Macro...zoom lenses?

colourofsound

colourofsound

Suspended / Banned
Messages
519
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
This seems to be only a vintage thing; but I'm seeing a bunch of zoom lenses with 'macro' switches on them on Japanese lenses from the 70s and 80s. I was mainly looking at getting one as a way to do negative scanning with my APS-C camera (there are some PK mount macro-zooms for £10 on ebay) but I am confused by this apparent combination of opposites!

So, how does a telephoto lens with a macro switch on it actually work? And are they any good?
 
colourofsound said:
This seems to be only a vintage thing; but I'm seeing a bunch of zoom lenses with 'macro' switches on them on Japanese lenses from the 70s and 80s. I was mainly looking at getting one as a way to do negative scanning with my APS-C camera (there are some PK mount macro-zooms for £10 on ebay) but I am confused by this apparent combination of opposites!

So, how does a telephoto lens with a macro switch on it actually work? And are they any good?
Click to expand...
Forty-years ago I had a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm that had a macro function. Seemed very good to me at the time,

There’s more than one version, mine was like this one:

That said, because it has ‘trombone’ style zoom control, it may not be the most suitable for use on a a copy stand due to zoom creep. In macro mode, the zoom effectively become a focus control, so any movement will affect focus. If I remember, closest focus is about 4-inches.

thenoisyshutter.com

Legacy Lens Review: Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f3.5 Macro Zoom - The Noisy Shutter

Sometimes price is a poor measure of value.
thenoisyshutter.com thenoisyshutter.com
 
Last edited:
No, get a dedicated macro lens and a lightbox or a film scanner.

Or a slide duplicator (but you need a full frame camera to use these effectively - you won't get the whole image using it on crop).
 
colourofsound said:
So, how does a telephoto lens with a macro switch on it actually work? And are they any good?
Click to expand...
When the lens elements are at their standard/telephoto MFD, the switch locks them together so they move as a unit. This essentially converts the focus mechanism into a helicoid extension tube function instead.

I'm unaware of any such lens that actually achieves macro reproduction; they are "near macro" at best (1:2). And old lenses designed for film are generally not up to the critical evaluation demands modern DSLR's allow/require (pixel peeping).
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
When the lens elements are at their standard/telephoto MFD, the switch locks them together so they move as a unit. This essentially converts the focus mechanism into a helicoid extension tube function instead.

I'm unaware of any such lens that actually achieves macro reproduction; they are "near macro" at best (1:2). And old lenses designed for film are generally not up to the critical evaluation demands modern DSLR's allow/require (pixel peeping).
Click to expand...
Cracking, this was what I was after. Some nerdy lens stuff. Cheers!
 
After "upgrading my Windows system to W11, I can't get my Epson flatbed scanner software to load/run. This has forced me to look at alternatives.. the easy one is to keep an old PC/laptop with an old windows version specifically for scanning.
I tried one of those copying stands that are intended to use a phone to image the negative held on the base over an illuminated patch. The stand worked well, but my phone camera is a long way off being good enough. The 35mm negative holder/light table is very good and is now used regularly.
An option I am working with at the moment is to photograph the 35mm negs with my APS-C Samsung NX camera. One lens gets quite close but not enough, the neg image occupies around 1/6 to 1/8 of the digital image. I tried a no-name macro lens addition that fits on the filter thread of the lens. It has several elements. It got close, but the IQ was pretty poor. I then tried another add-on filter lens, a Sigma AML-1 close-up lens filter (single element as far as I can see). This, with a zoom lens (the best of the few I have) fills about 40-50% of the area of the image and gives very nice image quality with high enough resolution.
I am still working on the process of scanning this way. A slight curvtaure of the film can give out of focus areas, so I added some packing to the light table to hold the film more firmly. I think that this will be the way forward for me, with a bigger light table. I can easily extend it to medium format if necessary.

(Note: my PC runs on Ubuntu, a version of Linux. The Windows system (dual boot) is necessary for the few applications that will not run on Linux, the epson scanner being only one of several.)
 
Cluster said:
A slight curvtaure of the film can give out of focus areas, so I added some packing to the light table to hold the film more firmly. I think that this will be the way forward for me, with a bigger light table. I can easily extend it to medium format if necessary.
Click to expand...

I bought some photo frame glass from Amazon to hold the negs flat on the light box.

Cheap too.
 
As I wrote my last post, I got my "macro" lens filter out to check its make and size. I hadn't realised that the outer part, with one of the two elements, unscrews.
I quickly tried the remaining single lens on my "scanner camera" and it looks as if it will allow closer focus than my Sigma add-on lens.
There's plenty of scope for experimentation and I have found, pretty good results......... apart from the post scan work: convert to positive, crop etc...
 
I have a film era Sigma 50mm f2.8 which is a 1:1 macro and it's good enough for me and could be a cheap option if there are any on ebay. I also have some close up filters which are again good enough for me.

I don't know if I'd bother with a zoom "macro" but I suppose the results are what count but I would want to know what the minimum focus distance is and if I can get the subject big enough in the frame. I'd then want to think about optical performance and if the lens was good enough. Old lenses could be perfectly good enough for some not too demanding users.
 
woof woof said:
I don't know if I'd bother with a zoom "macro" but I suppose the results are what count but I would want to know what the minimum focus distance is and if I can get the subject big enough in the frame. I'd then want to think about optical performance and if the lens was good enough. Old lenses could be perfectly good enough for some not too demanding users.
Click to expand...

This ^

These macro-zoom lenses are also not flat field lenes, so will have some form of field curvature, this can though be corrected for in LR/PS or other editing tools. A true Macro lens will be flat field.

Rather than buy one of these, I would suggest that @colourofsound considers using extension rings instead, their are Fuji ones but also ones from other suppliers which have theh same functionality. Using tehse with one of your existing Fuji lenses will give you teh magnification you require (but again you will have field curvature issues to resolve)

To magnify from crop to FF you are looking at requiring a magnification in the order x0.69, but realistically unless you 'must' have the negative filling the field of view, then cropping the negative out of a 24MP image is not really an issue so anything between x0.5 and x0.69 magnification will probably do.

This table will help (extension rings can also be stacked to give more magnication at the expenses of a loss of light (not an issue in this scenario) and an even shorter working distance.


@colourofsound, which Fuji lenses do you have?
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
@colourofsound, which Fuji lenses do you have?
Click to expand...

OK from your posts on Flickr you have the 27mm, 18-55mm 'kit' and XC50-230mm lenses

With the 11mm extension tube you will get the required magnification but this is at the wide end of the lens, with a working distance of only 11mm and will also result in excess field curvature

With your 27mm lens, a 16mm extension tube would give you roughly the right magnification with a 60mm focal length

Your 50-230mm lens has a very large working distance from the off, 905mm so isn't going to be suitable.

Personally I'd consider getting the Viltrox extension tube kit and experimenting with the 18-55 and 27mm lenses - aimining to get say a 12MP crop out of the centre would give potentially a usuable working distance and reduce field curvature.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
OK from your posts on Flickr you have the 27mm, 18-55mm 'kit' and XC50-230mm lenses

With the 11mm extension tube you will get the required magnification but this is at the wide end of the lens, with a working distance of only 11mm and will also result in excess field curvature

With your 27mm lens, a 16mm extension tube would give you roughly the right magnification with a 60mm focal length

Your 50-230mm lens has a very large working distance from the off, 905mm so isn't going to be suitable.

Personally I'd consider getting the Viltrox extension tube kit and experimenting with the 18-55 and 27mm lenses - aimining to get say a 12MP crop out of the centre would give potentially a usuable working distance and reduce field curvature.
Click to expand...
Cracking info; thanks a lot for this. Always more to consider than you think! NB the 27mm is the TTartisan rather than Fuji; doesn't make a huge difference but theres quite a lot of distortion at wide open on the TTA. I guess you'd just chuck it to f8 anyway for something like this.
 
Last edited:
colourofsound said:
Cracking info; thanks a lot for this. Always more to consider than you think! NB the 27mm is the TTartisan rather than Fuji; doesn't make a huge difference but theres quite a lot of distortion at wide open on the TTA. I guess you'd just chuck it to f8 anyway for something like this.
Click to expand...

You could even try your Pentax MF lenses with the extension tubes

Yes personally I’d drop the lens down a bit
 
Mr Perceptive said:
These macro-zoom lenses are also not flat field lenses, so will have some form of field curvature,
Click to expand...

This, flat plane of focus is a good thing in other situations. I love what they do when I'm taking "in their faces" red squirrels pics
 
colourofsound said:
For the sake of £10 it seems silly not to pick one up for scientific purposes
Click to expand...

There's no reason if £10 isn't a problem. My experience of many of these older zoom 'macro' lenses when they were new is that they would do typically 1:3 or 1:4 and the quality in terms of detail was probably a bit lower than a budget phone cam now.

If you're serious about scanning like this then consider the old plastic fantastic Cosina:https://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk/p...ens----minolta--sony-a-mount-fit_used-9310079 or a genuine Minolta MD 50mm macro https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Minolta-50mm-f/3.5-MD-Macro-Rokkor-|-1018861_400279.html
 
Cluster said:
After "upgrading my Windows system to W11, I can't get my Epson flatbed scanner software to load/run. This has forced me to look at alternatives.. the easy one is to keep an old PC/laptop with an old windows version specifically for scanning
Click to expand...
Nah! just partition your hard drive and you can then install win7 (32bits) up to win 10 ..once you have two hard drives, use "easybcd" program (free) to boot into the different drives.
You should be able to transfer your MS licence (serial no) from old computer onto your main computer (for the partitioned drive) if you have the installation disks........if not and if you can't get say win 7 from MS then you can download it off the net. If you don't have a licence (serial no) say for win 7 there are even workarounds for that...on the net.
 
Last edited:
I didn't want to go off topic, but on scanning...

Other options would be to use ViewScan on Win11, or run Win10 or Win 7 etc. using VirtualBox under Win11.
 
Kevin Allan said:
It was quite some time ago, but I'm sure I remember running Vuescan on Ubuntu, with an Epson V700 scanner
Click to expand...

Can confirm VueScan is still available for Linux. You can download for free to check if it'll work with your* particular setup and scanner, though any scans from the free version will be watermarked.



* "your" as in @Cluster or anyone else using Linux, not Kevin whom I quoted for context.
 
Apologies to the OP for the diversion of the thread........ I'll start a new thread to ask about scanning options/Windows etc.
 
For your application I can highly recommend a m42 Vivitar 55mm f2.8 1:1 macro lens. On an ASP-C would give a fov of a 90mm and would give edge to edge sharpness even at wider apertures. I picked one up for around £60 of the bay and in terms of IQ it is easily as good as my much more modern( and vastly more expensive) Sigma macro lenses. Its fully manual but would work very well shooting negs or slides in a controlled environment on a tripod. I think there are several brand variants of the same design usually found at similar prices if you can't find the Vivitar version.
 
Last edited:
RyanB said:
For your application I can highly recommend a m42 Vivitar 55mm f2.8 1:1 macro lens. On an ASP-C would give a fov of a 90mm and would give edge to edge sharpness even at wider apertures. I picked one up for around £60 of the bay and in terms of IQ it is easily as good as my much more modern( and vastly more expensive) Sigma macro lenses. Its fully manual but would work very well shooting negs or slides in a controlled environment on a tripod. I think there are several brand variants of the same design usually found at similar prices if you can't find the Vivitar version.
Click to expand...
Any PK options? I have a PK adapter already (and a Pentax MX…)
 
colourofsound said:
Any PK options? I have a PK adapter already (and a Pentax MX…)
Click to expand...
They exist but as to how common they are I'm not sure . I see one on eBay but it's going for nearly £100 which would make buying a M42 one with a new adapter the cheaper option. I got mine bidding so it was cheaper than the buy it now options I see about.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
A 90mm FOV means that your 35mm negative will only be 2,333 pixels in the long side resulting in a 3.26 MP image (a very significant crop) - I’d consider that not worth getting out of bed for!!!
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean. It's a ff lens which would be used on an asp-c body hence changing the effective focal length by the crop factor. It won't change the pixel count of the sensor as I understand it. Maybe I worded it badly.
 
RyanB said:
Not sure what you mean. It's a ff lens which would be used on an asp-c body hence changing the effective focal length by the crop factor. It won't change the pixel count of the sensor as I understand it. Maybe I worded it badly.
Click to expand...

OK if its an FF lens, then the FOV will be 1/1.5 * 90 = 60mm which would give 4000 px on the long side of a 35mm negative on the OP's Fuji X-T20 camera giving a 10.6MP resultant image for a 35mm neagtive, much more acceptable
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
OK if its an FF lens, then the FOV will be 1/1.5 * 90 = 60mm which would give 4000 px on the long side of a 35mm negative on the OP's Fuji X-T20 camera giving a 10.6MP resultant image for a 35mm neagtive, much more acceptable
Click to expand...
It's a 55mm ff lens I was recommending, I missed the fact the op had a 'Fuji' aps-c body and calculated the crop factor by 1.6 instead of 1.5. Either way as I understand it this won't affect the pixel count of the image/ sensor just the effective focal length of the 55mm lens. Filling the frame with the negative should still result in the full 24MP the sensor is capable of, the camera would just need to be a bit further away from the negative than the same lens on a ff body to account for the increased effective focal length.
 
Last edited:
RyanB said:
It's a 55mm ff lens I was recommending, I missed the fact the op had a 'Fuji' asp-c body and calculated the crop factor by 1.6 instead of 1.5. Either way as I understand it this won't affect the pixel count of the image/ sensor just the effective focal length of the 55mm lens. Filling the frame with the negative should still result in the full 24MP the sensor is capable of, the camera would just need to be a bit further away from the negative than the same lens on a ff body to account for the increased effective focal length.
Click to expand...
Ok I misread your initial post (sorry), if it’s a 1:1 macro you will indeed be able to fill the whole APSc sensor by adjusting the working distance
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top