• Ultraviolet Photography
  •  

Nikon 80mm f/5.6 EL-Nikkor: Nippon Kogaku Japan

Lens
22 replies to this topic

#1 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members+G
  • 1,830 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 03 January 2021 - 13:04

Finalized: Work in progress.
Last Update:
Nikon 80mm f/5.6 EL-Nikkor: Nippon Kogaku Japan

Manufacturer: Nikon
Manufacturer's lens designation: EL-NIKKOR 80mm f/5.6 Nippon Kogaku Japan
Currently manufactured: No
Lens type: Enlarger lens for film up to 56mm x 72mm ( Ø100mm )
Focal length: 80mm
Aperture range: f/5.6 – f/45, Manual, 8 blades
Design: 6 elements in 4 groups
Flange Focus distance: 70mm
Recommended magnification range*: 0.067x – 0.5x.
Optimal magnification *: 0.2x
Mount: M39 x 26tpi thread + hidden 32.5 x 0.5mm thread behind a built in step ring.
Sensor format/coverage: up to 56mm x 72mm ( Ø100mm ) at 0.2 x magnification
Front filter: 34.5 mm x 0.5 mm
Introduction year: pre 1960?
S/N of test object: 805773
* Definitions reversed from normal enlarger definition, referring to the motif not the negative-plane

Lens review (VIS), on the web:
Lens Manual on the web: http://www.savazzi.n...El-Nikkor_2.pdf

Image of test object:

Attached Image: IMG_2403.jpg Attached Image: IMG_2407.jpg Attached Image: IMG_2406.jpg Attached Image: IMG_2404.jpg

Transmittance Summary
Definitions of the parameters below
  • Range: The EL-NIKKOR Nippon Kogaku lens transmits 0-70% in an increasing slope from 315nm to 400nm.
  • TVISmax (%) = 88%
  • T400nm (%) = 84%
  • T365nm (%) = 67%
    This high percentage is an indicator for relatively short exposure time under typical UV-pass filtration peaking around 365 nm.
  • λUV HMvis(nm) = 349nm
  • λUV HM400 (nm) = 348nm
  • λUV Zero (nm) = 316nm
    These three values indicate that the lens is UV-capable into the upper UV-B range under appropriate filtration.

Spectral transmission graphs:
UV-NIR, EL-NIKKOR 80mm f/5.6, Nippon Kogaku Japan
Attached Image: EL-Nikkor 80 Nippon Kogaku full D.png
The transmission measurement accuracy into the end of NIR range is less good due to limitations in the light source.

UV, EL-NIKKOR 80mm f/5.6, Nippon Kogaku Japan
Attached Image: EL-Nikkor 80 Nippon Kogaku UV D.png

UV-Log, EL-NIKKOR 80mm f/5.6, Nippon Kogaku Japan
Attached Image: EL-Nikkor 80 Nippon Kogaku UV Log D.png
Numerical Spectra Data available: Yes

General comments about the UV-reach:
ffff


Filters and how to use them on this lens:
The front filter thread is rather odd, but suitable adapter can be found at RafCamera:
https://www.ebay.com...amera?_bkw=34.5

It is also possible to use rear mounted filters, either in lens mount adapters for mirrorless cameras like Sony A-series etc, or placed directly in the camera.

An alternative, if space in the camera allows, is to putty-mount a filter directly against the lenses rear element mount ring.
The rear lens element is recessed and thus safe and the ring provides a good reference plane for orienting the filter normal to the optic axis.

My Omega 330W80 Improved Ø25mm, is mounted in a 27mm-filter ring and works well to mount as it is.

Handling and focussing:
This lens needs to be combined with a helicoid or macro bellows to set desired magnification.
With short enough minimum length of those it is easy to obtain focus at infinity even for DSLRs with long back-focus distance.
https://www.ultravio...__fromsearch__1

Flare and sun-stars:
TBD

Sharpness:
I have found the lens impressing sharp.
My main usage has been for closeup UV and UV+VIS photography.

Lens distortion:
The lens

Chromatic Aberration / fringing in UV:
C

Image samples:
UV:
image
Filter:

UV, Fringing:
image
Filter:

UV, Fringing 100%:
image
Filter:

VIS+NIR:
image
Filter:

NIR:
image
Filter: long pass 800nm

Edited by UlfW, 06 April 2021 - 06:32.

Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#2 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 9,115 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 04 January 2021 - 00:43

Ulf, all enlarger lenses have by design some UV capability, so we need not make any attribution of discovery for such lenses.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#3 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members+G
  • 1,830 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 04 January 2021 - 01:23

View PostAndrea B., on 04 January 2021 - 00:43, said:

Ulf, all enlarger lenses have by design some UV capability, so we need not make any attribution of discovery for such lenses.
I think that is not entirely true.

I have a APO Rodagon N enlarger lens that I suspect is not even marginal for UV.
When I find it I can measure the UV-transmission and show here. Would such an entry be OK to enter the UV-Lens Data section sa an example Showing a very bad UV-lens?

Edited by UlfW, 04 January 2021 - 05:04.

Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#4 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,247 posts

Posted 04 January 2021 - 01:35

The sticky shows KDS as the 'tester'.

While I am looking at the sticky, I disagree with the sticky about the Kuribayashi 35mm f/3.5 lens.
I found those, showed them, way back on the old Nikongear (later named Fotozones?),
all those links are gone now.
The sticky here would seem to indicate that I didn't find the Kuribayashi 35mm,
which was the predecessor to all those Kuri's and Kyoei's being 'discovered' and tested for UV.

Edited by Cadmium, 04 January 2021 - 02:07.


#5 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 9,115 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 04 January 2021 - 07:26

While I am looking at the sticky, I disagree with the sticky about the Kuribayashi 35mm f/3.5 lens.
I found those, showed them, way back on the old Nikongear (later named Fotozones?),
all those links are gone now.
The sticky here would seem to indicate that I didn't find the Kuribayashi 35mm,
which was the predecessor to all those Kuri's and Kyoei's being 'discovered' and tested for UV.



The Lens Sticky *never* lists a “discoverer” of a lens because I don’t believe that we can possibly know who used which lens first for what purpose.

What the Sticky does do is to list one of the persons who tested a particular lens for its UV capability and who provided me with some data about that lens. If you were to look more carefully at the listing for the Kuri 35/3.5, you would most definitely find a link which you should have clicked.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#6 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members+G
  • 1,830 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 04 January 2021 - 07:43

I am OK with deleting all notations of discoverer in my posts.
It is not that important IMHO.

Not comparable with big things like discovering the sources of the Nile. :grin:
Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#7 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members+G
  • 1,830 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 04 January 2021 - 07:49

View PostUlfW, on 04 January 2021 - 01:23, said:

I think that is not entirely true.

I have a APO Rodagon N enlarger lens that I suspect is not even marginal for UV.
When I find it I can measure the UV-transmission and show here. Would such an entry be OK to enter the UV-Lens Data section sa an example Showing a very bad UV-lens?
I was wrong.
A quick test show that the APO Rodagon N 50mm f/2.8 is marginally UV-capable with a λUV HalfMax= ca 365nm.
Nothing to waste money on as an UV-lens or even as an entry in the UV-Lens Data section.
Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#8 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 9,115 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 04 January 2021 - 08:45

Ulf, I was probably thinking too much of early development/printing/enlargement processes which I only know by history and not experience. In more recent processes, UV light might not have been used as much? So there might indeed be some enlargers which don’t pass too much UV past 400 nm? We will leave it as an open question. :smile:

The generally held belief is that enlargers are good in the upper UVA range, say 370-400 nm with some few reaching deeper (as you have just shown).

I do think it is better to leave out attribution of “discovery” for most lenses, although links to other peoples tests or examples are of course acceptable.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#9 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 9,115 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 04 January 2021 - 09:01

With enlarger lenses, the flat field characteristic makes them more suitable for close work than landscapes.

I remember at least two users who have gotten a kind of center brightness akin to a hotspot (but not quite) with some El-Nikkors, the 80, IIRC. One of Andy Perrin’s topics here shows this in some landscape views.

Third thing is that many enlarger lenses have a windowed aperture setting which must be taped over or blocked when used for UV. We should remind readers about that where applicable.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#10 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members+G
  • 1,830 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 04 January 2021 - 11:50

Andrea,

Good points all of them.
I have mostly done close up photography with enlarger lenses and have little experience using them for landscapes.


I think another type of post suitable for the UV-Lens Data section can be a comparison-post with a few lenses having something in common.
Then I think the transmission graphs and links to the single lens data posts will be enough.
We have to figure out a good digest title format.

To compare the two EL-NIKKOR 80mm lenses maybe a title like this can be OK:
"Comparison, EL-NIKKOR 80mm old and older"

Is this OK?

Edited by UlfW, 04 January 2021 - 11:50.

Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#11 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,416 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 04 January 2021 - 19:12

Maybe this shot, Andrea? It was with the Noflexar, though.
https://www.ultravio...epsie-new-york/

Also the Noflexar:
https://www.ultravio...-massachusetts/

Both show a shift, but that's at 35mm and it's not an enlarger lens.

Edited by Andy Perrin, 04 January 2021 - 19:19.


#12 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 9,115 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 04 January 2021 - 19:45

Ulf, yes, start with any title. As your effort progresses, we can make amendments when/if we think necessary.

For example, it finally occured to me how to label the T and lambda data: https://www.ultravio...dpost__p__41521
(Also please review the post immediately preceding the linked post.)
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#13 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 9,115 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 04 January 2021 - 19:48

Andy, yes, that is a good example of wide-angle vignetting combined with a dichroic filter.
Somewhere though, you have a photo made with one of the EL-Nikkors which I am remembering showed some problems??

I've *always* had vignetting problems with my Noflexar. Although not quite as colorful as yours. La! I think that can be repaired in Photo Ninja.




Note: All the extraneous comments about formatting, etc. will be removed when the Lens Data topic is finalized.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#14 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,416 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 04 January 2021 - 20:47

I can’t recall any filter problems with my EL-Nikkor. I had a problem with my first copy of the lens itself that showed a lot of haziness near bright objects but that was the lens, not the filter.

#15 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 9,115 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 04 January 2021 - 21:22

ah, OK. I'm remembering (rather hazily myself it seems) something else, then.
There's so much stuff now on UVP, that I can no longer keep track of it all like I could a couple of years ago. :rolleyes:
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#16 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members+G
  • 1,830 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 05 January 2021 - 08:14

Andrea, I think you had some problems with it during the SEU2 evaluation
Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#17 UlfW

    Ulf W

  • Members+G
  • 1,830 posts
  • Location: Sweden, Malmö

Posted 05 January 2021 - 18:20

Replaced the transmission graphs with updated versions including copyright info.
Improved measurement dynamic range due to usage of a fifth measurement setup and processing to merge data into the composite graph.

I really do not think we need to know the transmission of lenses down to OD4, but it is fun to see how much I can push the different measurement methods.
I will try to do the same for the other lenses when I can.
Ulf Wilhelmson
Curious and trying to see the invisible.

#18 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,416 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 05 January 2021 - 18:31

It would be interesting to do a diabatic graph maybe. If you push it all the way to OD4.

#19 Stefano

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,174 posts
  • Location: Italy

Posted 05 January 2021 - 21:43

But what about data charts (with numbers)? Are you going to implement them?

#20 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,416 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 05 January 2021 - 23:57

I thought he was just going to post the raw data as excel or txt?