Macro lenses for a digital back

[shlomibe]

Hi,


I have a digital back (56x36mm) and I would like to use it to shoot products - tabletop and macro.

I have a Schneider Digitar 120 N lens which should cover tabletop.

But the question is what to do about macro: 1:2 - 1:1.

I would like to close aperture as much as possible - Schneider engineers told me that they approve aperture of up to 8 in 1:1, but of course I need more. So I would like the lens which handles diffraction best.

Regarding the question of digital or non digital lenses - some people tell me there is a big difference, other people say the old lenses are just fine for a digital back.

The lenses I am thinking of are:

Schneider Digitar 120 M
Schneider Macro Symmar HM
Rodenstock Apo Macro Sironar Digital 120
Rodenstock Apo Macro Sironar 120
Nikon 120 AM ED Macro

Any opinion or experience would be much appreciated.

[Brian Ellis]

I don't think many people here use a digital back, in fact some don't even use a digital camera. You'd probably get more and better responses if you posted these questions in a forum more oriented to digital cameras/backs than this one is.

[Bob Salomon]

The digital macro lenses will perform best on digital backs and roll film.

Non-digital lenses do not deliver the best results as they are designed for film at smaller apertures then digital lenses, have lower resolution, greater distortion and their color curves are not as good. Additionally analog lenses were made for a medium that sags, digital sensors do not sag. Film has several layers of emulsion, digital is one pixel thick. Lastly the light rays that pass through a digital lens strike the pixels on a digital sensor differently then the rays through an analog lens so the edges of the pixels are more evenly illuminated with a digital lens.

Also bear in mind, the analog lenses that you listed reach optimal aperture at f22 while that small an aperture will be well into diffraction on your size sensor. That is why the digital lenses reach optimal aprerture at f8 to 11. So using film lenses at optimal apertures on digital backs will always lead to degraded images due to diffraction.

The Rodenstock Apo Macro Digital is corrected for 1:5 to 2:1 which menas that this is the ideal lens for table top to 2:1 and will outperform what you are using now.

[Oren Grad]

TAlso bear in mind, the analog lenses that you listed reach optimal aperture at f22 while that small an aperture will be well into diffraction on your size sensor. That is why the digital lenses reach optimal aprerture at f8 to 11. So using film lenses at optimal apertures on digital backs will always lead to degraded images due to diffraction.

That's right, but Shlomi has already told us that he knows he's going to need to go there to achieve the required depth, and he's asking whether there's any difference in how lens performance degrades when the situation forces you to stop down past optimal aperture.

[Bob Salomon]

That's right, but Shlomi has already told us that he knows he's going to need to go there to achieve the required depth, and he's asking whether there's any difference in how lens performance degrades when the situation forces you to stop down past optimal aperture.

Yes, he will be well into diffraction on that format. That is why digital lenses, including macro digital lenses, are optimized for f8 to 11 rather then f22.

[shlomibe]

That's right, but Shlomi has already told us that he knows he's going to need to go there to achieve the required depth, and he's asking whether there's any difference in how lens performance degrades when the situation forces you to stop down past optimal aperture.

Pretty much.
More accurately - I know there's a difference (in how different MF/SF lenses handles the same apertures.)
I want to know which current or past LF lens has the best diffraction resistance - from user experience, not from manufacturer data, which I have already read.

I know some MF lenses have very good diffraction resistance, and I would like to compare them to the best ones from LF.
In the past I've tried Digitar M, and it was not any better than the comparable Mamiya.

The answer: "best sharpness is in f/8" does not answer the question: "which lens has the best sharpness at f/22?"
Schneider told me: "all lenses are crap in f/22", which in my experience is not true.

BTW I will take film experience as well, if someone tried more than one lens and minded the diffraction performance.

[Bob Salomon]

Pretty much.
More accurately - I know there's a difference (in how different MF/SF lenses handles the same apertures.)
I want to know which current or past LF lens has the best diffraction resistance - from user experience, not from manufacturer data, which I have already read.

I know some MF lenses have very good diffraction resistance, and I would like to compare them to the best ones from LF.
In the past I've tried Digitar M, and it was not any better than the comparable Mamiya.

The answer: "best sharpness is in f/8" does not answer the question: "which lens has the best sharpness at f/22?"
Schneider told me: "all lenses are crap in f/22", which in my experience is not true.

BTW I will take film experience as well, if someone tried more than one lens and minded the diffraction performance.

Apo Sironar-S

Back in the early 80s or late 70s Modern Photography devoted an issue to comparing lenses from all medium format cameras and also included a Super Technika V, 23b with 3 Rodenstock lenses; 65mm Grandagon-N 4.5, Sironar N MC 105mm and 180mm.
Compared to all other MF cameras; Hasselblad, Mamiya, Pentax, Rollei SL66 and 6006, etc. The lenses on the Linhof outperformed them all. In many cases significantly. The Apo Sironar-S will be even better.

[shlomibe]

Thank you.

I am seeing "Rodenstock 100mm f/5.6 Apo-Sironar-S", but not a macro.

Is there one?


Regarding what you said - Hasselblad and Mamiya have made tremendous progress in the past 15 years in the quality of their glass, and specifically sharpness at all apertures, so I'm not sure the results from the 1970's are relevant.

[Bob Salomon]

Thank you.

I am seeing "Rodenstock 100mm f/5.6 Apo-Sironar-S", but not a macro.

Is there one?


Regarding what you said - Hasselblad and Mamiya have made tremendous progress in the past 15 years in the quality of their glass, and specifically sharpness at all apertures, so I'm not sure the results from the 1970's are relevant.

No they would not be relevant. But there has been no other article or test like it since that compared test results like this in a U S publication. Color Foto Magazine in Germany did one called Sharp Shooting several years ago. The results were very much the same.

[Bob Salomon]

No, the Rodenstock analog macro lenses are the 120 Apo Macro Sironar and the 180 Apo Macro Sironar. These replaced the earlier 210 Makro Sironar and the 300 Makro Sironar several years ago. All would be greatly inferior optically on your back to the 120 Apo Macro Sironar Digital.