for the insignificant improvement over other optical lot easier and cheaper to obtain.

jotafoto · Post by **jotafoto** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:08 pm

morfa wrote:BTW â€“Â please keep us posted: I'm eager to learn what you guys find out from your testing!

Of course. Let's try so I remember, The JML 21 mm 3.5. The Nikon BD Plan 10X / 0.25. The Nikon M Plan 10X / 0.25. The Nikon E Plan 10X / 0.25 LWD. The Nikon 10X Plan N / 0.30. The Olympus 10X / 0.30. As a curiosity, two Edmund, DIN 10 / 0.25. One normal and one MICRO Plan. And put a lens diaphragm, Photar, f2 -25 mm.

PaulFurman · Post by **PaulFurman** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:04 pm

Beautiful work!
How about an Olympus 38mm f/2.8 macro bellows lens? Or Canon 35mm
I have not tried a 50mm El-Nikkor but have had *great* results with an 80mm f/5.6 at around 1x.

seta666 · Post by **seta666** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:31 am

Also in the test we could include a nikon 10/0.30 water inmersion, to see if there are any differencies between the WI and the normal N sample. My guess is that if there is any optical correction in the WI it will be done in the WI hood, which can be removed.
one more lens tha can go in the test is a Mikrotar 15mm 2.3 I own, but it is optimized for 18x plus
Regards

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:54 am

Javier,

I dont have a full frame camera so I cannot tell you with absolute confidence, but in the magnification range of 2,5-3,5x the Zeiss Luminar 63mm works perfect for me (actually 2x - 4x). Sharp and good contrast.

Regards,
Barry

morfa · Post by **morfa** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:04 am

@Barry: The Luminar 63 is among my top favorites for field work (on APS-C as well as FF) but in terms of sheer resolving power under studio conditions, considering it's f4.5 maximum aperture and my experiences with it, I wonder if it's not dethroned by faster alternatives (on a 12MP sensor). I have only experience with the first version of this lens.

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:41 am

After some tests I found the Luminar 63mm to be best in the middle of the 1 and 2 aperture settings....what will that be; f5.6 I guess. Up to 4x I found that resolving power very good. (best at 3x)

Correct me if I am wrong but certainly on a full frame sensor (Canon 5D) this aperture will be fast enough?
On a smaller sensor a 4x 0.13 would be better I guess, hope someone could test this and publish the results somewhere (and include the JML).
I have the luminar and JML but no microscope objective.