55mm f2.8 AIS with extension tube, will it work?

[Zang]

Hi all,

Does anyone have experience using 55mm f2.8 AIS with an extension tube (10mm or 20mm). I plan using that setup on my APS-C to have 1:1 magnification for negative scanning. I would think an extension tube would compromise the CRC a bit but not sure how this thing works the reality.

Cheers,
Zang

[MEPER]

I have used this lens on a bellows and it worked fine.

[MEPER]

Something like this you want?
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-on-review/the-franken-scanner-slide-and-negative-digitizer

[Birna Rørslett]

The Micro 55/2.8 Ais is designed to be used with an M2/PK-3 extension tube to reach 1:1. Like the 105/2.8 Micro, the added extension conflicts to some degree with the CRC, but stop down to f/11 and you should be fine. By the way, this is the same recommendation as Nikon had for the 105/2.8 AIS with the PN-11.

[Roland Vink]

Regardless of which extension tube is used, the AIS 55 f2.8 micro works best when focused all the way to the close focus position. In this way the optics are best configured for closeup photography. So, if you want 1:1 magnification, the PK-13 tube with 27.5mm extension is the best option. If you require slightly less magnification in the range between 1:2 and 1:1 then one of the shorter tubes is better, such as the PK-11 (8mm) or PK-12 (14mm).

On the other hand, if you need magnification just beyond 1:2 and use the PK-13 extension tube, the lens will need to be "focused" near infinity. In this setup the optics are configured for near-infinity shooting so performance will be less good (probably field curvature etc). In this situation it is better to use a shorter tube and focus the lens all the way out.

[Zang]

Something like this you want?
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-on-review/the-franken-scanner-slide-and-negative-digitizer

Thanks Meper. Good to know it worked for you. The film copier looks so cool! but I have crafted a DIY one which looks equally military

[Zang]

The Micro 55/2.8 Ais is designed to be used with an M2/PK-3 extension tube to reach 1:1. Like the 105/2.8 Micro, the added extension conflicts to some degree with the CRC, but stop down to f/11 and you should be fine. By the way, this is the same recommendation as Nikon had for the 105/2.8 AIS with the PN-11.

Thanks Birna. I want to get 1:1 on APS-C so M2/PK-3 would be too long. I do feel a tube compromise the CRC but I hope the issue is not noticeable. I'll try it out and report back.

[Zang]

Regardless of which extension tube is used, the AIS 55 f2.8 micro works best when focused all the way to the close focus position. In this way the optics are best configured for closeup photography. So, if you want 1:1 magnification, the PK-13 tube with 27.5mm extension is the best option. If you require slightly less magnification in the range between 1:2 and 1:1 then one of the shorter tubes is better, such as the PK-11 (8mm) or PK-12 (14mm).

On the other hand, if you need magnification just beyond 1:2 and use the PK-13 extension tube, the lens will need to be "focused" near infinity. In this setup the optics are configured for near-infinity shooting so performance will be less good (probably field curvature etc). In this situation it is better to use a shorter tube and focus the lens all the way out.

Thanks Roland. PK-13 is so rare today. Besides, I want 1:1 on APS-C, so I bought a 3rd party set of 13/20/36. I think 13 would work and I will remember your advice regarding closest distance focusing.

[MEPER]

Nikon also makes a dedicated attachment for the camera:
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/miscellaneous/es-2-film-digitizing-adapter-set.html

There are other brands which works similar and are probably cheaper but now you have built your own :-)

From memory I just used the 55/2.8 set to infinity on bellows and did not think about the CRC.
It should be easy to test which settings gets the best results. F/11 seems to be a good aperture to use.

Is it mounted slides?   .....probably the raw film gives best results if you can keep it 100% flat. AN glass frames are probably not the best to "scan" from.

[MEPER]

A bit more info here about digitizing:
https://www.throughthefmount.com/articles_tips_digitise.html

A 55/3.5 is used. It is mentioned that using a camera gives a bit softer corners that when a dedicated scanner is used.
Maybe an advantage to use a DX sensor to use the best part of the lens and also utilize CRC when using a 55/2.8 for best flat field performance.

[David H. Hartman]

The Micro 55/2.8 Ais is designed to be used with an M2/PK-3 extension tube to reach 1:1. Like the 105/2.8 Micro, the added extension conflicts to some degree with the CRC, but stop down to f/11 and you should be fine. By the way, this is the same recommendation as Nikon had for the 105/2.8 AIS with the PN-11.

Using the shortest extension tube (or set of tubes) needed for a particular image ratio will keep the CRC as close to the near position as possible rather than the infinity position. For example with a 55/2.8 AIS Micro use a PK-11a then a PK-12 followed by a PK-11a & PK-12 combined before using a PK-13. If one will be stopping down to f/11 anyway this may not be necessary but if you want to shoot at f/5.6 or f/8.0 it may be a useful strategy.

Dave

[Snoogly]

Regardless of which extension tube is used, the AIS 55 f2.8 micro works best when focused all the way to the close focus position. In this way the optics are best configured for closeup photography. So, if you want 1:1 magnification, the PK-13 tube with 27.5mm extension is the best option. If you require slightly less magnification in the range between 1:2 and 1:1 then one of the shorter tubes is better, such as the PK-11 (8mm) or PK-12 (14mm).

On the other hand, if you need magnification just beyond 1:2 and use the PK-13 extension tube, the lens will need to be "focused" near infinity. In this setup the optics are configured for near-infinity shooting so performance will be less good (probably field curvature etc). In this situation it is better to use a shorter tube and focus the lens all the way out.

This is very useful information. Is it available online anywhere? (Apart from your reply!)

[David H. Hartman]

This is very useful information. Is it available online anywhere? (Apart from your reply!)

Check Roland Vink's post above mine. He gave the same information just before I did.

Dave

[Erik Lund]

If your Micro Nikkor is CPU chipped you might need this little modification to retain contact between camera and lens 
https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=4544.0

[Zang]

A bit more info here about digitizing:
https://www.throughthefmount.com/articles_tips_digitise.html

A 55/3.5 is used. It is mentioned that using a camera gives a bit softer corners that when a dedicated scanner is used.
Maybe an advantage to use a DX sensor to use the best part of the lens and also utilize CRC when using a 55/2.8 for best flat field performance.

Hey Meper. Thanks for the links. Yes, I copy raw negative, not slides. I do have full frame camera plus 1:1 100mm Contax Zeiss lens but that set-up is bulky and heavy. I think APS-C is enough to get the best result from negatives. I got the rings and as predicted, APS-C plus 10mm ring give me exactly 1:1!

Here is my DIY copier: