Shoot Macro on 8x10 like Karl Blossfeldt

[Jim Noel]

Jim, the killer is magnification. Makes the effective aperture smaller than the nominal aperture set.

When I was testing lenses for work above 1:1 I found that the really good ones, e.g., Luminar, MacroNikkor, were best wide open, lost central resolution when stopped down at all. This wasn't quite true for a 25/1.9 Cine Ektar II. Superlative around 15:1, but better at f/2.8 than at f/1.9. Below f/2.8, the mush just got worse. Similar results for a reversed 55/2.8 MicroNikkor AIS. Best at f/4, central resolution was worse at smaller stops.

Your statement concerning aperture and magnification is well known to me.
I do not plan to use modern lenses. I will use some of my collection from the Blossfeld era.

[Tin Can]

Now I gotta reshoot my Shitake!

But first reassemble the S11 stand by myself. Not so easy.

I think I can.

[Dan Fromm]

Your statement concerning aperture and magnification is well known to me.
I do not plan to use modern lenses. I will use some of my collection from the Blossfeld era.

Jim, a lens is a lens is a lens. The same rules apply to all of them. Even cine lenses.

[Josh]

Jim, a lens is a lens is a lens. The same rules apply to all of them. Even cine lenses.

True, but older lenses won't be sharp wide open. All lenses will be softened at smaller apertures, but for many, they'll get to their sharpest at f/16 or so. If the lens is sharpest at f/2.8 then stopping down will soften it. Presumably, you'd want to use the lens at its sharpest aperture, so I think Jim's point is very resonable.

[Dan Fromm]

Josh, what matters is the effective aperture, not the aperture set. Effective aperture = aperture set * (magnification +1).

At 1:1, f/16 set is f/32 effective. At 30:1, f/16 set is nearly f/500. You might as well use a pinhole that's too small.