Ai Micro 55mm/f3.5 for copying 6x6 slides

[Akira]

I found a couple of 120 size RTP II films that recorded some UV flower images in 6x6 format.  I got a 6x6 film holer for the LPL enlarger to hold the frame flat.  But currently I don't have any lens suitable for digitizing the images.

The largest possible magnification factor would be 1/2.33 when the frame is shot with a full-frame camera (56 / 24 = 2.33).  So, a Micro Nikkor 55mm should do the job without an extension tube.

However, I've heard that the Ais Micro 55/2.8 suffers from hotspot at a certain magnification at a certain lighting condition, if I remember correctly.  So, I'm looking at an Ai or K 55mm/f3.5.  I'm using the lens with Sigma fp via Novoflex adapter, so I'm fine either with Ai or non-Ai.

Any advice or share of experiences would be appreciated.

[pluton]

It will interesting to hear any experiences with the hotspot/flare of the 55/2.8.  I haven't owned a 55/2.8 in digital times, but always think I'd like to have one for the jobs that the Zeiss 50/2Makro (big and heavy) or Nikon Micro 55/3.5 (no floating elements) fall short on.
 I can offer the [common] knowledge that the 55/3.5 K/Ai is optimized for 1:10, and detail rendering performance falls off outside that magnification.  What is acceptable for given job is up to the user, of course. I think it'd be a close contest between the 55/3.5 K/Ai and a mid-line scanner such as my Epson V600.

[Zang]

I used 55mm f2.8 on D300 for reproducing 35mm negative and it worked fine. I do not notice any flare issue, but to be honest, I have not used it much during 20 years of the ownership If you know how to reproduce the flare issue, let me know and I can do testing.

Cheers,
Zang

[Seapy]

I use the micro 55mm f/2.8 regularly and have never noticed any hotspot or other undesirable traits, I regard it as my go to lens at that focal length, unless I need the 50mm 1.4D. That is with D1, D1x, D200, D200IR, D200 Full Spectrum, D300S, D3 and D800.  It replaced my Micro 60mm f/2.8 AF which I disposed of on fleabay.

[Roland Vink]

I can offer the [common] knowledge that the 55/3.5 K/Ai is optimized for 1:10, and detail rendering performance falls off outside that magnification.  What is acceptable for given job is up to the user, of course. I think it'd be a close contest between the 55/3.5 K/Ai and a mid-line scanner such as my Epson V600.

it is true the 55/3.5 is optimised for 1:10, but the drop-off on either side is not great. Stopping down should fix any issues, I imagine the shots would be taken around f/8 for best performance, it also gives a little more DoF which helps if the film is not perfectly flat.

[Akira]

Thank you, Keith, Zang, Robert and Roland, for sharing your experiences and info!

The flare issue was reported by the pro-phogog friend of mien who is experienced in product photography.  I asked about the issue again, and he says the 55/2.8 Micro tends to flare slightly when a flash is set in a slightly agains-the-light position.  I'm concerned about that because copying slide film is essentially an unavoidably inherent contrasty against-the-light situation.

In this case, the sharpness and even image quality only within the 24x24mm area on a full-frame format, so the fall-off of 55/3.5 could be tolerable, if it doesn't suffer from the flare issue.

[Birna Rørslett]

I can confirm the f/2.8 is more susceptible to flare than its  slower f/3.5 sibling.

[John Geerts]

A bit off-topic, but  ...  despite some minor non-optical drawbacks, I like the first 'AF' 55/2.8  Micro-Nikkor because it is so versatile.

https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/1stafnikkor/AF55mmmicro.htm

[Zang]

Akira,

From another side, the way I did the lighting was, I used a LED panel placed away from the back side of the negative. Additionally, I put a piece of white plastic shopping bag in between. The light was pretty soft and even.

Thanks,
Zang

[Akira]

Thank you, Birna, John and, again, Zang, for the confirmation and suggestions.

So, 55/2.8 seems to be avoided at least for the purpose.  I liked the concept of the AF version with the simpler optical construction and the ability to go up to 1:1, but I'm not sure if the flare issue is addressed.

I'm going to use iPad with the lightbox app I found as the light source.  I need to keep some distance between the screen and the slide and put some sort of diffuser inbetween to erase the grid pattern which is otherwise clearly projected onto the transparency.

[John Geerts]

So, 55/2.8 seems to be avoided at least for the purpose.  I liked the concept of the AF version with the simpler optical construction and the ability to go up to 1:1, but I'm not sure if the flare issue is addressed.

I am not aware of a flare issue with my 55/2.8 AF.   Does a great job. Use it a lot with flash photography.  For copy of slides I used the 105/2.8 in order to get one slide per photo, and a Huion LB4 Led Light Pad as light source. That has an advantage to put the slides on the pad.

[Akira]

I am not aware of a flare issue with my 55/2.8 AF.   Does a great job. Use it a lot with flash photography.  For copy of slides I used the 105/2.8 in order to get one slide per photo, and a Huion LB4 Led Light Pad as light source. That has an advantage to put the slides on the pad.

Thank you for the suggestion.  I found that the LPL negative carrier holds the trasparency about 1.5cm above its bottom (iPad screen), which will keep the grid pattern out of the DOF and offer enough room and space for a diffuser.

I thought about an EL-Nikkor 50, 75 or 80mm for the purpose, but a Micro Nikkor can be used for different purposes after the slide copy work is done.

Even in Japan, the AF Micro 55/2.8 is rarely seen in the second-hand market, and strolling around in Tokyo to find one under current situation isn't a good idea.

On the other hand, I do know a good and reliable source to get a near-mint Ai 55/3.5.   

[MEPER]

You could also consider a Coolscan 9000?
For my I have dedicated glass holder for 120 film. It works very well but some years ago I used it.
It is now a discontinued scanner and maybe you can find a cheap one in Tokyo?    …..I have not followed prices…...maybe they have dropped as I don't think many use them today.

Another option is that you know someone that has a scanner......and can scan the film strip you have. If it is just one roll of film...

[Hugh_3170]

The prices of Nikon's late model Coolscan scanners are  holding well and if anything are actually going up;  likewise major accessories such as the SF-210 bulk slide scanner.

I agree that the Coolscan 9000 (or the 8000) would be a good option to scan the 120 film that Akira has.

You could also consider a Coolscan 9000?
For my I have dedicated glass holder for 120 film. It works very well but some years ago I used it.
It is now a discontinued scanner and maybe you can find a cheap one in Tokyo?    …..I have not followed prices…...maybe they have dropped as I don't think many use them today.

Another option is that you know someone that has a scanner......and can scan the film strip you have. If it is just one roll of film...

[Akira]

MEPER and Hugh, thank you for the suggestion.

Film scanner would be handy, but I don't see any further use of it at all after having scanned 6-7 frames from three rolls of 120 films...  My rabbit hutch wouldn't allow to store a big thingy like a flatbed scanner.