Old School Nikon Primes

[John Koerner]

Very nice detail of the Spider John. And a good description of that versatile 28mm/2.8 Ai-S   

 

[John Koerner]

Here is another example:

I used the "infinity" end of the wide-angle lens (properly-oriented) to document the entire area, looking back, where I hiked:



I used the mid-range end of the lens and document the plant/flower upon which I found the spider:



The lens also has a very close min focusing distance (properly-mounted) to get a standard close-up of the flower type on which it was found (again, normal lens mounting):



And then, just slapping on a simple reverse-ring, and turning the lens around, I am able to get an ultra-close 2:1 macro shot of the spider on the end of a flower bud (again, stacked image, natural light, macro rail):


(This is no crop--it filled the frame--and it looks awesome at full-size!)

That is a pretty wide gamut of uses for 1 simple, inexpensive lens

Jack

PS: Here is the Encounter.

[KarlMera]

It's this lens, reversed onto my camera by way of this ring.

According to the specs it achieves 2.1x lifesize magnification.

I thought that You reversed the 1,2/50, and it would have been interesting for me if it maintains 1,2.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

John, have you actually measured that a reversed 28/2.8 delivers 2:1 images? I would have expected higher magnification that that.

[Jacques Pochoy]

Vers nice spider shot ! I guess that in june at the Bièvre Photofair, I'll go hunting for some reversal rings, as in all those years I haven't tried the process of lens reversing, maybe because I was much too lazy... :-) But the 28/2.8 AIS being one fo my favorite your pictures just gave me a tinge of envy !!!

[John Koerner]

John, have you actually measured that a reversed 28/2.8 delivers 2:1 images? I would have expected higher magnification that that.

Hi.

I haven't measured them, no.

But the instructions that come in the box directly give the macro measurements achievable with each lens type, so I see no reason to question the manufacturer's own statistics.

Attached is the package insert (the green checkmarks are my own, denoting each lens I have, based on the incremental increase in magnification I get with each lens type--and I will probably add the 24mm so I can get 2.6x magnification). I rarely find the need to shoot at over 3x magnification for a nature shot.

Jack

PS: You can add extention tubes between reverse-ring and lens to increase the magnification (though I rarely, if ever, do so).

[Bjørn Rørslett]

OK, thanks for the additional details.

I would have tried putting a close-up lens on the host lens before reversing it. Conjugate relationships would be better maintained. Also do note that without a narrow lens hood on the exposed rear end of the lens, the setup becomes very sensitive to stray light and potential loss of contrast. This of course due to the fact that a lot of the light entering the rear of the lens no longer can form an image.

The humble 36-72/3.5 Nikon SE is excellent for reversal using this principle. The added advantage is that one can fine-trim the composition by a little zooming in or out.

[John Koerner]

Vers nice spider shot ! I guess that in june at the Bièvre Photofair, I'll go hunting for some reversal rings, as in all those years I haven't tried the process of lens reversing, maybe because I was much too lazy... :-)

Thank you--she is a beauty!

No need to wait or hunt for a ring: you can order the BR-2A online, brand new, for like $35.

But the 28/2.8 AIS being one fo my favorite your pictures just gave me a tinge of envy !!!

Lol, it is really fun having this kind of flexibility in one lens.

I actually bring 3 lenses with me now (unless I take a longer trip): the Voightlander 125 APO, the Nikon 50 1/2, and the Nikon 28 f/1.2.

The Nikon 300 mm II I have is too heavy to enjoy hiking with every day.
The Nikon 20 mm f/2.8 shoots too close (3.4x) to be useful.

I find that the Voightlander 125 is light enough to be enjoyable and gives me a decent amount of reach. The 630° focus throw is a blessing and a curse. A blessing when you have the time; a curse when you don't.

The 50mm f/1.2 gives great bokeh for candid shots, plus it gives very nice 1:1 when I need to be close. It probably gets used the least, though, as most of what it can do the Voightlander can do also.

The 28mm is my favorite, because it gives me a really good wide shot, and when I reverse it, it gives me twice the magnification as the Voight and the 50, without being so close as to render it useless in the field (like the 20mm does). Again, I rarely need to shoot at 3:1, and when I do I need studio conditions. But that is me.

Jack

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I'm a little confused as to what lenses you actually use as the nomenclature is non-standard.

"Nikon 50 1/2" is it the Nikkor 50 mm f/1.2 or the Nikkor 50 mm f/2 ?? The latter is known to be excellent for reversed-lens photography.

"Nikon 28 f/1.2" - no Nikkor has this specification. Is it the Nikkor 28 mm f/2 you refer to? Or the 28/2.8? The latter is often referred to as the "Wide-angle Micro-Nikkor".

[John Koerner]

OK, thanks for the additional details.

I would have tried putting a close-up lens on the host lens before reversing it. Conjugate relationships would be better maintained. Also do note that without a narrow lens hood on the exposed rear end of the lens, the setup becomes very sensitive to stray light and potential loss of contrast. This of course due to the fact that a lot of the light entering the rear of the lens no longer can form an image.

The humble 36-72/3.5 Nikon SE is excellent for reversal using this principle. The added advantage is that one can fine-trim the composition by a little zooming in or out.

Interesting, thanks. A manual aperture zoom makes sense, composition-wise.

My only reason from shying away from zooms is because the image quality isn't typically as good as a prime.

The way I do things is, if I need greater than 1:1, I slap extension tubes between my 125 APO and my Voightlander.

At greater than 1.5:1, I slap a reverse ring on my 28 mm.

Although my 35mm could get me 1.8:1, I like the simplicity of 3 lenses (1 on camera, 2 in a bag + tubes, if necessary).

The Zoom would simplify things even more ... but I am not sure the image quality would be on a par with a prime.

Have you compared the two?

Cheers,

Jack

[John Koerner]

I'm a little confused as to what lenses you actually use as the nomenclature is non-standard.

"Nikon 50 1/2" is it the Nikkor 50 mm f/1.2 or the Nikkor 50 mm f/2 ?? The latter is known to be excellent for reversed-lens photography.

"Nikon 28 f/1.2" - no Nikkor has this specification. Is it the Nikkor 28 mm f/2 you refer to? Or the 28/2.8? The latter is often referred to as the "Wide-angle Micro-Nikkor".

Just a typo from responding quickly.

I use the 50 f/1.2 and the 28 f/2.8 both Ai-S.

All of which can be seen on my "gear" link on my signature

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Thanks again, those were my hunch but I wanted to remove any ambiguity.

I have several of the 36-72 Nikon SE lenses, of which one is permanently set up for photomacrography. They are very inexpensive and optical quality is surprisingly good for a decent specimen.

There is an example using 36-72 SE on a D800, hand-held capture. The subject is the signal pins of a Xeon CPU chip at 3.5X.

[John Koerner]

Very interesting, thank you.

Would be similar in functionality (reversed) to the Canon MP-E 65mm.

Also a cool way to check the sharpness, via CPU chip

Thanks for sharing, may have to get one on eBay to check it out.

[John Koerner]

Hi again.

I checked out your article on this, and again, interesting.

I would like to see the results when shot from a tripod + remote switch.

It is impossible to tell the level of detail possible from the lens, from that 3x shot, because you hand-held. It would be unacceptable for a live image, but that might not be the fault of the lens just the fact it was hand-held.

I don't think it is possible to hand-hold any camera/lens combo at 3:1 and get acceptable results (mayybe with a flash at 1/250, no way with natural light).

Jack

PS: From what I read of the 36-72 Nikon SE reviews its strengths were sharpness and bokeh, so it may well be an ideal choice ... so thanks again for the tip.

[David H. Hartman]

But the instructions that come in the box directly give the macro measurements achievable with each lens type, so I see no reason to question the manufacturer's own statistics

In the passed I found frequent errors in Nikon documents. Some where major errors. The last I remember were in the AF 70-180/4.5-5.6D ED Micro-Nikkor instructions.

Dave