Free E-book on Close-up and Macro Lenses

[Frank Fremerey]

Thank you Michael, I adore your work!

[JKoerner007]

I will check on those page numbers. As for the Sigma 180mm (or anything in this article), it is only based on my own experience. No attempt is made to be complete. It is eclectic, based on what I use.

Understood.

Trouble is, if the strengths of a lens are not mentioned, the reader (who may not have experience with any) might shy away from a lens that would actually be more useful to him than one that is more useful to you.

Another example would be the 28mm. It can achieve levels of magnification almost none of the other lenses can achieve, just by reversing it. Not mentioning these details is a pretty big omission. (Again, not criticism, just suggestion for the next time you feel like running through the work.) It easily sharp enough for field work, too, when reversed, with ultra-smooth bokeh:



The 28mm not only is unique because it is wide, and goes 1:4, but it reverses too, making it exceptionally-useful in the field as one tiny/powerful tool.

As for the Otus 55 and the Noct Nikkor, not sure what you were after. To me, there is no comparison. It is apples and oranges. I love both of those lenses, but they are poles apart IMO. The Noct is a specialized lens in my work, wonderful because it is fast, but not well corrected and if not used VERY carefully, the result is nothing special. If used right, the Noct can be breathtaking.

The Zeiss Otus 55 is much more of a generally useful lens IMO, one that with a little extension (K1 Ring) can get close enough to be useful for the work I do. I use it all the time. I use the Noct occasionally.

Thanks. Is there any occasion where you might choose the Noct. over the Otus? (E.g., is there anything the Noct. can do exemplary that the Otus can't do at the same level?)

If so, please provide an example, if you don't mind.

The book itself is, as mentioned, a homemade job. I no longer have a staff of hundreds of people (LOL), so everything is done by me. I don't care to spend a lot of time looking for typos. I would rather be photographing. I just put it out there for those few who can benefit from it. I write an essay a day of Facebook (not about photography), so that keeps me busy. I would also like to illustrate each technique with images, but will have to save that for later this winter or when I feel like it. Thanks for the comments.

Understood. Would never suggest worrying about typos, but making the Table of Contents match the page numbers, and adding some elements with certain lenses that were omitted, might be worth the effort.

Minor quibbles/suggetions aside, it is a wonderful walk-through ... of scores of lenses ... that most of us have (or covet), so thanks for the tremendous effort of putting it together.

[Frank Fremerey]

I miss longer comments on the Large Format Nikkors and the Schneiders I recommend to you. I remember you commented on  these on the forum. I know that huge tiltability means a new field in stacking, but your thoughts are very interesting, if only to me...

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

Cheez, Michael, I understand why hardly anyone of those "arm-chair quartbacks" would never ever even think about taking this enormous effort to write something like you have done themselves.... talk is so darn cheap and there is way too much of that HERE. 

I had this myself when I published my macrolenses database. Got some many complaints, "this ain't right and that ain't", but guess what, nothing like this was there before and it has millions of hits now over the years and helped many, many macro shooters.

And it will be the same or better with your ebooks!!

[Michael Erlewine]

Another example would be the 28mm. It can achieve levels of magnification almost none of the other lenses can achieve, just by reversing it. Not mentioning these details is a pretty big omission. (Again, not criticism, just suggestion for the next time you feel like running through the work.) It easily sharp enough for field work, too, when reversed, with ultra-smooth bokeh:

The 28mm not only is unique because it is wide, and goes 1:4, but it reverses too, making it exceptionally-useful in the field as one tiny/powerful tool.

Thanks. Is there any occasion where you might choose the Noct. over the Otus? (E.g., is there anything the Noct. can do exemplary that the Otus can't do at the same level?)

I have the 28mm and will add it as I find time.

As for the Noct over the Otus. The Noct, like the APO-El Nikkor 105mm, has certain draw or "style" that is all its own. It makes it less of a general lens like the Otus 55 and more of a specialty lens, if I want that particular look. And it is fast. Because of its lack of correction, I have to be careful what I use it on. The  Zeiss Otus 55mm I can use anytime for anything.

[Matthew Currie]

About to head off for a fairly boring week of family stuff in Georgia so will be sure to have a copy on my computer for browsing. 

Anything that helps to bag a bug is worth reading.

[Michael Erlewine]

I miss longer comments on the Large Format Nikkors and the Schneiders I recommend to you. I remember you commented on  these on the forum. I know that huge tiltability means a new field in stacking, but your thoughts are very interesting, if only to me...

I will keep that in mind. However, almost all of the large-format lenses I have are very sharp, not very fast, but otherwise similar in many ways and fairly easy to lose. They each have their own style, but these are more similar IMO than different. The APO-El Nikkor 105mm has a very unique style that sets it apart in mind from the other industrial lenses. The two AM-ED Nikkors that I have (120 and 210) are great lenses and have their own style, but to me it is more utilitarian and less arty in style. All of the LF lenses I have are IMO good. Don't know what more to say.

I use them on various bellows of which I have a bunch, but mostly on the Cambo Actus Mini system, using Tilt to tie the near and the far ends of a subject together through a plane of focus... so that I can stack with less artifacts. I do this all in LiveView and by eye, not by any measurements or diagrams. I tilt or shift a lens until I like what I see in LiveView and take photographs. Simple.

[JKoerner007]

Cheez, Michael, I understand why hardly anyone of those "arm-chair quartbacks" would never ever even think about taking this enormous effort to write something like you have done themselves.... talk is so darn cheap and there is way too much of that HERE. 

I had this myself when I published my macrolenses database. Got some many complaints, "this ain't right and that ain't", but guess what, nothing like this was there before and it has millions of hits now over the years and helped many, many macro shooters.

And it will be the same or better with your ebooks!!

Might want to check yourself. I have actually written a 500+ page ebook (in small-type, not large type), which is sold on Amazon.

I also have a database ... with 800,000 biological taxa on it ... which took 4 years to complete ... so I very much have a deep respect, empathy, and understanding of what it takes to write a book ... as well as to construct a database.

Not everyone who comments is an "armchair quarterback" ... and not all criticism is said with a lack of appreciation for  the work of the author.

Some criticism is earnestly-designed to help the author make his already fine contribution better.

It is impossible for "one" person to see everything; the perspective of others is important.

One-liner praise, without actually reading the material, is only worth so much ...

[JKoerner007]

I have the 28mm and will add it as I find time.

As for the Noct over the Otus. The Noct, like the APO-El Nikkor 105mm, has certain draw or "style" that is all its own. It makes it less of a general lens like the Otus 55 and more of a specialty lens, if I want that particular look. And it is fast. Because of its lack of correction, I have to be careful what I use it on. The  Zeiss Otus 55mm I can use anytime for anything.

Thanks for the feedback, Michael, it is appreciated.

Check your PM.

[F2F3F6]

Thank you very much for your excellent work, Michael !

Some thoughts about it :
I wonder why you repeat some technical information twice (Nikkor 1,4/85 AFD page 73 and 74) or why there is no comment on the page 172 over the Zeiss S-Planar, a pretty good repro 1:1 lens (see coinimaging) ?
I also wonder if the Componon-S 4/80(p185-186) can be an Apo ? There are some lenses from Schneider that are labelled apo-componon but this one not...and for sure the focal lenght is not 120mm.
(I think you replicated  by mistake the infos of the Apo Digitar 120mm above...)
And I 've seen some errors like p98 Micro Nikkor 3,5/55 Auto and P-auto (corrected by R.Vink p99)
"There were two versions, one with a compensating diagram (diaphragm) (marked “P”) and one without (no “P” suffix)." It's the contrary : the compensating one is the non-P (just "auto") !
Also p.118, the lens shown is a 1:4/105 Micro Nikkor Ai (or maybe Ais), not the 105P (the belows lens) and it doesn't need an HS4 or HS8 hood, because it has a (long) integrated lenshood...(again corrected by Roland Vink)...

BUT all in all an excellent and complete work !

May I suggest  to add some lenses for the next edition, like Apo-Componons, Apo-Rodagons (there is a good 4/105 Apo-Rodagon, pretty light and very good speed for an enlarger lens-other 105's are 1:5,6) and Apo Rodagon "D" (duplicating) 1:4/75 (1:1), 1:4,5/75 (2:1) and 5,6/120 (2:1) ppretty common and cheap but very good...

Again thank you very much for all these informations and testing !

[Michael Erlewine]

Thank you very much for your excellent work, Michael !

Some thoughts about it :
I wonder why you repeat some technical information twice (Nikkor 1,4/85 AFD page 73 and 74) or why there is no comment on the page 172 over the Zeiss S-Planar, a pretty good repro 1:1 lens (see coinimaging) ?
I also wonder if the Componon-S 4/80(p185-186) can be an Apo ? There are some lenses from Schneider that are labelled apo-componon but this one not...and for sure the focal lenght is not 120mm.
(I think you replicated  by mistake the infos of the Apo Digitar 120mm above...)
And I 've seen some errors like p98 Micro Nikkor 3,5/55 Auto and P-auto (corrected by R.Vink p99)
"There were two versions, one with a compensating diagram (diaphragm) (marked “P”) and one without (no “P” suffix)." It's the contrary : the compensating one is the non-P (just "auto") !
Also p.118, the lens shown is a 1:4/105 Micro Nikkor Ai (or maybe Ais), not the 105P (the belows lens) and it doesn't need an HS4 or HS8 hood, because it has a (long) integrated lenshood...(again corrected by Roland Vink)...

BUT all in all an excellent and complete work !

May I suggest  to add some lenses for the next edition, like Apo-Componons, Apo-Rodagons (there is a good 4/105 Apo-Rodagon, pretty light and very good speed for an enlarger lens-other 105's are 1:5,6) and Apo Rodagon "D" (duplicating) 1:4/75 (1:1), 1:4,5/75 (2:1) and 5,6/120 (2:1) ppretty common and cheap but very good...

Again thank you very much for all these informations and testing !

I will try to correct what you point out as I find time. I have no intent to be complete. These are just lenses I have gotten my hands on. I do know how to be complete, howerver.... having created the largest music database in the world, the All-Music Guide, everything from 10" records on up, millions of data points, biographies, discographies, tracks, samples, etc. and etc. ... abeit with the help (at the time) of 150 full-time staff and 750 free-lance writers. Did the same thing with movies and have one of the two largest movie databases, complete with casts and characters. Also the most complete database on rock n' roll concert posters (donated to the Bentley Historical Library of the University of Michigan and elsewhere), and the largest library of astrology works, now part of the permanent collection at the University of Illinois. So, I am not afraid of tacking huge collections. This is just a rough look at lenses I have used.

[JKoerner007]

I noticed toward the end, you compiled a bottom line:

First Tier Lenses
APO El Nikkor 105mm f/5.6
Voigtlander 125mm f/1.4 APO-Lanthar
Nikkor “O” CRT 55mm f/1.2
Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO
Zeis135mm f/2.0 APO Sonnar

Second Tier
Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4 APO
Zeiss Otus 28mm f/1.4 APO
Zeiss Milvus 35mm f/1.4 G
Nikkor Printing Nikkor 150mm APO f/2.8
Nikkor Printing Nikkor 105mm APO f/2.8
Nikkor Printing Nikkor 95mm APO f/2.8
Leica Macro Elmarit-R 60mm f/2/8
Leica Macro Elmarit-R 100mm f/2/8

Third Tier
NOCT Nikkor 58mm f/1.2
Nikkor 16mm Fisheye f/3.5
Voigtlander 180mm f/1.4 APO-Lanthar
Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 90mm f/3.5 SL


While reading each individual account is nice, a 'bottom line' is also valuable, which the above tiers represent.

I have been asking about a good 55mm f/1.2 lens, and your placement of the Nikkor 55mm, f/1.2 CRT "O" in your top tier intrigues me. (Mis-named Micro-Nikkor, but no biggie.)

Anyway, a search here shows a whole thread topic to this lens.

I already have lenses 2 and 5 in your Top Tier ... and will likely be adding #s 1 and 3 by spring.

Still debating whether to keep the Zeiss 135 Apo ... since I keep reaching passed it to grab the Voigtlander 125 f/2.5 nine times out of 10 ... so in the end I will probably be left to your Top 3 in my stable.

Your #s 4 and 5 will be replaced by my own, which are the 28mm AI-S and the 20mm AI-S, for their close-focus capability. They have this ability properly-oriented (as you exactly describe on p. 103), with the added bonus of reversing for more extreme macro in the field, as reflected in the image up top.

Thanks again.

[Michael Erlewine]

I have been asking about a good 55mm f/1.2 lens, and your placement of the Nikkor 55mm, f/1.2 CRT "O" in your top tier intrigues me. (Mis-named Micro-Nikkor, but no biggie.)

Where did I misname something "Micro-Nikkor," page number please.

Also, what you are doing (as in field work) I did many years ago for decades, but age demands less of that, and also not interested in what I call "field-guide" photos at this time. I did plenty of that. In the last year and one-half I had major health problems that make it difficult for me to hike much. I have not mentioned it a lot, but here I am, just for clarification as to WHY I am not contemplating Mt. Everest these days.

I have no idea what you want to do with technical/bellows systems. Am I reading that right? You want to go into bellows tilt/shift work?

Aside from the CV-125, both of us are waiting for an Otus-level macro lens.

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

Might want to check yourself. I have actually written a 500+ page ebook (in small-type, not large type), which is sold on Amazon.

I also have a database ... with 800,000 biological taxa on it ... which took 4 years to complete ... so I very much have a deep respect, empathy, and understanding of what it takes to write a book ... as well as to construct a database.

Not everyone who comments is an "armchair quarterback" ... and not all criticism is said with a lack of appreciation for  the work of the author.

Some criticism is earnestly-designed to help the author make his already fine contribution better.

It is impossible for "one" person to see everything; the perspective of others is important.

One-liner praise, without actually reading the material, is only worth so much ...

Agreed, not everyone is, which I haven't intended to say and of course valuable contributions help!

[Akira]

Where did I misname something "Micro-Nikkor," page number please.

P167 as well as P6 (the index page).