Yannick Khong: "The Problem with modern Optics"

[Thomas Stellwag]

this is showing up in several forae now - it is pure fun in his blog....long noses will survive - i hope at least for my kids
a thesis with generally perceived truth content thrown in a group and in a sudden everybody knows something about it
with these accurate diagrams you might even proof that new digital Lomo is the worst macro camera exisiting - o.k. this might be true

[charlie]

So the only way to confirm the 3D vs flat issue would be if someone has the mentioned lenses, tries them out, and shares with us the results.

If the argument is that older lenses with fewer elements create a more 3 dimensional image than newer lenses with more elements, couldn't this be compared with any old manual nikkor prime lens vs say a 24-70mm or 70-200mm?

[Almass]

.

[BW]

The rendering of a scene doesn't necessary come down to just one factor. The optics surely play a role, but so does the quality of the light, the angel of the light and the contrast in a scene. I really dont understand why you are discussing just one factor of the equation without even considering the others? Seem quite odd to me

[Frank Fremerey]

The rendering of a scene doesn't necessary come down to just one factor. The optics surely play a role, but so does the quality of the light, the angel of the light and the contrast in a scene. I really dont understand why you are discussing just one factor of the equation without even considering the others? Seem quite odd to me

Take the meat picture as an example. I took a whole series (other meat products) with a current (2009) Micro-Nikkor 60mm (D or G, do not remember). Compared to the APO ED Nikkor the pictures look "flat".

I feel that also has to do with the movements I applied, not only with the lens itself. In that sense the portrait shot is more of a reference because it is not taken at F=16 but wide open at f=5.6 and both standarts in parallel.

[Michael Erlewine]

Compare to the APO ED Nikkor the pictures look "flat".

What exactly is the "APO ED Nikkor" referred to here?

[charlie]

Take the meat picture as an example. I took a whole series (other meat products) with a current (2009) Micro-Nikkor 60mm (D or G, do not remember). Compare to the APO ED Nikkor the pictures look "flat".

"The meat" picture has incredibly flat lighting on a featureless white background, the flatness of that image has far more to do with those choices than it does lens choice.

If anyone was to make a comparison of image depth based on lens choice alone why not use the same camera position, subject, and lighting across all images?

It seems anyone could pick a lens and curate flat or 3D images from lighting conditions alone to support their argumenst.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

What exactly is the "APO ED Nikkor" referred to here?

Frank might refer to the AM-ED Nikkor 120 mm f/5.6 for large-format cameras. It's a stellar performer.

[Jan Anne]

My comment above was indeed my first announcement of returning to Nikon, and FX.

An FX camera with the 16MP sensor would make more sense in this context, but neither Df or D4s was within my budget.

Welcome back to Nikon Akira and thank you for sharing the reasons behind the switch, its always interesting what drives others in their choice of gear.

Myself I'm also on the fence to add the Nikon D500 to my arsenal, there's only one thing standing in the way besides availability and thats my desire to own the Canon 100-400 and those two don't mix One of my reasons to switch to Sony is the ability to cherry pick lenses from multiple brands but a camera like the D500 is the reason why I fell in love with Nikon as a brand (top performance in a tough and dependable package).

[Airy]

Yes. Schneider APO Digitar:

http://fotokontext.de/DSC_7706_v1.jpg

And. Nikkor APO Macro:

http://fotokontext.de/POR_5138_vitamin_e.jpg

http://fotokontext.de/Rindsrouladen_ABC_7026_merged_8bit.jpg

OK. Got the point. Still difficult to explain or prove or measure. But, again, I think that your lighting was essential, the lens possibly playing a secondary role (as long as it is no bad glass).

[Frank Fremerey]

Frank might refer to the AM-ED Nikkor 120 mm f/5.6 for large-format cameras. It's a stellar performer.

Yes. At the moment I took these pictures they were absolutely revealing to me and I still feel the structure of the meat pops out of the frame, although the standards of the current generation 810, 750 set the bar higher that the humle D3 could deliver.

[Michael Erlewine]

Yes. At the moment I took these pictures they were absolutely revealing to me and I still feel the structure of the meat pops out of the frame, although the standards of the current generation 810, 750 set the bar higher that the humle D3 could deliver.

Would the Nikon Nikkor AM-ED 120mm f/5.6 lens fit on the Balpro bellows? Could one use the Copal #0 mount? Would this then work with the D810?

[Birna Rørslett]

Would the Nikon Nikkor AM-ED 120mm f/5.6 lens fit on the Balpro bellows? Could one use the Copal #0 mount? Would this then work with the D810?

The 120 ED will fit on most bellows. I used it with a Novoflex unit and the PB-4, plus of course on my Arca-Swiss F-Line technical camera for shooting on 120 film and 4x5" sheet film.

Any mounting arrangement is facilitated by the capability for the lens to be split in two halves so you can push one part through the appropriate hole, then reattach the other half. You could use either the Copal shutter as is or set it to "T" and use the camera to control the exposure. Be prepared to use washers to ensure the lens is safely and snugly attached to its mounting board.

I used the lens with a D800 so D810 should pose no problem ...

[Michael Erlewine]

The 120 ED will fit on most bellows. I used it with a Novoflex unit and the PB-4, plus of course on my Arca-Swiss F-Line technical camera for shooting on 120 film and 4x5" sheet film.

Any mounting arrangement is facilitated by the capability for the lens to be split in two halves so you can push one part through the appropriate hole, then reattach the other half. You could use either the Copal shutter as is or set it to "T" and use the camera to control the exposure. Be prepared to use washers to ensure the lens is safely and snugly attached to its mounting board.

I used the lens with a D800 so D810 should pose no problem ...

Thanks much. What would I need to put it on the PB-4?

Also, is the lens up to the D810? Could it work well on a 50 MPx camera? Is it a real APO? Macro?

[Birna Rørslett]

Thanks much. What would I need to put it on the PB-4?

Also, is the lens up to the D810? Could it work well on a 50 MPx camera? Is it a real APO? Macro?

Not much. For the makeshift arrangement in front of me: Nikon BR-2 (to provide the F bayonet), a T2-M39 step ring, 37-52 step-up ring. The latter 2 items just act as spacers and centering alignment.

It is a perfectly symmetric design optimised for the 1:5 to 5:1 range.

Perhaps it's better to start a separate thread on the 120 APO or similar optics?