Compensating MIcro Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 revisited

[David H. Hartman]

A 150/5.6 EL-Nikkor has a usable range of 2x to 8x per Nikon data. When reversed I would think it should perform well at 2:1 to 8:1 with maybe it's best at 5:1. Foreword I think 1:8 to 1:2 should perform well. Is my thinking correct here?

At what magnification would I want to reverse a 55/3.5 Compensating Micro? a 55/3.5 AI Micro?

Flipping a 55/2.8 AIS Micro should be OK if only the center was important or do I miss understand the purpose of CRC in that lens? I've flipped 55/3.5(s) but never tried a 55/2.8 because of the CRC.

Dave

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Your thinking is theoretically sound, Dave. The devil, as usual, hides in the practical details. Meaning one might need to add excessive extension in some cases, leading to an unwieldy and impractical setup.

When I shot 4x5", I often added the 4T to my 120 mm f/5.6 AM Nikkor ED to crank up magnification and avoid inserting an extra bellows length. worked very well, but then 4x5" and good technique is pretty tolerant of a slight reduction in quality anyway.

Reversing a 55 Micro would mean one could do 2:1 without too much added extension.

[Asle F]

Flipping a 55/2.8 AIS Micro should be OK if only the center was important or do I miss understand the purpose of CRC in that lens? I've flipped 55/3.5(s) but never tried a 55/2.8 because of the CRC.

When reversing the lens, just revers the magnification on the focusing ring, and the CRC will be with you. When photograping at 2x, set the focus ring at 1:2. When photographing at 3x, set focusing ring at 1:3…

[Akira]

When reversing the lens, just revers the magnification on the focusing ring, and the CRC will be with you. When photograping at 2x, set the focus ring at 1:2. When photographing at 3x, set focusing ring at 1:3…

Asle, all versions of the 55/3.5 Micro Nikkors are of rack focus type without CRC.  So, you can leave the focus ring set at infinity when reversed.  Or, you can set the focus ring to a closer distance to utilize the rear barrel as a lens hood.

[David H. Hartman]

Long ago I saw an early setup for macro with a view camera. Many bellows were used. The whole outfit may have been 2 meters long or longer.

The 150/5.6 El-Nikkor I mentioned above was a bad choice. It would need 450mm from lens to sensor to achive 2:1 (2x life). I might be able to do that by mounting a camera on the back of a Super Technika IV 45. A shorter focal length lens would be far more practical. Even 135/5.6 would need 405mm from lens to sensor to achieve 2:1. The lens I'd like to try is a 50/3.5 Fujinon-EP but it has no attachment thread on the front. The 50/3.5 could get to 2:1 easily on a Nikon PB-4 bellows.

Concerning the 55/2.8 reversed: I can't think what to call the dull black baffle and lens protector on the rear but with the lens focus ring set to 1:3 the rear of the lens (dull black thing) is pushed out approximately 20mm and is maybe 23mm from the rear element. If I were reversing a 55/2.8 I'd leave the focus ring at infinity and hope for the best.

For reversing Micro-Nikkors I have several 55/3.5 lenses.

Dave

[F2F3F6]

Hello Dave and everybody,

for macro-use I think the best (Micro-Nikkor excepted) lenses are short focal enlarger lenses or better Apo-EL, Apo-Componon, Apo-Rodagon lenses between 28 and 105 mm for more than 1:1 magnification.
I have seen many articles from Dan Fromm,  (here some interesting stuff in english : www.galerie-photo.com/1-lens-6x9-dan-fromm.html), but also fromm Bjørn Rørslett (Hello !) and Michael Erlewlne and other contributors...

Seems that for greater magnifications a few 28 or 35mm enlarger lenses (Componon for example) or cine lenses (see Dan  Fromm's articles) are good performers.
Than you can search for the holy grail, the Macro-Nikkors or some Photars (Leitz) or Luminars from 19mm to 35mm...

Around 50mm, Fromm says the Micro-Nikkor (2,8/55 Ais in his case) remains one of the best...but he tested for 6x9cm and film.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

For studio work at say 5 to 10X magnification, using a flat-field infinity corrected APO objective such as those from the Mitutoyo M Plan series in conjunction with a tube lens yields image quality at least as good or very probably better than what any finite-focus lens, even the famous Macro-Nikkors, can deliver.

In these infinity-corrected systems, several additional issues have to be sorted. Firstly there is a need for a quality tube lens of focal length 200 mm. A 200 mm lens with telephoto construction works pretty well; a highly corrected close-up lens such as the Raynox DCR-150 might be at least as good, but much cheaper. Secondly, as there typically is no aperture control, depth of field is very limited thus focus stacking is required in virtually all cases. And thirdly, flare from external light sources can be troublesome unless you carefully shield the front of the objective, or due to the setup for the tube lens, there could be internally generated flare to cope with as well.

[F2F3F6]

Thank you Bjørn for reminding us this other (cheaper and better) solution ! I had already read about Mitutoyo or Nikon M-Plan lenses for microphotography here on a few posts...