Old Nikon lenses with new DSLR camera

The most rigorous test for flatness of field and resolution is a flat target, parallel to the film plane. A curved subject is only in focus in a very narrow plane, which makes it impossible to make an objective comparison between lenses. Any such comparison consists of several components, the weakest of which usually dominates the results, including lens resolution, focus accuracy, sensor resolution, and of course, the subject.

Corollary: If you can't see the difference, the test is deficient. In measurement science, we like to see a 4 to 1 difference between the accuracy of the method and the object under test.

Corollary: If you can't see the difference, the test is deficient.

or there is no difference!

 

The most rigorous test for flatness of field and resolution is a flat target, parallel to the film plane. A curved subject is only in focus in a very narrow plane, which makes it impossible to make an objective comparison between lenses.

Right. That's why we're discussing reversed enlarger lenses used for focus stacking of 3D objects.

 

I suspect any green/magenta areas disappear (get averaged out) as the focused plane is shifted over the object and the software blends the individual frames.

"Old Nikon lenses with new DSLR camera"

Runaway thread "?

Runaway thread "?

Nah, reversed 1967 El Nikkor 80mm f5.6 on a 2020 D850.....:D

Edited January 1, 2021 by mike_halliwell

In the real world, there's always a difference. That difference may be obscured by the test design and quality of the measurements. When comparing lenses, I look at the corners, not just the center. In the test images posted above, a reading glass would fare as well as a Micro-Nikkor.

When comparing lenses, I look at the corners, not just the center.

Indeed, but that's the magic of stacking.

 

To misquote from a certain Matrix film, "there are no corners"...

 

with stacking. If it's not good it becomes transparent.

 

Admittedly, if the corners are AWFUL, they will still be bad in a stacked image.... maybe that's why enlarger lenses for MF are good for 35mm stacking?

Ed, another poster criticised the use of a flat subject - film.

So I wish you armchair critics would make your minds up!

 

Anyway, this is indeed wandering way off topic for this thread, so I've transferred a repeat of this test to a new thread in 'Mirrorless Digital Cameras' here.

If you wish to evaluate flatness of field or resolution objectively, then a flat target is the appropriate choice. If you with to evaluate subjective attributes like bokeh, then a 3D scene with an OOF background would be better. I think I qualified my statements adequately in my posts.

By using a simple M39 flange adapter, but connecting the lens direct to the camera body is pretty useless. You need a bellows with a Nikon fitting at the camera end. This needn't be a Nikon bellows. For years I used a set of Pentax bellows with an M42-to-F adapter fitted. Plus an M42-to-M39 reducer at the lens end.

Thanks Joe! I do have a Nikon bellows collecting dust, so that is good motivation to un-dust.

 

And also thanks for taking the trouble to post your comparison images. :cool: You are right: for (my) practical applications in the field (= non-flat natural objects) a mid-range enlarger lens could work just fine.

Thanks Joe! I do have a Nikon bellows collecting dust, so that is good motivation to un-dust.

 

And also thanks for taking the trouble to post your comparison images. :cool: You are right: for (my) practical applications in the field (= non-flat natural objects) a mid-range enlarger lens could work just fine.

Some of those enlarger lenses do perfom well (depending on focal length and object distance) on extention tubes plus M39 converter too, so some combinations can be easyer to handle by replacing the bellows by PK11a , pk12, pk13 combo's ..

 

So you might want to do some experimenting with this also..

Indeed. You get what you pay for. Cheap enlarging lenses are not great, neither as enlarging lens nor as taking lens.

No. No. No. Well, new - yes. But, no - not now: dozens of stellar, very inexpensive enlarger lenses out there. I've collected 1,235 different (ie unique models of) enlarger lenses. I love at least fifty of them and only a handful cost over £100.

No. No. No. Well, new - yes. But, no - not now: dozens of stellar, very inexpensive enlarger lenses out there. I've collected 1,235 different (ie unique models of) enlarger lenses. I love at least fifty of them and only a handful cost over £100.

 

Yikes! I have ten and figured that was about 8 more than a rational number. Not even bush league. I'm chasing fouls for the Pony league!

I have used old Nikon AI lenses for years with fine results on DF, D750, D7200 and D810. Using two cameras at events, my old 135 2.8 or 180 2.8 will often outperform the 24-120 f4 or 28-300. I use a 55 1.2 for night shooting, again to good effect. Well worth pursuing, and good fun to boot. If you have pre AI lenses, they can be converted to AI at modest cost. Contact AI Conversions.

 

I thought AIS lenses were equal to those being made now. Are the AF D lenses superior?

I thought AIS lenses were equal to those being made now. Are the AF D lenses superior?

I can't think of a single AIS lens, that has a modern AF-S F or Z mount lens, that could get close to equal.

 

Some AF-D lenses are better than their AIS equivalent, but that's not so clear cut.

The AF-D 105 F2.8 Micro-Nikkor is optically better than its AF-S equivalent.

Indeed, but it won't auto focus on a Nikon Z body.

 

Mind you, AF in 1:1 macro isn't always useful.

I thought AIS lenses were equal to those being made now. Are the AF D lenses superior?

The AF-D Micro-Nikkor series lenses are all first rate. I sold my AIS Micro-Nikkor 200/4 after getting the AF-D Micro-Nikkor 200/4, the latter is better. I use the AF-D Micro-Nikkor 60/2.8 over the AIS Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8, but kept it. Never had a manual focus Micro-Nikkor 105. The AF-D Zoom Micro-Nikkor 70~180 is the best zoom I own.

The AF-D Zoom Micro-Nikkor 70~180 is the best zoom I own.

Now, that would be a treat in Z mount.....!!