• Members 1662 posts
    Feb. 15, 2024, 8:52 p.m.

    That's interesting. I've heard several people mention that the El-Nikkor 50 mm N f/2.8 (I assume that's what you use, given how common these lenses are) is not particularly good for high magnification macro work. Reading up on it now, it seems that's only true at faster f-stops though... Stopping it down to f/8 makes it a pretty good option across the full frame image circle, when reversed. For my kind of shots corner sharpness is not particularly important most of the time, but I also haven't really used an El-Nikkor 50 mm for more than a couple of test shots, so I don't have any real experience on the matter... Where it shines (according to Marks tests on deltalenses) is in the close-up to infinity range, where it is among the best enlarging lenses ever, if memory serves me right.

    I agree. Would love to see some high magnification shots! 👍

    Here's a recent (around 2:1) of mine:
    live.staticflickr.com/65535/53524377373_489f9f6b13_b.jpg
    Color de-livery
    by simple.joy, on Flickr

  • Members 213 posts
    Feb. 22, 2024, 2:26 a.m.

    I have the older metal body EL-Nikkor 50 F2.8. Bought it years ago for the darkroom. Repurposed it for macro. Was considering getting the newer version and found out it wasn't as good for UV. So I haven't picked one up - yet. I was posting this to show the lens reversed on a bellows at 1:1 or greater. Looking at the info, I'm not sure it counts. The bugs were on the front window. The whole colony was the size of a nickel and this isn't the whole colony. So on a full frame it is more than lifesize. This was an experiment using the Pentax Q7 with reversed EL-Nikkor. Q7 has a 4.6X crop factor. So the sensor is probably smaller than the image. On the other hand a 4.6x crop works the lens very hard with 12mp focused in a very small area.

    Wish the window could have been cleaned before the shot :).

    Thanks for looking,
    barondla
    IMGP3440redbugssidelit2.jpg

    IMGP3440redbugssidelit2.jpg

    JPG, 481.0 KB, uploaded by barondla on Feb. 22, 2024.

  • Members 300 posts
    Feb. 22, 2024, 5:30 a.m.

    A great shot!😍
    Your EL-Nikkor looks very good in this. My newer EL-Nikkor N version is slightly soft and has an awful Chromatic Aberration at 1:1. Unfortunately I can't mount it reversed (yet).

  • Members 300 posts
    Feb. 22, 2024, 9:21 a.m.

    I made a comparison with three enlarging lenses EL-Nikkor N 50mm f/2.8, Focotar 50mm f/4.5 and Rodagon 50mm f/2.8. Mounted normally, non-reversed.

    The subject was some lichen on a small branch. Magnification around 1:1 with small variation coming from my different DIY lens mountings. I tried to focus at the greenish area in the yellow circle.

    Rodagon50mmf8_DSC3269.jpg

    There's small variation in brightnes too although the exposure time was the same - camera at M mode - and aperture was set to the same number 8 with every lense's aperture ring. Nikkor was almost 1/3 stop brighter than the two others.

    I thought to compare the Straight Out off Camera Jpegs but due to that exposure difference and CA problems in Nikkor I used RAWs processed them in my usual way in RawTherapee.

    Here EL-Nikkor SOOC
    detail_OOCJPG_elnikkor50mmf8_DSC3274.JPG

    EL-Nikkor converted from raw
    detail_RT_elnikkor50mmf8_DSC3274.jpg

    Focotar from raw
    detail_RT_Focotar50mmf8_DSC3272.jpg

    Rodagon from raw
    detail_RT_Rodagon50mmf8_DSC3269.jpg

    There's RT's automatic CA correction in every pic and the same amount of sharpening; in EL-Nikkor picture I manually added CA correction until it looked good. CA correction made it also a little sharper than the jpeg from camera; still not as sharp as the others.

    detail_RT_Rodagon50mmf8_DSC3269.jpg

    JPG, 65.3 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 22, 2024.

    detail_RT_Focotar50mmf8_DSC3272.jpg

    JPG, 65.5 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 22, 2024.

    detail_RT_elnikkor50mmf8_DSC3274.jpg

    JPG, 66.4 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 22, 2024.

    detail_OOCJPG_elnikkor50mmf8_DSC3274.JPG

    JPG, 65.2 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 22, 2024.

    Rodagon50mmf8_DSC3269.jpg

    JPG, 1.5 MB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 22, 2024.

  • Members 1662 posts
    Feb. 22, 2024, 1:58 p.m.

    Thanks for the information and your sample shot - looks good! It's interesting that some of the older El-Nikkors are significantly better at UV. From what I've heard it's the same with the 63 mm f/3.5 (older) and the 63 mm f/2.8 (newer) El Nikkors. However there are different reports about their qualities as taking lenses. Some seem to claim the older lens has higher resolution, others say the newer one is better. I only have the newer, so I can't compare it, but I can say for sure that that's a pretty great lens.

    bellflower.jpg

    bellflower.jpg

    JPG, 2.8 MB, uploaded by simplejoy on Feb. 22, 2024.

  • Members 1662 posts
    Feb. 22, 2024, 2:08 p.m.

    Thanks a lot fore the comparisons - it seems to confirm the findings of some of the macro experts I follow, that many El-Nikkors don't hold up quite as well for macro work. It's interesting and somewhat surprising, but probably can be explained in part by their optimization. After all they were not intended as taking lenses. It's similar for the Computar DL line of lenses btw. They're pretty good close-up lenses but not nearly as good at high magnification macro and (interestingly) also infinity...

    Here's the kind of shot they're really good at:

    live.staticflickr.com/65535/51331725965_2a082d922f_b.jpg
    Red carpet treatment
    by simple.joy, on Flickr

    live.staticflickr.com/65535/52369417736_3e880331f3_b.jpg
    Red dot design
    by simple.joy, on Flickr

    live.staticflickr.com/65535/51673361234_ab7859bcba_b.jpg
    Look at those fall colors - all SOOC!!!
    by simple.joy, on Flickr

    live.staticflickr.com/65535/52126424728_74cc94be09_b.jpg
    Vita-min-imalism.
    by simple.joy, on Flickr

  • Members 213 posts
    Feb. 22, 2024, 6:05 p.m.

    @TimoK thanks for the excellent comparison. You put a lot of work into this shoot out. Much appreciated. You probably mentioned in a previous thread which version Focotar 50 this is?

    Lens coatings are likely one reason the newer EL-Nikkors are worse at UV. My metal 50 has very little coating. Faster lenses also tend to use thicker, or more elements. Glass doesn't pass UV well, so more is bad. The "accidental UV" 35mm F3.5 wideangle lenses all fail when moving to the F2.8 models.

    The reason some of the same model EL-Nikkors perform better than others could come down to unit to unit variation. We aren't using the lenses for their designed purpose and Nikon's quality control tests might not even measure these parameters. The difference in brightness between different lenses is because F stops are theoretical. T stops measure the actual light transmitted.
    @simplejoy I really like the creativity of your paint brush image.
    Superb images everyone,
    Thanks for sharing,
    barondla

  • Members 300 posts
    Feb. 23, 2024, 5:40 p.m.

    I agree, we are outside of their optimal range. But we can try. Some lenses are good at close-ups and landscapes. EL-Nikkor N 80mm is said to be one of those. imaging.nikon.com/imaging/information/story/0064/index.html

    It is this deltalenses.com/product/leitz-wetzlar-focotar-50-lfe-4-5-v5/
    Maybe it's a Schneider lens.

    My Rodagon looks like this and serial number is between numbers they mention but there's a lot of flare for a multicoated lens.
    deltalenses.com/product/rodenstock-rodagon-50-2-8-2-v1/

    That is very probably the reason.

    Because I was a little disappointed with my EL-Nikkor I made some shots at their optimal focus distance around 1:10. These pictures are cropped from OOCjpgs. I used quite hard led spotlight.

    EL-Nikkor at f/2.8 very little CAs visible at the unsharp area left
    f2.8_el-nikkor_detail_DSC3291.JPG

    Rodagon 50mm at f/2.8 I like this flare as an effect but it was almost impossible to focus.
    2.8_rodagon_detail_DSC3300.JPG

    EL-Nikkor at f/8 looks good, usable quality.
    f8_el-nikkor_detail_DSC3287.JPG

    Rodagon 50mm at f/8 This was the sharpest, no flare
    8_rodagon_detail_DSC3304.JPG

    8_rodagon_detail_DSC3304.JPG

    JPG, 453.6 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 23, 2024.

    f8_el-nikkor_detail_DSC3287.JPG

    JPG, 457.5 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 23, 2024.

    2.8_rodagon_detail_DSC3300.JPG

    JPG, 361.8 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 23, 2024.

    f2.8_el-nikkor_detail_DSC3291.JPG

    JPG, 394.9 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 23, 2024.

  • Members 213 posts
    Feb. 24, 2024, 2:19 a.m.

    Super comparison. Have you ever tested the EL-Nikkor at F4-5.6? I've heard they are optimized 1-2 stops down.
    Thanks,
    barondla

  • Members 300 posts
    Feb. 24, 2024, 5:53 a.m.

    Yes I did. In my test at 1:10 magnification F8 was the best aperture for every three lens. Unfortunately I did not take F11 shots.
    At 1:1 and bigger magnifications bigger apertures are recommended due to diffraction. I don't have my own experience of that enough.

    EL-Nikkor 50mm at f/4
    f4_el-nikkordetail_DSC3290.JPG

    EL-Nikkor 50mm at f/5.6
    f5.6_elnikkor_detail_DSC3289.JPG

    I forgot the Focotar shot from my previous post. It was the weakest performer in my comparison at 1:10 magnification. But there's so many possible sources of errors. Don't take these too seriously.

    Focotar 50mm F4.5 at f/8
    8_focotar_detail_DSC3299.JPG

    8_focotar_detail_DSC3299.JPG

    JPG, 462.3 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 24, 2024.

    f5.6_elnikkor_detail_DSC3289.JPG

    JPG, 430.5 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 24, 2024.

    f4_el-nikkordetail_DSC3290.JPG

    JPG, 425.6 KB, uploaded by TimoK on Feb. 24, 2024.

  • Members 1662 posts
    March 1, 2024, 4:37 p.m.
  • Members 1555 posts
    March 1, 2024, 4:44 p.m.

    I particularly like the second and third ones here 😍 👍🏻

  • Members 300 posts
    March 1, 2024, 5:05 p.m.

    In my books the name Xenon means money! Or even much more money! They are no more cheap lenses because the movie makers love them.
    Your pictures show why.

  • Members 1662 posts
    March 2, 2024, 4:48 p.m.

    Thank you!

    Thanks a lot! Yes, the various Cine-Xenons are not cheap usually... however these industrial versions are pretty much unknown, so from time to time you can be lucky and find one for reasonable prices. They don't have the coverage to be used as taking lenses at infinity (at full-frame) but for close-up shots, they are certainly highly interesting lenses.

    They're also very good high magnification macro lenses, when used reversed:

    live.staticflickr.com/65535/53539288628_0935871377_b.jpg
    You know this Un-Sung Buddy?
    by simple.joy, on Flickr

    live.staticflickr.com/65535/53539648263_9266cb3fae_b.jpg
    Tear‘o‘rise
    by simple.joy, on Flickr

  • Members 213 posts
    March 2, 2024, 5:53 p.m.

    The gear colors are exceptional and I like the composition. The lens is a fine performer.
    Thanks for sharing,
    barondla

  • Members 300 posts
    March 12, 2024, 6:22 p.m.

    A shadow on the wall. (Empty glass)

    shadow.jpg

    Sinaron Digital 5.6/135mm

    shadow.jpg

    JPG, 7.0 MB, uploaded by TimoK on March 12, 2024.

  • Members 213 posts
    March 16, 2024, 6:23 a.m.

    Very moody image. I like it. @TimoK the B&W is great with this subject.
    Thanks for sharing,
    barondla

  • Members 208 posts
    March 19, 2024, 12:31 p.m.

    I've not yet shot a negative through my Delta77 projector lens, (which gives roughly a 120 degree FOV on my 5x4) but here's one showing an image on the ground glass
    live.staticflickr.com/65535/53597640765_f009982b68_b.jpgdelta 77 - deluxe & GG by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

    Unfortunately shooting square on with digital exaggerates the vignetting, but hope fully film will be more tolerant.