Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 72,517   Posts: 1,598,202   Online: 753
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Alamo City, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,033

    35mm Tominon vs. 25mm Cine Ektar II for Macro on 6x9cm and/or 6x12cm

    The magnification range appears to be about the same and they both seem to perform well. The Tominon is easier to use because it screws straight into a Copal #1. Other than this, which lens would you keep to use on 6x9cm or 6x12cm at 10-20X and why? Also, do you know of any reverse adapters (combination of adapters) to fit the Ektar to the front of a shutter?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,612
    In my tests a 25/1.9 Cine Ektar II in good condition resolved 161 lp/mm at 10:1, 15:1 and 26:1 at f/2.8. It was worse at f/1.9 and at f/4. At 10:1 and 15:1 it beats two known good Zeiss 25/3.5 Luminars, neither tested at higher magnifications.

    The better of the two 35/4.5 Tominons I tested formally did 114 lp/mm at 10:1 and 13.3:1, 144 at 17.6:1 at f/4.5. It was worse at f/5.6.

    My adapter for the CE II was a crude lashup. Its time for you to start being creative. And don't object. If you don't like my results, replicate my trials -- you'll have to get a USAF 1951 on glass target -- and report the results.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Alamo City, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,033
    LOL... You're a good man, Dan, albeit a bit sharp-edged. Yes... I need to STFU and shoot.

    I'll sell the Tominon and keep the Cine Ektar. In fact, I have a full set of the Tominons I can sell. I kept the lot because it's a complete kit but I only really wanted the 17mm and 35mm FL. I've decided against ever trying the magnifications the 17mm is designed for so I don't need it. Since the Cine Ektar outperforms the 35mm Tominon then I don't need that either. The others in that kit I can do without too. I'm considering a 55mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor reverse mounted as a bridge between the 25mm and 105 Comparon or 135 Repro-Claron... whichever I decide to keep.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,612
    Don't give up the 17 Tominon, it isn't a bad lens and if you ever need the magnification requires usefully less extension than even a 25 mm lens.

    Thinking of which, you do know how much extension shooting at 20:1 with a 25 mm lens requires, don't you?

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Alamo City, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,033
    Yeah... I have a Chamonix v1 plus the extension rail and a 4" extension lens board so right around 600mm extension.

    BTW, I've had corrected the focus problem the Chamonix v1 had. I had a Maxwell screen installed per the technician recommended by Maxwell.
    Last edited by Old-N-Feeble; 08-11-2014 at 08:59 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,612
    Quote Originally Posted by Old-N-Feeble View Post
    Yeah... I have a Chamonix v1 plus the extension rail and a 4" extension lens board so right around 600mm extension.
    Interesting. Not enough for 20:1 with a 35 mm lens. Hold on to that 17/4 Tominon.

    By the way, what do you intend to shoot at those magnifications? And how do you plan to deal with the absence of depth-of-field?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Alamo City, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,033
    Very small stuff, Dan. Very small stuff. I may never be able to venture into roadside photography again so I may need to settle into studio still-lifes.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin