NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Michael Erlewine on October 28, 2017, 12:28:37
-
I am intrigued by the report of Lloyd Chambers on the built-in focus stacking in the D850. He loves it. I might like to try it out, but I have very few autofocus lenses because I don't use autofocus... much.
I would appreciate hearing about ANY lenses for Nikon F-Mount (having autofocus) that are highly corrected (approximating APO-level). Any suggestions are appreciated.
-
Tamron 85mm f1.8 VC USD seems to be one of the candidates, according to Sten's comparison test with AF-S Nikkor 85/1.8:
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,3866.0.html
Also, Tamron looks better than AF-S 105/1.4E ED in terms of LoCA correction:
https://www.lenstip.com/472.5-Lens_review-Tamron_SP_85_mm_f_1.8_Di_VC_USD_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html
https://www.lenstip.com/492.5-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_105_mm_f_1.4E_ED_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html
That said, I'm not sure if this third-party lens is compatible with the in-camera focus stack of D850.
-
Sigma 2,8 150 OS macro.
-
Doesn't the AFS 300/4 PF have very low LoCA? The focal length and working distance will be on the long side, but it does get to 1:4.1, which should be enough for the sort of work Michael does (although I recall he found the 135/2 ZF too long, it gets to 1:4 same as the 300PF but has only half the focal length...)
-
All four are not APO.
APO lenses are designated as such by focussing all three basic colors into one point (correcting for the frequency dependence of the refraction).
The effort and price for that is so high that companies will always advertize it. I only have APO lenses for Large format: AMED Nikkor 120mm (AMED = Apo Macro Extreme low Dispersion) and the Schneider APO Digitar 120mm N°48
Autofocus APO in F-Mount??? Gosh. I would sure be interested!
Apart from that I own three of the mentioned four lenses and all of them are great performers and I really love to shoot them.
For the kind of work that Michael does none is useful
-
The ticket here is APO lenses that are in F-Mount that have a modern autofocus. Like Frank, I have a number of APO lenses, plenty of them, but they are not autofocus lenses. I did have the Sigma 180mm F/2.8 Macro (the newest version), but was not that impressed by it.
I have the Sigma f/1.4 24mm lens in F-Mount, but while it is a nice lens, it is not really an APO lens, even though that term has no standard definition. I have the Nikkor 105mm Macro VR, but that is not APO by a long shot. And so on...
There is a great need for an Otus-quality macro lens that has autofocus. In fact, we are long overdue for a really great macro lens for the Nikon mount, with or without autofocus, one that is well corrected.
My point is that if we want to try out the new focus-stacking option in the Nikon D850, we need a lens with autofocus. Getting that in an APO format seems not too probable, but you would think the lens makers would figure out that such a lens is needed.
I corresponded with Zeiss (a lens expert) for an Otus macro lens and his response was that they would have to sell 10,000 of them to consider making one. Ouch!
-
Sigma 2,8 150 OS macro.
+1 on it being APO and AF
but ... I never seem to get images sharp enough, either my technique is flawed or my copy is not that sharp, also the DXO measurements are not that great
I have tried a couple of times to sell it with no buyers showing interest
-
Nikon AF Micro 4 200mm and Sigma OS 2,8 105mm.
-
The Nikkor 80/2.8
"This lens features very superior aberration correction and no major shortcomings."
http://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0023/index.htm (http://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0023/index.htm)
-
+1 on it being APO and AF
but ... I never seem to get images sharp enough, either my technique is flawed or my copy is not that sharp, also the DXO measurements are not that great
I have tried a couple of times to sell it with no buyers showing interest
I have the pre optically stabilized version of this lens and really like the images I get from it on my D4.
-
The Nikkor 80/2.8
"This lens features very superior aberration correction and no major shortcomings."
http://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0023/index.htm (http://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0023/index.htm)
This lens belongs to the first group of AF lenses for the F3-AF. The only other camera which will AF these lenses is the F4. With other camera models, the different arrangement of CPU pins will cause the battery to run flat - Bjorn has more experience on this.
Getting back to APO etc, if I can ask a silly question (I have no experience with focus stacking ...) we know lateral CA can easily be corrected with software, surely that should not be too much of a problem, apart from adding an extra step to the work flow. Longitudinal CA is not easily fixed with software but it shows up mainly in front and behind the focus plane, and focus stacking software is mainly using the in-focus part of the stacked images to build up a composite picture. So if lateral CA can be fixed, and longitudinal is not relevant why is it so important for the lens to be APO? Of course it helps if the source images are high quality as possible, but maybe the quest for APO is being given more importance than it really merits. If the lens is very sharp but not perfectly APO, maybe that is good enough?
As for which Nikon AF lenses are near APO, the current super-telephotos starting with the AFS 200/2 and bigger are very highly corrected. The large size of these lenses and long focal length is probably not practical for Michael's requirements. Among the shorter AF lenses, the only ones that might be close are:
- 300/4 PF - which has well controlled LoCA and focuses reasonably close (as noted earlier)
- AFS 105/1.4 - very well corrected, might come close to APO stopped down, but might not focus close enough?
- AFS 70-200FL - Very well corrected. Being a zoom, corner sharpness may not be as good as primes, but Michael's subjects are usually central with the corners in the background, so that is not an issue.
- there may be some third party lenses as already mentioned.
-
The 80/2.8 AF is really a good performer, but pretty awkward to focus as there is significant play in the focusing collar if focusing is conducted manually, and as we cannot use ordinary AF, manual operation is the only option.
-
The ticket here is APO lenses that are in F-Mount that have a modern autofocus. Like Frank, I have a number of APO lenses, plenty of them, but they are not autofocus lenses. I did have the Sigma 180mm F/2.8 Macro (the newest version), but was not that impressed by it.
I have the Sigma f/1.4 24mm lens in F-Mount, but while it is a nice lens, it is not really an APO lens, even though that term has no standard definition. I have the Nikkor 105mm Macro VR, but that is not APO by a long shot. And so on...
There is a great need for an Otus-quality macro lens that has autofocus. In fact, we are long overdue for a really great macro lens for the Nikon mount, with or without autofocus, one that is well corrected.
My point is that if we want to try out the new focus-stacking option in the Nikon D850, we need a lens with autofocus. Getting that in an APO format seems not too probable, but you would think the lens makers would figure out that such a lens is needed.
I corresponded with Zeiss (a lens expert) for an Otus macro lens and his response was that they would have to sell 10,000 of them to consider making one. Ouch!
As I told you, there IS a standard definition of Apochromat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat
"Apochromatic lenses are designed to bring three wavelengths (typically red, green, and blue) into focus in the same plane."
-
I have the pre optically stabilized version of this lens and really like the images I get from it on my D4.
I have the same lens and its razor sharp on any camera I have tried with. Including the D850.
-
As I told you, there IS a standard definition of Apochromat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat
"Apochromatic lenses are designed to bring three wavelengths (typically red, green, and blue) into focus in the same plane."
Don't even bother Frank, people will say what they want to say, what they "feel" apochromatic is.
I know Michael and his work, but most contributors will not even look at it, to understand what his
needs are and what he really is after. Let me predict this: there is no AF APO lens which will satisfy
Michael's requirements.
-
Let me predict this: there is no AF APO lens which will satisfy Michael's requirements.
I thought so. I would sure own it if it existed!
-
I thought so. I would sure own it if it existed!
Have you ever tried the Coastal 60mm f4.0 APO (Or even Superchromatic) glass in Nikon mount? LZ
-
Have you ever tried the Coastal 60mm f4.0 APO (Or even Superchromatic) glass in Nikon mount? LZ
LZ, Michael is now looking for an AF lens.
-
Yes, I know, to try this new D850 option, but my question to Frank. What I did see 5-6 years ago, was the Coastal optical block inside the old Nikkor 55 macro AF body. AF worked, but aperture was manual. LZ
-
Yes, I know, to try this new D850 option, but my question to Frank. What I did see 5-6 years ago, was the Coastal optical block inside the old Nikkor 55 macro AF body. AF worked, but aperture was manual. LZ
Oh, I didn't know that. However, the coastal 60/4.0 incorporates CRC. I'm not sure the transplanted optics of 60/4.0 would work correctly in the mechanism of AF micro. If the CRC doesn't work correctly, it may show the chromatic aberration in addition to other aberrations.
-
No idea coz I was not allowed to try it or even put my hands on it! But owner said it was absolutely to original Coastal specs. I couldn't imagine how much that hand-made combo would cost... LZ
-
Hmmm...that's hard to believe...
-
Why? I did see on E-Bay Contax portraiture lens inside the Nikkor old AF lens body, couple times, and something else, often enough, couple times in last year. Everything is possible, especially if CRC of the Coastal was turning to the same with Nikkor direction. Helicoid could be custom, too, not big deal, or simply used original. LZ
-
As far as I understand it Michael is interested in an AF APO in F-Mount for his work. Quite possible he wants to try the Auto Function "Focus Stacking" of the D850. Michael is not a very technical person so he would likely prefer am AF Otus out of the box. In MF there are lots of options for APO lenses and Michael has the best of them already.
-
Why? I did see on E-Bay Contax portraiture lens inside the Nikkor old AF lens body, couple times, and something else, often enough, couple times in last year. Everything is possible, especially if CRC of the Coastal was turning to the same with Nikkor direction. Helicoid could be custom, too, not big deal, or simply used original. LZ
The original barrel of Coastal uses the conventional helicoid, but AF Micro Nikkor 55/2.8 uses the cam system. He would have to create a new cam for the optics of the Coastal 60/4.0 because the amount of the compensation wouldn't be the sam as that of the optics of 55mm micro.
Contax portraiture lens like the older Planar 85/1.4 has no CRC and is of a simple rack focus type, so it should be possible to transplant the optics to some appropreate AF barrel, as Rick (richardhaw) transplanted the optics of the 50mm Biotar (Industar?) into the barrel of an AF Nikkor.
-
No problem to remove the original Nikkor cam, at all, with extra tube, and set inside the Coastal original helicoid, with hand-made middle adjusting tube. The problem is, how to connect the AF chip, especially if new helicoid is turning to opposite direction, or the CRC doing so. What is a real problem here, not the primitive enough mechanical job. That's why I am saying I've no idea how much this lens would cost, after all... THX! LZ
-
As mentioned, I would like to try out the feature on the D850 that (using autofocus lenses) automatically stacks images. However, it’s more of a sidebar for me because I am quite happy stacking images manually, since in my kind of photography the entire process is what I enjoy and not just the resulting photos. And I can stack pretty well manually.
So, I am not in a hurry to get to the traditional end result (photo), but IMO consider the whole process of photography the end result. I also find that the more I focus on the process, the better the resulting photos are. Make sense?
And I don’t see any low-hanging fruit (as they say) in terms of APO-level autofocus lenses available to me. Where are they? If I wanted to use my collection of APO lenses for automatic focus-stacking, I could buy a mechanized focus rail and mount manual lenses on that, which would give me at least a ballpark idea of what that is like. But I have never felt the need to do so. I am not a lens mechanic, so I don’t take lenses apart, aside from adapting mounts, like converting Leica-R lenses to Nikon-F mounts, etc.
As for the Coastal Optics 60mm APO Macro, I had one and used it for many years, but finally sold it. While it was a very well corrected lens, it was poorly-designed lens shell, IMO. Why make a fine lens for close-up (perhaps forensic) work with a very short focus throw? I used to have to mount the Coastal Optics 60mm on a focus rail in order to use it properly. It had no hood, not to mention a huge hot spot for close-up work (and it was a macro lens!). It also had, IMO, trouble with variable or mottled light, like you would find with sunlight coming through the leaves in a forest. So, the designer of the optics (aside from the hot spot) did well, but the mechanical aspects of the lens showed little foresight IMO.
So, the only thing the new feature of auto-stacking in the D850 offers me is speed. And I well understand that speed can be important with changing light conditions or subjects that otherwise will move. But speed would only be useful to me with highly-corrected lenses. I don’t need speed if all I have are lenses that are not well corrected. For me, well-corrected “APO” lenses offer me a “sharpness” that only refined color correction can offer. It is not all about acutance.
-
Oh, I didn't know that. However, the coastal 60/4.0 incorporates CRC. I'm not sure the transplanted optics of 60/4.0 would work correctly in the mechanism of AF micro. If the CRC doesn't work correctly, it may show the chromatic aberration in addition to other aberrations.
Costal optics 60mm has a two group set up of the lens elements, the rear group stays at the same position while focusing, while the front group moves.
So it could be switched relatively easy into another lens barrel,,,
The old AF Micro NIkkor 55mm would not be my choice, it's one of the most wobbly assemblies ever build by Nikon ever,,, but ok - it should work,,,
-
Costal optics 60mm has a two group set up of the lens elements, the rear group stays at the same position while focusing, while the front group moves.
Erik, thanks for the detail. This cross-section proves that.
LZ, sorry for the confusion.
-
Although not APO, the Nikkor 200 f2G II ED VR AFS ranks among the best lenses available. The super-ED element likely has something to do with this
https://www.dxomark.com/best-lenses-for-the-nikon-d810-exceptionally-high-sharpness-and-detail-but-no-advance-over-d800e
https://www.lenstip.com/325.1-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_200_mm_f_2G_ED_VRII.html
The Kenko ext tubes maintain full function of the AF et al
-
Old Sigma Apo Macro AF 1:5,6 180mm.
-
Old Sigma Apo Macro AF 1:5,6 180mm.
Why the old and not the newer Sigma 180mm APO macro?
-
Why the old and not the newer Sigma 180mm APO macro?
I thought that you do not like it. The old 180 has a very good resolution, is Apo and af, and constant 5,6 down to 1:2.
-
Why the old and not the newer Sigma 180mm APO macro?
I thought that you do not like it. The old 180 has a very good resolution, is Apo and af, and constant 5,6 down to 1:2.
I was not that impressed by it, but it's OK. My question is why would I like the earlier version better? What are the differences?
-
Although not APO, the Nikkor 200 f2G II ED VR AFS ranks among the best lenses available. The super-ED element likely has something to do with this
https://www.dxomark.com/best-lenses-for-the-nikon-d810-exceptionally-high-sharpness-and-detail-but-no-advance-over-d800e (https://www.dxomark.com/best-lenses-for-the-nikon-d810-exceptionally-high-sharpness-and-detail-but-no-advance-over-d800e)
https://www.lenstip.com/325.1-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_200_mm_f_2G_ED_VRII.html (https://www.lenstip.com/325.1-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_200_mm_f_2G_ED_VRII.html)
The Kenko ext tubes maintain full function of the AF et al
The 200mm AFS f/2.0 does very poorly with extension, again due to floating elements CRC
-
I was not that impressed by it, but it's OK. My question is why would I like the earlier version better? What are the differences?
Its weight is 435g instead of 1640g, excellent resolution, if, af, today it is very cheap.
-
Erik, thanks for the detail. This cross-section proves that.
LZ, sorry for the confusion.
Ah, forget about. Truth is delivering by confusions and discussions. Thanks for posting that cross-section! Yeah, Erik is correct, implementing into another body is more than possible, what I did see! And yes, the focus throw is unusually short, Michael is correct, too, absolutely! Hmm, even if wobbly, the choice of that old Nikkor AF 55 was not that stupid... Thanks! LZ
-
I was not that impressed by it, but it's OK. My question is why would I like the earlier version better? What are the differences?
Apparently, the pre-"Global Vision" Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro Lens is better-corrected than the newer Sigma 180mm f/2.8 (as well as the older Sigma 180 f/3.5) macro lenses.
It is apparently better-corrected than the Voigtländer SL 125mm f/2.5 Apo-Lanthar, according to Sigma-sponsored Robert O'Toole:
(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5864340dc534a5769d5b1daf/t/59c5d9aebe42d656a94af321/1506138546982/Sigma-150mm-+EX-OS-APO-and-Macro-Voigtlander-125mm-APO-Lanthar-LoCA-Test-Crop-Robert-OToole-Photography-2017.jpg)
Voigtlander 125mm f/2.5 Apo-Lanthar top row vs Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX OS APO Macro at the bottom
(Note: he mis-labeled the Sigma as 105mm, but he clearly meant 150mm, if you follow the thread (http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35405&start=0).)
Here are his results from another test/thread (http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=219441):
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro
(http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/userpix/3062_S150_1.jpg)
Voigtländer SL 125mm f/2.5 Apo-Lanthar
(http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/userpix/3062_VAPO_1.jpg)
Again, this is coming from a Sigma-sponsored photographer, who personally uses the 150mm Sigma over either 180 Sigmas (f/2.8 or f/3.5). (I also remember Bjørn mentioning that, @ 1:1, the Voigtländer has fringing ... and is actually better-corrected at telephoto distances than macro distances.) Still, while better-corrected wide-open, it's not nearly as sharp @ f/2.8 as the CV is at f/2.5.
That said, @ 1:1, if you click on both provided thread topics, there is no AF macro that can compare to Rodenstock, Schneider, or Printer-Nikkor lenses ... however, it seems that the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 comes the closest, as far as CA correction goes. So try it, you might like it. It's fairly-sharp @ f/4, but not so much wide-open, and not like an Otus/or printing lens. Also, it has what's considered 'average' to 'good' bokeh. As finicky as you are, when all is said and done, I am pretty positive you won't like it as well as the Oti or other true Apo lenses. (Hard to go backwards ...)
It might be a great option for fieldwork (where you don't want to bring a whole bunch of gear), but for critical studio shooting, where you can do your absolute best, I don't think you will be happy with it.
Therefore, in closing, it seems to me that (if you're looking for precision automated stacking, and the finest lenses in the world—which are MF, not AF) you should forget the Nikon D850 in-body feature and instead utilize the MF lenses you already have with the Stackshot (https://www.cognisys-inc.com/products/stackshot/stackshot.php) or the WeMacro (http://www.wemacro.com)automated rail systems. That way, you pair the best of both worlds together, as opposed to trying to mate compromised stacking with compromised lenses. That's my $0.02.
Hope it helps,
Jack
-
Michael is correct, too, absolutely! Hmm, even if wobbly, the choice of that old Nikkor AF 55 was not that stupid... Thanks! LZ
Yeah, in order to get as close as possible with this closeup capable lens, it would need the AF 55 that could go up to 1:1, unlike the original MF Micro 55/2.8.
-
Therefore, in closing, it seems to me that (if you're looking for precision automated stacking, and the finest lenses in the world—which are MF, not AF) you should forget the Nikon D850 in-body feature and instead utilize the MF lenses you already have with the Stackshot (https://www.cognisys-inc.com/products/stackshot/stackshot.php) or the WeMacro (http://www.wemacro.com)automated rail systems. That way, you pair the best of both worlds together, as opposed to trying to mate compromised stacking with compromised lenses. That's my $0.02.
Hope it helps,
Jack
I'm just curious, but not about to use any automated rail, etc. I am dedicated to the process of stacking focus manually. Using automation to speed things up interests me not at all. What I say to those folks is:
“If you are in such a hurry, on your way home why not pick up some fast food.”
And let’s not forget the old chestnut “No wine before its time,” and all that. In grandma’s time, they cooked all day. It can be a slow process. And “process” is the keyword here, attention to the process. I’m not against progress and even doing things faster, but if in that process, quality is lost, then that loss of quality is not worth the gain in time saved. As they say, “what’s the hurry?” People are not in a hurry to get to the end of the line. LOL.
Economy only interests me when nothing of equal quality is lost. The moment it is, something by definition is lost. This is why digital sampling, like MP3 files, don’t sound as good as the finer .WAV files, and on and on. Any kind of sampling means something is sacrificed. We can talk about the fact that most people can’t hear the difference, but many can, and you would not catch a recording studio working with MP3s and I own one. It’s the same with DVDs or any sampling.
I run across this every day with storing photographic image files. I am happy to have image files compressed as long as it is “lossless” compression and not “lossy” compression, etc. I would not give up my corrected lenses for all the speed in China. Just curious. Careful attention to the process of photographing, IMO, is the way to go, and the best results come from that as well.
Jack, thanks for answering. Here is an old manually-stacked image, not sure what camera body or lens.
-
I'm just curious, but not about to use any automated rail, etc. I am dedicated to the process of stacking focus manually. Using automation to speed things up interests me not at all. What I say to those folks is:
“If you are in such a hurry, on your way home why not pick up some fast food.”
And let’s not forget the old chestnut “No wine before its time,” and all that. In grandma’s time, they cooked all day. It can be a slow process. And “process” is the keyword here, attention to the process. I’m not against progress and even doing things faster, but if in that process, quality is lost, then that loss of quality is not worth the gain in time saved. As they say, “what’s the hurry?” People are not in a hurry to get to the end of the line. LOL.
The only reason to hurry would be on a stack of a live subject, which may move before you're able to finish a slower, more deliberate stack.
For flowers and such, I agree, there is no reason to hurry.
Economy only interests me when nothing of equal quality is lost. The moment it is, something by definition is lost. This is why digital sampling, like MP3 files, don’t sound as good as the finer .WAV files, and on and on. Any kind of sampling means something is sacrificed. We can talk about the fact that most people can’t hear the difference, but many can, and you would not catch a recording studio working with MP3s and I own one. It’s the same with DVDs or any sampling.
I run across this every day with storing photographic image files. I am happy to have image files compressed as long as it is “lossless” compression and not “lossy” compression, etc. I would not give up my corrected lenses for all the speed in China. Just curious. Careful attention to the process of photographing, IMO, is the way to go, and the best results come from that as well.
Agreed.
Interestingly, when you and I debated the CV 125 f/2.5 vs. Sigma 180 f/2.8 a few years ago, according to OToole's tests, the 180 is actually preferable to the Sigma 150, sharpness-wise. While the topic of his (and your) thread was lack of CA, what his images showed me was the lack of sharpness in the Sigma 150, wide-open, although it is better-corrected. The Sigma 180 is easily on a par with the CV 125, at f/2.8 (2.5), in both sharpness and correction (@1:1). So, while the 150 is better-corrected wide-open, it is nowhere near as sharp:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=219441
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35405
In the end, therefore, the Sigma 180 would probably suit you better than the 150 (paired with the D850 for in-body stacking), offering comparable results to the CV 125. The trouble is, it is a bigger, more cumbersome lens.
Thanks to you, for nature-stacking, I personally love the CV 125's 630° of focus throw, which removes the need for programming a D850 on a live subject (as well as the need for a manual rail), both of which take time to set-up and implement. A CV 125, and a tripod, can capture wildlife/arthropod stacks quite easily on their own.
For flower stacks (in nature or in studio) I agree the StackShot and WeMacro rails are superfluous. Most flower shots are @ 1:4 to 1:2, mostly, so a good manual rail is all you need. Even for 1:1, an automated rail isn't that important, because any movement at these non-critical magnifications can be compensated-for with stacking software.
However, where these automated-rail offerings become invaluable is in greater-than-1:1 extreme macro, where the limitations/subtle movements of manual rails are unacceptable ... and the precision (not the speed) of automated rails becomes mandatory.
Jack, thanks for answering. Here is an old manually-stacked image, not sure what camera body or lens.
You bet ... and very nice.
-
In the end, therefore, the Sigma 180 would probably suit you better than the 150 (paired with the D850 for in-body stacking), offering comparable results to the CV 125. The trouble is, it is a bigger, more cumbersome lens.
Well, I agree with everything your say, except that the Sigma 180 Macro APO is comparable to the CV-125. I bought the Sigma 180 Macro (latest version) based on your review, so I know first-hand IMO what it can do. The Sigma 180 Macro is no CV-125. It just lacks the magic touch of the CV-125, IMO. We could argue for hours about that, but my eyes see what my eyes see. In fact I just took some shots with the CV-125 today, but they are not stacked yet. I will try to post one here, if I remember.
-
Well, I agree with everything your say, except that the Sigma 180 Macro APO is comparable to the CV-125. I bought the Sigma 180 Macro (latest version) based on your review, so I know first-hand IMO what it can do. The Sigma 180 Macro is no CV-125. It just lacks the magic touch of the CV-125, IMO. We could argue for hours about that, but my eyes see what my eyes see. In fact I just took some shots with the CV-125 today, but they are not stacked yet. I will try to post one here, if I remember.
I was going by the sharpness results of OToole's tests on a B&W subject.
In color rendering, I am sure the Sigma 180 doesn't do what the CV 125 does, so in the end we agree, which is why I sold the Sigma 180 and purchased the CV 125.
Even with the D850's in-body focus stacking, my point was I am not selling my CV 125 and getting a big, honkin' 180mm macro lens ... but will stick to the compact size (and wonderful 630° of focus throw) on the CV 125 for nature stacks.
Another huge bonus is, I can put my CV 125 in a side-pouch, when I hike, and it fits nicely along with my AI-S lenses.
No way could I put a Sigma 150/180 macro in a side-pouch.
-
I was going by the sharpness results of OToole's tests on a B&W subject.
In color rendering, I am sure the Sigma 180 doesn't do what the CV 125 does, so in the end I sold the Sigma 180 and purchased the CV 125.
Even with the D850's in-body focus stacking, my point was I am not selling my CV 125 and getting a big, honkin' 180mm macro lens ... but will stick to the compact size (and wonderful 630° of focus throw) on the CV 125 for nature stacks.
Another huge bonus is, I can put my CV 125 in a side-pouch, when I hike, and it fits nicely along with my AI-S lenses.
No way could I put a Sigma 150/180 macro in a side-pouch.
I hear you. It seems we are on the same page. The world does need, right now, for Nikon F-Mount, IMO, a very high-quality APO Macro lens, better than anything else out there, like an Otus-level. Right now, my best lenses are used on the Cambo Actus and I will use them with the Sony A7R3, which I have on order.
-
Yep.
I will wind up getting the D850, probably by next spring, and I believe it will be my last camera purchase for a long time.
I believe the in-camera stacking will be of more benefit to landscape AF lenses than macro, at least at this stage.
Right now, the D810 still serves me well @ base ISO and I don't see the need to change at the moment.
I anticipate Nikon will be upgrading the old 200 Micro-Nikkor ... but who knows if it will be Apo or not. Hope so.
Cheers.
-
Yep.
I will wind up getting the D850, probably by next spring, and I believe it will be my last camera purchase for a long time.
I believe the in-camera stacking will be of more benefit to landscape AF lenses than macro, at least at this stage.
Right now, the D810 still serves me well @ base ISO and I don't see the need to change at the moment.
I anticipate Nikon will be upgrading the old 200 Micro-Nikkor ... but who knows if it will be Apo or not. Hope so.
Cheers.
I believe the Sony A7R3 is a sleeper, meaning my guess (as far as I can tell) is that it will be very close to the performance of the D850 and (hopefully) offer the pixel-shift technnology which will equal MF images, albeit for still life only, which is all I do.
-
I believe the Sony A7R3 is a sleeper, meaning my guess (as far as I can tell) is that it will be very close to the performance of the D850 and (hopefully) offer the pixel-shift technnology which will equal MF images, albeit for still life only, which is all I do.
I will be interested in your views/comparison.
Since most of what I do is wildlife shots, pixel-shift is not as important to me.
However, in-studio, I could see how this could make a subtle difference.
At this point, I think camera ISO/DR values are becoming more-and-more similar ... so purchase decisions are going to boil down to lens availability and what features compliment a photographer's style.
For me, the D850 will likely be the summit for many years to come.
-
For me, the D850 will likely be the summit for many years to come.
I agree, but it looks like the low ISO on the D850 is noisier than that on the D810, but not enough for me to not use the D850. I understand why landscape and "bugs" may warrant using the new stacking feature of the D850, but for me on the D850, the silent mode with EFC (mirror up) is amazingly fast and should be looked at. I use it all the time now.
-
I corresponded with Zeiss (a lens expert) for an Otus macro lens and his response was that they would have to sell 10,000 of them to consider making one. Ouch!
Honestly, with 7.6 billion people in the world, 10,000 customers is 1 out of every 760,000 people.
Easily doable ...
In fact, if an Otus macro lens were made, and were $4,000 or less, I would venture to say Zeiss would sell far more than 10,000 copies within a year ... for sure within 2 years.
-
Honestly, with 7.6 billion people in the world, 10,000 customers is 1 out of every 760,000 people.
Easily doable ...
In fact, if an Otus macro lens were made, and were $4,000 or less, I would venture to say Zeiss would sell far more than 10,000 copies within a year ... for sure within 2 years.
You would think! But teaching these camera companies what we want is a thankless task.
I am happy to see that more attention is being paid to correctlng color in lenses, witness some of the Zeiss Milvus offerings.
-
Stumbled on this site searching for reviews of Sigma macro lenses
FYI' a couple of links relevant to APO optics
https://www.closeuphotography.com/voigtlander-apo-lanthar-125mm-lens/
https://www.closeuphotography.com/sigma-150mm-macro-lens/
-
Interestingly, he tested the APO 125CV at 1:1, a range in which it performs only substandard.
-
Interestingly, he tested the APO 125CV at 1:1, a range in which it performs only substandard.
Yep. I referenced the same test (re-posted on Photomacrography) on the previous page of this thread.
Also, even at 1:1, at its widest f/2.5 aperture, Ray Charles can see the CV is about twice as sharp as the Sigma is @ f/2.8.
While the test was for CA, the Sigma 150 f/2.8 shots are so blurred they don't even look to in focus ... while the sharpness of the CV is unmistakable.
Also, at the smaller apertures, every image he shot with the Sigma is back-focused on the lower part of the upper "O" ... while the CA is precisely center-focused ... because it can be done manually, not relying on AF.
With respect to his comments on the retro-grade chrome trim not being 'professional,' while subjective of course, I find this to be part of the CV's charm and "touch of class" ... while every single low-end, POS lens available today is a flat-black/plastic offering.
-
When all is said and done, IMO, the CV-125 APO Lanthar is the best all-around lens for close-up work I know of. This may be sad and points out the need today for a really, really good macro lens for the Nikon mount. Nikon is, IMO, years behind offering one. And I do not understand why Voigtlander did not offer their new 65mm Macro in Nikon format. It has a lot in common with the CV-125. Or, for that matter, they could re-issue the CV-125.
I have the various Zeiss Otus series (and the 135mm that I consider Otus), and the Zeiss lenses are better corrected and sharper, but they are not meant for close-up work. When it comes right down to where the rubber meets the road, I can always reach for my CV-125.
There is a special quality to the CV-125, call it draw or style or whatever....anyway you want to spell it; the look of images shot with the CV-125 have a special quality. If we move to bellows-based work, then IMO the APO El Nikkor 105mm has the same speicial qualities and is even more useful (to me) than the CV-125. In my experience sheer "sharpness," correction, and so on without some special qualities, even if they are caused by defects (photographically) like the Nikkor "O" CRT lens, which may not be made for "white " light and it it is curved, etc. But its style is almost unique and very lovely.
I don't use the CV-125 for 1:1 macro work, bur rather for general close-up work, which IMO is where it shines. Folks can do tests and more tests of the CV125, but in the end it is not the sharpest, not the best corrected, etc. However, I would sell my Otus lenses before I would sell the CV-125. And I would sell ALL of my lenses before I sold the APO El Nikkor 105. That's my view.
-
For me the best non af macro lenses are the apo-digitar 5,6/120 macro and the apo-digitar 5,6/80 M, and the only good corrected af-lens is the sigma 150 OS.
-
And I do not understand why Voigtlander did not offer their new 65mm Macro in Nikon format.
The back focus distance is too short for an SLR camera, to fit on a Nikon camera would require a new design.
-
For me the best non af macro lenses are the apo-digitar 5,6/120 macro and the apo-digitar 5,6/80 M, and the only good corrected af-lens is the sigma 150 OS.
I hear you and those are fine lenses, but just sharpness is not enough IMO, and this is where folks differ.
I have two copies of the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar f/5.6 120mm MC lenses, each slightly different
I have a Schneider-Kreuznach Componon-s f/4 80mm lens
2 copies of the Nikkor AM-ED 120mm f/5.6 lens
1 copy of the Nikkor AM-ED 210mm f/5.6 lens (heavy)
and other industrial or "exotic" lenses for Nikon F-mount.
None of them compare, IMO, to the APO Nikkor 105mm f/5.6, because of the "style."
I also had, but sold the APO Nikkor 210mm f/5.6 lens, which is very rare, but very heavy and while equal to the 105mm version, it did NOT outperform the APO El Nikkor 105mm so, as mentioned, I sold it.
So, we photographers seem to differ all over the place, but at least we are in the same ballpark with the above mentioned lenses.
Photo of the APO El Nikkor 210mm lens that I have recently sold.
-
When all is said and done, IMO, the CV-125 APO Lanthar is the best all-around lens for close-up work I know of. This may be sad and points out the need today for a really, really good macro lens for the Nikon mount. Nikon is, IMO, years behind offering one. And I do not understand why Voigtlander did not offer their new 65mm Macro in Nikon format. It has a lot in common with the CV-125. Or, for that matter, they could re-issue the CV-125.
I have the various Zeiss Otus series (and the 135mm that I consider Otus), and the Zeiss lenses are better corrected and sharper, but they are not meant for close-up work. When it comes right down to where the rubber meets the road, I can always reach for my CV-125.
There is a special quality to the CV-125, call it draw or style or whatever....anyway you want to spell it; the look of images shot with the CV-125 have a special quality. If we move to bellows-based work, then IMO the APO El Nikkor 105mm has the same speicial qualities and is even more useful (to me) than the CV-125. In my experience sheer "sharpness," correction, and so on without some special qualities, even if they are caused by defects (photographically) like the Nikkor "O" CRT lens, which may not be made for "white " light and it it is curved, etc. But its style is almost unique and very lovely.
I don't use the CV-125 for 1:1 macro work, bur rather for general close-up work, which IMO is where it shines. Folks can do tests and more tests of the CV125, but in the end it is not the sharpest, not the best corrected, etc. However, I would sell my Otus lenses before I would sell the CV-125. And I would sell ALL of my lenses before I sold the APO El Nikkor 105. That's my view.
Here here.
Funny that you mention you'd sell your Oti in favor of the CV ... as I am again putting up my Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar up for sale. (Second time selling one.)
I actually love the Zeiss lens, and I respect its strengths, but in the end I can't get past the fact it is a heavier, more awkward, infinitely-less-versatile tool as the Voigtlander 125 Apo Lanthar.
Almost universally, the Zeiss is left at home; without exception the CV 125 comes with me. I, too recognize the Zeiss is sharper, but the colors I get from it seem natural. In fact, that is what I love most about the CV is the sublime, authentic, subtle colors ... and the dreamy bokeh. It is razor-sharp (or sharp enough) ... but it's a natural sharpness, not too overdone so that it looks weird or unnatural.
I think that might be the key: with the Zeiss, I am in awe of 'the sharpness,' and the colors don't seem natural (almost over-saturated). I find myself paying more attention to 'the photograph details' rather than the subject.
With the CV, I am simply in awe of the subject ... the lens presents my subject so perfectly (just the right amount of color, just the right amount of sharpness) that I want to reach out and touch that subject. The Zeiss images look surreal to me; the CV images look like perfect iterations of what I was seeing and trying to capture. I think therein lies the difference, at least to me.
I am actually in the process of selling/upgrading almost every lens I have now ... but the CV has a permanent home.
The author of the article, O'Toole, that Chambeshi referenced, doesn't understand the lens (he doesn't actually use it ... he just borrowed one) ... and is testing it clinically (for CA only) ... unwittingly at its worst proximity.
If he used it as it was intended to be used (and where it truly shines) ... beautiful bokeh stacks, @ f/2.5 to f/4, wide-open, he would junk the Sigma ... which cannot compare in either bokeh, wide-open sharpness, or authentic color reproduction. But then again he is sponsored by Sigma ...
Here are a couple CV shots (a few I may have posted already) to show the subtle, intricate, realistic colors captured by what I believe to be the best walk-around macro I have ever used.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4394/36432071544_73dfbe0a6a_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XvnTAy)
Arizona Mantid ♀ (https://flic.kr/p/XvnTAy) by John A. Koerner II (https://www.flickr.com/photos/naturescapes007/), on Flickr
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4475/37425431370_bbd4e1d663_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Z2a7S7)
Honey Bee (https://flic.kr/p/Z2a7S7) by John A. Koerner II (https://www.flickr.com/photos/naturescapes007/), on Flickr
It's like you can reach out and pluck them off their perches.
-
Here here.
Funny that you mention you'd sell your Oti in favor of the CV ... as I am again putting up my Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar up for sale.
The CV-125 is not a better lens than the Zeiss Oti, just better "all-around," if you understand my meaning. I don't have to choose only one lens and I use about half a dozen or so lenses all the time.
I am considering getting the Sigma 150mm OS Macro. Is there anything more you can tell me about that lens. They say it is very well corrected. Any thoughts?
As for various technical tests, etc. from the so-called "techspurts," I no longer trust many. You have to use a lens yourself and for more than a day or two in order to understand what it can do for you. In fact, I am slowly becoming a stranger to all of the online photography forums. I no longer get much out of the photo geeks and the fan-boys. I don't post photos here much anymore because half the comments just miss the point, IMO. I am not interested in others telling how they would compose my photos unless I ask for that (and I don't). I know it's just me, but that's all I have to work with, my own eye and sense of photography..
I am still doing lots of photography, but don't bother to share it, except a few on my Facebook blog each day. I do continue to track down lenses and buy them, just because I want to see for myself what's happening. Then I keep them or sell them. More and more of my work is done with the Cambo Actus and tilt. It's like I have come full circle, back to just taking photos for my own interest.
Winter is coming on here, so I am looking at some indoor projects.
-
The CV-125 is not a better lens than the Zeiss Oti, just better "all-around," if you understand my meaning.
I do. Perfectly.
I don't have to choose only one lens and I use about half a dozen or so lenses all the time.
I subscribe to the biological truth: no two competitors can occupy the same ecosystem. One will prevail.
The Zeiss, while technically sharper, can't do 1/10th the things I usually need to do ... that the CV can do ... while the CV can do anything the Zeiss can do (and then some) ... close enough so that I don't need the Zeiss.
I am considering getting the Sigma 150mm OS Macro. Is there anything more you can tell me about that lens. They say it is very well corrected. Any thoughts?
To contradict what I said earlier, I think you'd be happier with the 180.
The 150 is nowhere near as sharp. Look at OToole's tests.
True, the 150 has better CA control, but that is easily fixed.
By contrast, you can't fix lack of sharpness wide-open + inferior bokeh.
As for various technical tests, etc. from the so-called "techspurts," I no longer trust many. You have to use a lens yourself and for more than a day or two in order to understand what it can do for you. In fact, I am slowly becoming a stranger to all of the online photography forums. I no longer get much out of the photo geeks and the fan-boys. I don't post photos here much anymore because half the comments just miss the point, IMO. I am not interested in others telling how they would compose my photos unless I ask for that (and I don't). I know it's just me, but that's all I have to work with, my own eye and sense of photography..
Totally agree with you here.
I respect anyone's opinion with more experience than my own (esp. with a lens I have not owned before).
However, once I myself have used a lens, then I no longer care about anyone's opinion than my own ... because only I can apply the lens to my own needs and determine if it's suitable for what I want.
When I see a dude use a CV 125mm on a black-and-white letter, up close, and draw inferences from this primitive result ... I can only shake my head ... as he's failing to truly appreciate all of the subtleties of what the lens offers. Not to mention the fact that when he fails to see how dull/unsharp the Sigma 150 is wide-open, in comparison to how sharp the CV, it just makes me want to hit the *delete* button on the article. But, then again, Sigma pays for a lot of what he does ... ;)
As you know, I did have the Sigma 180mm macro, which is a great lens IMO, but I prefer the CV 125.
When I need quick AF for a macro shot (say a butterfly on a flower), I use my 300mm VR II which is better in every way than both of them. Better reach, can keep more distance, and cropped images from the 300mm VR II equal most distance macro shots IMO.
I am still doing lots of photography, but don't bother to share it, except a few on my Facebook blog each day. I do continue to track down lenses and buy them, just because I want to see for myself what's happening. Then I keep them or sell them. More and more of my work is done with the Cambo Actus and tilt. It's like I have come full circle, back to just taking photos for my own interest.
In the end, that's all you can do: photography for yourself.
Me, I am purging what I have in anticipation of a few Nikkor AF lenses (FL ED) ... and getting rid of some AI-S lenses in favor of either Zeiss or elder pre-AI all metal lenses, just because.
Winter is coming on here, so I am looking at some indoor projects.
Yep. I am going to be working on some websites and such over winter, as well as finishing a high-mag, super-macro studio setup on my desk/credenza, in anticipation of a new spring.
Cheers.
-
I have two copies of the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar f/5.6 120mm MC lenses, each slightly different
I have a Schneider-Kreuznach Componon-s f/4 80mm lens
2 copies of the Nikkor AM-ED 120mm f/5.6 lens
1 copy of the Nikkor AM-ED 210mm f/5.6 lens (heavy)
Do you have the Apo-Digitar 120 M26°, that is important.
The Componon 80 is not recommendable, the Apo-Digitar 5,6/80 M28° is much better.
The AM-ED 120 is not usable wide open, the Apo-Digitar 120 M is very good at 5,6.
-
Do you have the Apo-Digitar 120 M26°, that is important.
The Componon 80 is not recommendable, the Apo-Digitar 5,6/80 M28° is much better.
The AM-ED 120 is not usable wide open, the Apo-Digitar 120 M is very good at 5,6.
I have the Apo-Digitar 120 M26° MC and the Apo-Digitar 120 N-46° MC.
I like the Componon-S 80mm. It all depends what I'm shooting and the look I want.
Here are two shots taken with each of the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digital f/5.6 120mm :
(all are stacked photos)
They are taken within minutes of one another, both processed the same, but look at the difference in their contrast, etc. How do we explain this? It could be that the outside light changed coming through the window.
The first is the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digital f/5.6 120mm MC M-26°
The second is the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digital f/5.6 120mm MC N-48°
What does that "N" mean. I believe it means telephoto and the "M"means macro.
Any ideas?
P.S. I went back and reprocessed the first one (MC M-26°) and it's clear that anything can happen with color and so on post. Here that image is. Putting that aside, what do the two differ in?
-
Hello Michael, I love your work !
Indeed, the Apo-Digitar M with narrow field of view/angle of view is the Macro (from1:4 to 4:1) specialised lens (8-4 lens/groups);
The N lens (6-4) seems to be the digital successor of the well known Apo-Symmar LF lens, a very good normal lens (no it's not a tele-formula) usable from infinity to 1:4 (said the old Schneider documents for Apo-Symmar L or Apo-Symmar).
Apo-Digitar - Schneider Optics
https://www.schneideroptics.com/.../CatalogSubCategoryDisplay.as...
-
Hello Michael, I love your work !
Indeed, the Apo-Digitar M with narrow field of view/angle of view is the Macro (from1:4 to 4:1) specialised lens (8-4 lens/groups);
The N lens (6-4) seems to be the digital successor of the well known Apo-Symmar LF lens, a very good normal lens (no it's not a tele-formula) usable from infinity to 1:4 (said the old Schneider documents for Apo-Symmar L or Apo-Symmar).
Apo-Digitar - Schneider Optics
https://www.schneideroptics.com/.../CatalogSubCategoryDisplay.as...
Thanks for the note and details. So, the "48°" is the field of view. What does the "MC" indicate?
The first is the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digital f/5.6 120mm MC M-26°
The second is the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digital f/5.6 120mm MC N-48°
That link does not seem to work.
Do you know of any book or paper or site that lays out the whole Schneider lens history or some way for me to understand these lenses?
-
MC is multi-coated. Means just that.
-
Yes MC means Multicoated but I don't know if some Schneider Kreuznach book exists (?). Never heard about it or saw it...
The link can befound with your browser: you just have to search for "Schneider apo-digitar ".
Schneider Kreuznach site has some informations (but not much !) about older lenses, some LF classics (Super Angulon or S-A XL, Symmar S and Apo-Symmar, Tele-Xenar or Apo-Tele Xenar...) and enlarging lenses...(Componons, apo-componons...).
-
Sine there seems to be no handbook, can anyone offer a list of the best corrected Schneider lenses for close-up or macro, please and thank you?
-
Sine there seems to be no handbook, can anyone offer a list of the best corrected Schneider lenses for close-up or macro, please and thank you?
That depends on the magnification factor. For my work the Apo-Digitars 120 M and 80 M for 4:1-1:4 are the best. For infinity to 1:4 the 120 and 4,5 90 digitars are the best. But the Ms are patient and also usable at 1:10.
-
A very good macro lens is the Apo-Macro-Sironar Digital 5,6 120 from 1:5-2:1.
-
Why the old and not the newer Sigma 180mm APO macro?
Michael, let's get back to the AF question you had for enjoying the in-focus stacking feature of the D850.
I don't think Robert Otoole's tests are in any way relevant with respect to your style of photography. Since you don't shoot 1:1, his tests are utterly-irrelevant.
As mentioned, Ray Charles could see the Sigma 150 is soft as warm butter wide-open, while the CV 125 was razor sharp. For that matter, the Sigma 180 was also very sharp at f/2.8.
As better source material, I found multiple lens reviews (from the same testing outfit: LensTip) on ALL Sigma macro lenses, that prove-out the obvious errors/omissions in Otoole's testing:
- Sigma 105 f/2.8 (https://www.lenstip.com/241.4-Lens_review-Sigma_105_mm_f_2.8_EX_DG_Macro_Image_resolution.html)
- Sigma 150 f/2.8 (https://www.lenstip.com/313.4-Lens_review-Sigma_150_mm_f_2.8_APO_EX_DG_OS_HSM_Macro_Image_resolution.html)
- Sigma 180 f/3.5 (https://www.lenstip.com/237.4-Lens_review-Sigma_180_mm_f_3.5_EX_DG_HSM_Macro_APO_Image_resolution.html)
- Sigma 180 f/2.8 (https://www.lenstip.com/355.4-Lens_review-Sigma_180_mm_f_2.8_APO_Macro_EX_DG_OS_HSM__Image_resolution.html)
* All of these links go straight to the resolution charts *
These tests prove what can easily be seen in OToole's limited tests, namely that the Sigma 150 is a dud at the f/2.8 aperture, which is where you like to be, whereas the Sigma 180mm (f/2.8 ) is pretty darned good.
[For comparison, check out the chart for the lens we both know you like, namely the Zeiss 135 f/2 Apo Sonnar (https://www.lenstip.com/388.4-Lens_review-Carl_Zeiss_Apo_Sonnar_T*_135_mm_f_2.0_ZE_ZF.2_Image_resolution.html).
In fact, wide-open, @ 2.0, the Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar actually blows away every single Zeiss Otus (considerably, and with much more even sharpness across the frame): 28mm (https://www.lenstip.com/481.4-Lens_review-Carl_Zeiss_Otus_28_mm_f_1.4_Image_resolution.html), 55mm (https://www.lenstip.com/390.4-Lens_review-Carl_Zeiss_Otus_55_mm_f_1.4_ZE_ZF.2_Image_resolution.html), 85mm (https://www.lenstip.com/415.4-Lens_review-Carl_Zeiss_Otus_85_mm_f_1.4_Image_resolution.html).
(For this reason, I just pulled my own copy of the Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar off EBay and intend on keeping it :) )
By contrast, the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 (https://www.lenstip.com/24.4-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_Micro_105_mm_f_2.8G_IF-ED_VR_Image_resolution.html) AF is 'meh' wide-open.
Now, if you shot Canon, the 100mm f/2.8L (https://www.lenstip.com/214.4-Lens_review-Canon_EF_100_mm_f_2.8_L_Macro_IS_USM_Image_resolution.html) looks to be a great candidate, wide-open, for in-body AF ... but, sadly, it's not an option for you.
That said, when all is said and done, for in-body AF (for the Nikon D850), with a desire for exceptional wide-open resolution, the Sigma 135mm f/2.8 Art (https://www.lenstip.com/501.4-Lens_review-Sigma_A_135_mm_f_1.8_DG_HSM_Image_resolution.html) appears to be the lens you should consider for this specific purpose.
Although it only has a 1:5 reproduction ratio, it is very similar to the Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar (@ 1:4), and is even sharper wide-open :o
Jack
-
That said, when all is said and done, for in-body AF (for the Nikon D850), with a desire for exceptional wide-open resolution, the Sigma 135mm f/2.8 Art (https://www.lenstip.com/501.4-Lens_review-Sigma_A_135_mm_f_1.8_DG_HSM_Image_resolution.html) appears to be the lens you should consider for this specific purpose.
Although it only has a 1:5 reproduction ratio, it is very similar to the Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar (@ 1:4), and is even sharper wide-open :o
Jack
I follow your reasoning, exactly and agree. I figured out from my own tests about the Zeiss 135mm APO Sonar being sharper than the others. In my own person notations I refer to it as the Otus 135mm. LOL.
I sill look into the Sigma 135mm lens. Thanks for all the effort. Much appreciated!.
-
I follow your reasoning, exactly and agree. I figured out from my own tests about the Zeiss 135mm APO Sonar being sharper than the others. In my own person notations I refer to it as the Otus 135mm. LOL.
I sill look into the Sigma 135mm lens. Thanks for all the effort. Much appreciated!.
You bet, and your eyes were right.
In fact, I am sad to remind myself that it appears the Sigma 135 does not offer the same micro-contrast subtlety as the Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar (https://youtu.be/SSKbMh_nGF4), especially where you (and I) like to be: up close :(
-
I think I will wait and see if something does not appear. I have other less attractive lenses I can experiment with. Also, I am trapped inside until next spring. We have snow on the ground already. Also, I like stacking and can do it pretty well. And aside from sunlight, my subject will cooperate. LOL.
I see this more as a tool for other photographers that will introduce them to what stacking can do. I already know that.
-
The ticket here is APO lenses that are in F-Mount that have a modern autofocus. Like Frank, I have a number of APO lenses, plenty of them, but they are not autofocus lenses. I did have the Sigma 180mm F/2.8 Macro (the newest version), but was not that impressed by it.
I have the Sigma f/1.4 24mm lens in F-Mount, but while it is a nice lens, it is not really an APO lens, even though that term has no standard definition. I have the Nikkor 105mm Macro VR, but that is not APO by a long shot. And so on...
Here's a working definition of APO from astronomy: An apochromatic system is one in which wave aberrations do not exceed 1/4 wave optical path difference (OPD) in the spectral range from C (6563A - red) to F (4861A - blue), while the g wavelength (4358A - violet) is 1/2 wave OPD or better, has three widely spaced zero color crossings and is corrected for coma.
For D850's stacking to function, you not only need an autofocus lens, but one with a built-in motor. With perhaps one or two exceptions (like the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S), lenses with "modern autofocus" employ floating elements instead of focusing as a unit. Even if each set of moving elements met the above definition of APO, I'm skeptical that a floating element design can meet that definition across a wide range of focus distances. And that's before thinking about manufacturing tolerances. So I dismiss the APO moniker on lenses like the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 as marketing hype. I do own a 180mm f/3.5 and think it's a good lens, but an APO lens it is not. Autofocus speed is quite slow, and I suspect it would need rechipping to function fully on a D850.
-
Here's a working definition of APO from astronomy: An apochromatic system is one in which wave aberrations do not exceed 1/4 wave optical path difference (OPD) in the spectral range from C (6563A - red) to F (4861A - blue), while the g wavelength (4358A - violet) is 1/2 wave OPD or better, has three widely spaced zero color crossings and is corrected for coma.
For D850's stacking to function, you not only need an autofocus lens, but one with a built-in motor. With perhaps one or two exceptions (like the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S), lenses with "modern autofocus" employ floating elements instead of focusing as a unit. Even if each set of moving elements met the above definition of APO, I'm skeptical that a floating element design can meet that definition across a wide range of focus distances. And that's before thinking about manufacturing tolerances. So I dismiss the APO moniker on lenses like the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 as marketing hype. I do own a 180mm f/3.5 and think it's a good lens, but an APO lens it is not. Autofocus speed is quite slow, and I suspect it would need rechipping to function fully on a D850.
I understand the above. Where the rubber meets the road is the fact that camera lens manufactures do not IMO (whether there exists some theoretical APO standard or not) follow a standard for APO, not anywhere near. I have a lot of APO lenses, many of which are really well corrected, like the Otus lenses and various among the exotic industrials. The saving grace is that sooner or later, the reality of APO will sink in and more and more of them will appear.
-
Here's a working definition of APO from astronomy: An apochromatic system is one in which wave aberrations do not exceed 1/4 wave optical path difference (OPD) in the spectral range from C (6563A - red) to F (4861A - blue), while the g wavelength (4358A - violet) is 1/2 wave OPD or better, has three widely spaced zero color crossings and is corrected for coma.
For D850's stacking to function, you not only need an autofocus lens, but one with a built-in motor. With perhaps one or two exceptions (like the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S), lenses with "modern autofocus" employ floating elements instead of focusing as a unit. Even if each set of moving elements met the above definition of APO, I'm skeptical that a floating element design can meet that definition across a wide range of focus distances. And that's before thinking about manufacturing tolerances. So I dismiss the APO moniker on lenses like the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 as marketing hype. I do own a 180mm f/3.5 and think it's a good lens, but an APO lens it is not. Autofocus speed is quite slow, and I suspect it would need rechipping to function fully on a D850.
Didn't Zeiss coin the Apo moniker?
The Sigma 180 f/3.5 macro is beneath the Sigma 180 f/2.8 macro, as the tests on the preceding page illustrate, and neither is a true Apo.
However, the Sigma 135mm Art (https://www.lenstip.com/501.5-Lens_review-Sigma_A_135_mm_f_1.8_DG_HSM_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html) has a slightly worse LoCA score than the Zeiss Apo Sonnar (https://www.lenstip.com/388.5-Lens_review-Carl_Zeiss_Apo_Sonnar_T*_135_mm_f_2.0_ZE_ZF.2_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html), but a better LaCA score.
-
To sum up what works for me:
Faster glass in a lens means great bokeh, but for my work it also has to be very sharp wide-open and very well corrected at well. That’s the glass that I seek and sometimes find. With fast glass as described above, even though wide open the DOF is razor thin, I can literally paint in focus over a sea of bokeh and be quite satisfied with the results.
Things that also help are a lens with a long focus throw or using the tilt features of a bellows, thus forcing the plane of the focus to compress near and far, making it much easier to stack with fewer artifacts. In the process of searching out lenses, along the way I have tried all kinds of lenses to see if I could squeeze from them something useful for close-up shooting.
-
It appears that the Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art is the best candidate for the ultimate wide-open (w/ razor-sharp focus) lens. Combined with low CA, and the ability to take advantage of the in-body stacking feature of the D850. I can't think of a better option.
Wouldn't be worth much as a true macro lens, but you're more into close-focus.
With 1:5 magnification, this would mean a 180mm (7.01-inch) subject would fill the 36mm D850 frame, which is about ideal for flower photography.
It is so sharp, you could probably frame a 4" subject, crop, and have better resolution than a common macro lens would give you.
It would be interesting for you to compare in-body stacks of this lens on your D850 to manual stacks with the Zeiss 135 Apo.
(Compare both time + results.)
-
Hmm, I really wonder Michael, if automatic stacking using an AF lens and the new D850
could possibly kill the mediative moments of serenity while doing your work?
You made me really think about it, and I asked myself why I do that to me, working with very
fast lenses wide open, hand held to achieve what I am after - and it is exactly that: it forces
me into a certain descipline, it takes all my attention and the world around disappears, it is just
the subject and me which remains for these long moments of flow... I'm sure you understand me very well.
-
Hmm, I really wonder Michael, if automatic stacking using an AF lens and the new D850
could possibly kill the mediative moments of serenity while doing your work?
You made me really think about it, and I asked myself why I do that to me, working with very
fast lenses wide open, hand held to achieve what I am after - and it is exactly that: it forces
me into a certain descipline, it takes all my attention and the world around disappears, it is just
the subject and me which remains for these long moments of flow... I'm sure you understand me very well.
The auto-stacking is probably a harbinger of things to come. We will always find a place for those meditative moments because we depend on them, IMO. Things change, but (as they say) they remain the same.
-
The auto-stacking is probably a harbinger of things to come. We will always find a place for those meditative moments because we depend on them, IMO. Things change, but (as they say) they remain the same.
Sure, we cannot and should not ignore what technology brings us, as long as that doesn't take away important aspects of our life.
-
Sure, we cannot and should not ignore what technology brings us, as long as that doesn't take away important aspects of our life.
The important aspect is to enjoy nature (or the flower/subject) in-and-of-itself; the advancements we can use to facilitate our ability to best capture the essence of what we admire will not detract from our basic interest and enjoyment. Indeed, continuous advancement will merely amplify our ability to capture that essence which captivates our fancy to begin with.
-
Here are a couple CV shots (a few I may have posted already) to show the subtle, intricate, realistic colors captured by what I believe to be the best walk-around macro I have ever used.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4394/36432071544_73dfbe0a6a_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XvnTAy)
Arizona Mantid ♀ (https://flic.kr/p/XvnTAy) by John A. Koerner II (https://www.flickr.com/photos/naturescapes007/), on Flickr
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4475/37425431370_bbd4e1d663_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Z2a7S7)
Honey Bee (https://flic.kr/p/Z2a7S7) by John A. Koerner II (https://www.flickr.com/photos/naturescapes007/), on Flickr
It's like you can reach out and pluck them off their perches.
I really enjoy these!
-
I really enjoy these!
Glad to hear it, thank you!
-
That Mantid is great close-up shot!
-
That Mantid is great close-up shot!
Thanks!
The subtle, ultra-realistic colors of the Voigtlander are what I enjoy most about this lens :)
-
Glad to hear it, thank you!
I did a lot of bees for a honey producer for 10 years, but these were more moody shots for the lables. I fact customers criticized the shot where the bee stings were too clearly in focus, like these. My equipment for these started with the D70 & 2.8/60D and ended with the 2.8/60G on the D600, next season I want to try the extended 4/300PF on the D500 and D850 to see if AF can make all the difference here:
(http://fotokontext.de/Sommerhonig_2009_erster_Biohonig_nach_Zertifizierung.jpg)
(http://fotokontext.de/pfandglas_fruehlingshonig_petzold_webversion_holtorfer_wiesenhonig_bioerzeugung.jpg)
(http://fotokontext.de/Honigetikett_Sommer2010_Bio_Steuobstwiese_im_Erlenpesch_Wiederauflage_Neubearbeitung.jpg)
-
Very nice macro work Frank!!
-
Very nice light and composition on the third photograph. The bee is getting down. The poor workers only live about two weeks after they start leaving the hive.
Dave who was a bee keeper for a few of years until he had a reaction to a sting.