Search the Community

Hi, anybody tried this 2/1 elemnets/groups design lens http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/item/c_4057.html#prettyPhoto? It also looks like it allows many funny effects in visible/IR light too... It would be quite fast f=2.9 (so will allow easy Lv focusing) and then we can "stop it down" by inserting othert aperture shape... https://shop.lomography.com/en/lenses/daguerreotype-achromat-art-lens/daguerreotype-art-lens-chrome-nikon They also have other lomo lenses, I wonder if some of them are just uncoated and have a small number of elements - so they could be very usable in UV - focus at max aperture, then insert another/stop-down and shoot.

Motivated by Andy's recent reply to Bill about the distance performance of the EL-Nikkor 80/5.6, I thought I would make a similar test with the EL-Nikkor 105/5.6. LINK: https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/4998-is-the-el-nikkor-80mm-old-metal-version-ok-at-long-distances/ Today there was not enough good sunlight to be able to test in UV, so I started with visible sunlight. This scene was photographed looking North from my house with the sunlight behind me. That pyramidal hill in the center background is about 4.2 miles/6.7 km away. ADDED LATER: On Google Maps I measured to the top of the hill. I should have measured to the bottom of the hill. That distance is about 3.6 miles. Given that the EL-105 is able to show the Juniper shrubs on those hills, I think we can safely say that it is useable at a distance. The photo was given a typical conversion in Photo Ninja, then resized. I do not know exactly where this 25 mph sign is located between me and Pyramid Hill. It has to be within half a mile or less I would think? The 25 mph speed limit sign is approximately 2200 feet from where I was shooting. You can definitely read the sign in this unresized crop from the as-shot version of the photo. That is, no edits were made in this extracted JPG, but note that I used a in-camera standard picture control with moderate sharpening. 3 more unresized, unedited crops of the speed limit sign. These are each 81 px wide and 158 px tall. (Can you find the stop sign in the larger photo? ha-ha...) Here is view, looking West, of an electrical transmission tower slightly under a half-mile away (2367 feet/727 meters according to Google maps) from my house. The sunlight was to my left and slightly in back of me. Today we didn't have a blue sky, more like a pale blue, thin cloud layer. This file was also given a typical conversion in Photo Ninja. There was some atmospheric disturbance in that direction, but you can see from the three unresized, unedited crops that again detail is resolved quite well at just under half a mile away by the EL-Nik 105. Although I did not make any kind of specific test for corner/edge detail, things seem to hold up well there too. In spite of the wobbly air, you can see the wires and other parts of this transmission tower from just under a half-mile away.

Decided to Gorilla tape the Baader on waiting for the 34.5mm to show. This was taken with white balance on teflon tape wrapped card, sun behind with cloud haze. Raw file was converted to png and downsized only. Badder-U, El-Nikkor 80mm this was wide open, FS Canon 77D .25 sec, ISO 400. This lens IS by far my sharpest, quite surprised. I tested for light leaks, and were none. Is this what is expected as a raw with this equipment and conditions? Could my white balancing be incorrect? Would a totally cloudless higher Sun make a difference? I'm not disappointed, just testing still for best configs.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Cassar-S-2-8-50mm-2067710-Stone-Pale-Munich-M39-/284362832926?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l6249&mkrid=707-127634-2357-0 I know this lens to one of the best if not the very best non-specialist lenses for UV. I found this cheap deal, it's supposedly in good condition except the aperture is stuck. I have a guy who could probably take it apart and look what's wrong. What do you guys think? Should I go for it?

Hi all. I may have purchased another lens in my UV journey but I have a question. I read on here that the front thread is 35.5mm, but see 40.5mm on description, so could it actually be 40.5mm? I know I'll need to get a focuser too, but haven't done extensive research on that yet for a Canon dslr. Is this the metal version too? Thanks for any help.

I have been wanting an autofocus lens for UV macro type imaging. As I like the in camera focus stacking mode on Olympus cameras. So I have been looking seriously at the Nikon Z-mount cameras just because there is the Megadap autofocus adapter, which would allow my home made lenses to autofocus. But the Nikon's don't have incamera focus staking and they have PDAF points on the sensor which causes banding. Then I noticed for the current autofocus adapters to work you need PDAF point on the sensor, which is something I don't like. I would like to get a nice contrast detection sensor moving forward. The Olympus EM5mk2 is already excellent this way and has in-camera focus stacking. So I need to build a lens, and one that not only has autofocus but could be used on multiple camera systems. So I looked at the current Canon EF mount lenses. There are quite a few that use linear focus extension for the focus system. These include the EF 28mm F2.8, EF 35mm F2, EF 50mm F1.4 USM, EF 50mm F1.8 II, EF 50 mm F1.8 STM, EF 50 mm F1.2 L USM, EF 85mm F1.2 II USM, EF 50mm F2.5 compact macro and the Yonguo 50mm f1.8 lens. The best option might be the Canon 50mm f2.5 compact macro, as it extends quite a lot. This is its component manual: EF 50 2.5 MACRO (C0MPACT).PDF But I was able to get a cheap EF 50mm F1.8 II lens and there are many YouTube videos online to show you how to take one apart. This is its component manual: EF 50 1.8 II.PDF The back comes off easy exposing the rear group. This group of three elements easily turns out, counter clockwise. I scanned the lens with and without the back 3 elements and the UV cut off was the same at about 360nm. This is the Raw scan: This is an image of the Canon 50mm F1.8 II back with back 3 element group removed: I then drilled through the back of the lens, through the front three elements and then carefully with a hammer and a bolt, taped out the front glass bits. The first and third elements are very thick and of the same type of glass. The middle element is very different, it broke apart very easily when the drill hit it and sparked and flickered due to the drilling heat. So be careful in the removal. The back end (maximum aperture opening is 20mm) This is the font without any glass: There is lots of room to add elements and since the whole front moves during focusing, it works well. This is the front with a 25mm filter element in place: The cheapest option might be to add the SvBony 0.5x element to the front. My elements are 58mm focal length and work. But I would need a to make a spring and holder to place it for infinity focus. So for mine I used black epoxy and glued in a fused silica plano convex 75mm focal length element in C-mount adapter. This is my final lens: It focus very fast, almost too fast as its probably expecting more glass weight than just a single element. So for best results you need to tap the shutter button twice. Once to get there and a second to lock on tight. The in-camera focus stacking feature works very well. I don't have a good image with it yet, as my sun has been low and I didn't use a tripod for my first quick images sets. But will post some in-camera stacks later. I also added a cheap empty metal 52mm ring to the front of the lens as the front filter thread is plastic.

The Novoflex Noflexar 35mm lens is considered to be a good lens for UV-photography, except for its leakage-quirks when it is extended. A while ago I realised that Novoflex have had several bellows-lens heads intended for macro. I made some brief research to find out more. The lenses I found some information about on the net are: Novoflex Staeble-Katagon 4.0 / 60mm M39 Novoflex Macro Noflexar 1:4/60mm M39 Novoflex-Memmingen Noflexar 1:3,5 / 105mm - M39 Novoflex Noflexar 1:4 / 105mm - M39 Novoflex Noflexar 1:4 / 105 Automatic - M39 Novoflex Schneider Xenar 1:3.5 / 105mm - M39 Novoflex Schneider Xenar 1:4.5 / 105mm - M39 Novoflex Noflexar 1:4.5 / 135 - M39 Novoflex Noflexar 1:4.5 / 135 Automatic - M39 Novoflex Schneider Xenar 1:4.5 / 135 Novoflex Schneider Xenar 1:4.5 / 150 Beside these macro bellows lenses Novoflex had their Schnellschuss tele lenses I think there were a 5.6/400mm and a 8/600mm T-Noflexar lens head for the focussing grip. The Schnellschuss lenses existed in several different versions over the time designated with capital letters A - D. It would be interesting to findout if any of these lenses are good performers and might be usable for UV-photography. Do anyone here have experience with any of these lenses?

I'm wondering what others are using for a lens hood with the Baader U or other filters. This is all I could think of, as the ones I found online are so small. There used to be a show your gear on UVP, but couldn't find it to see what others are using. Thanks

A quick snapshot in my back yard followed by a Raw Digger analysis immediately shows that this nice old Nikon AIS 24/2.0 is not suitable for reflected Ultraviolet photography. (The lens is also not quite up to the 47MP of the S1R, but that is a story for another day.) Reason: The 24/2.0 AIS transmits UV mostly on the right side of the BaaderU's bandpass. Things are very violet looking as you will see below in the raw color photo. I'm not going to test further with the 24/2.0. Camera: Panasonic Lumix S1R Full-spectrum Conversion Lens: Nikkor 24mm f/2.0 AIS Visible Filter: Baader UV/IR-Cut + BG38 x 2.0 mm UV-Pass Filter: BaaderU Visible Reference Photo Conversion and resize only, no edits. Nice color! Some normal vignetting from a wide angle lens. f/8 for 1/2500" @ ISO-100 Ultraviolet Photo: Shot in Monochrome to better enable exposure assessment in LV. Conversion and resize only, no edits. Bit of porch shadows there, my bad. f/8 for 1/400" @ ISO-3200 (woo! I never shoot that high of ISO!) Ultraviolet Raw Photo: No white balance has been applied. This very purple photo does *not* show the typical oranges/reds/magentas which we typically get from a non-white-balanced raw BaaderU file when the BU is used with a UV-capable lens that can reach at least 350 -360 nm. Ultraviolet Raw Histogram: And here you can see that the raw data has an obvious overload in the blue channel. Using the BaaderU on a UV-capable lens would never produce a "leading" blue like this. You would get leading red, then green and lastly blue OR have green/blue matched. This is the logarithmic view.

Hi all, I have a Canon 77D and have been going down the lens rabbit hole again. I found an Industar-26m 50mm f/2.8 for $30 in the US and couldn't pass it up because it looks like it might pass a little more in Baader's range. After doing some reading, It might not reach infinity because my sensor is so far back. I have a slim M42 to eos for the Industar 50-2 that works perfect. I ordered an M39 to eos slim adapter so just wondering if any Canon Dslr users have reached infinity with that lens. Here's how slim those adapters are. Thanks for any input

Bill had wondered whether the EL-Nikkor family were suitable for work at long distances, and I said I hadn't noticed anything wrong with mine. Today I got out the 80mm/5.6 and did a quick test. This was on a solid tripod with a helicoid on my Sony NEX-7 (NOTE: that is an APS-C sensor with 24MPix). filters: UG11 2mm + S8612 1.75mm Exposure: 1.6" F/16 ISO100 WB off PTFE. The only editing was to remove a couple of dust bunnies that were very distracting. I chose the exposure to not blow out the sky, which makes the foreground murky with no editing. Full image: Crop 1, 100%. Most of the blur seems to be atmospheric. That building is 1km or so from me. Sharpens up fine also, at the expense of a bit more noise: Crop 2, 100% This is across the street, so much closer. Plus sharpening: Again, probably not going to match a modern lens but it seems sharp enough even with no editing?

Some details from Dresdens architecture, taken from the other bank of the Elbe, so the slight blurriness might be caused by this. Camera: Canon EOS 6D, b/w, internal X330C, external S8612 Lens: MTO 3M-5CA 500mm f/8 mirror lens (proves the point that in UV tele-lenses may be useful )

Ufar-12 41mm f/2.5 Уфар-12 https://www.ebay.com/itm/313254997196?hash=item48ef73eccc:g:wzEAAOSw-bJfhBFL From Dr. Klaus Especially developed for the USSR Mars missions, quote from NASA source: Ufar/Zufar objectives were used on the television cameras carried by the Mars-2, 3, 4, and 5 spacecraft. Ufar-12 made of fluorite and quartz, apochromatically corrected for UV, visible and IR light (230...1000nm). Sharpness is outstanding at 82 lpm in the center and 40 lpm in the corners. From another source: Ufar anastigmat designed by D.Volosov, N.Melnikova and T.Shamanina. UV aplanat-lenses exist already for a long time. It is difficult to design anastigmat lenses for UV because of all useful optical materials (quartz, fluorite and others) have low refractive indexes, that creates difficulties for field curvature correction of the image plane of large aperture anastigmats. UFAR lenses have a transmission ratio of more than 50% in spectral zone of 250 nm. So they can be used in more shortwave range, up to near 230 nm.

David has previously shown that this lens is good for UV down to UVB: https://www.ultravio...but-not-magical And here is an image quality test: https://www.ultravio...-tests-at-313nm Bernard Foot has also tested this lens for its intended purpose, and too reported good results: https://www.ultravio...th-svbony-et-al So I tested one myself. I built a lens using the following parts: The 25-52 mm adapter ring barely screws on the lens ring since the lens is thicker than the original UV filter. If you want to build a similar lens, either glue the step-up ring or try to find a deeper 25 mm filter ring. The lens should be mounted with the most curved side towards the subject and the flatter side towards the sensor. The focal length of this lens is about 45-48 mm (I used 48 mm to calculate the apertures below). Image quality Being a single lens, there's no correction for spherical and chromatic aberrations, so you will get both. You will need to refocus at different wavelengths. Full-spectrum Canon EOS M, Chinese BG39 (2 mm). Fully open (about f/2.4), ISO 200, 1/30 s exposure: About f/5, ISO 800, 1/30 s exposure: Stopping down even more will improve image quality a lot, especially the edges, but of course this will require longer exposure times. UV (ZWB2 (2 mm) + Chinese BG39 (2 mm)), lens stopped down between f/3 and f/5, eyeballing: ISO 25600, 1/15 s exposure: Rubik's cube. All colors absorb at 310 nm and 340 nm, but the white squares are still a bit reflective at 387 nm, and they appear red here: ISO 100, 8 s exposure: ISO 25600, 1/30 s exposure: UVB performance and TriColour This lens is quite transparent to UVB, at least down to 310-313 nm (see David's test in the link at the beginning), while even lenses with a very good UV reach (such as my Soligor) do not transmit much there, just a few percent at most. This makes taking UVB images and TriColours easier, as I put the 310 nm images in the blue channel. With this lens there is a gain of at least 2-3 stops compared to a Soligor 35 mm f/3.5 lens at 310 nm. The focus shift between 310 and 340 nm is not very strong, but between 340 and 387 nm it is visible in live view (I would have expected the opposite). In the images below, I had to zoom-in some channels (especially the red one) and stretch them horizontally and/or vertically to overlay them as best as possible. I did that in Paint. In the 310 nm images I only kept the green channel, as most of the signal is recorded there. Channels: Red: BrightLine 387/11 filter + Chinese BG39 (2 mm); Green: BrightLine 340/26 filter + ZWB1 (2*2 mm); Blue: Chinese 310 nm bandpass filter*2. Empty glass with paper tissue and rocks. This image was probably taken with the lens either fully open or very open, as it is quite soft. The absorption of the glass at 310 nm is visible as a yellow tint. Magnifying glass (top), plastic lens (bottom left), car headlight lens (bottom right). All the lenses are black at 310 nm, and the plastic lens is black at 340 nm too (hence the red color): Rubik's cube. All squares absorb UV, except for the white ones, which reflect at 387 nm and appear red here: 2 mm thick ZWB2 filter (left), 3 mm thick ZWB1 filter (right): From here, I also stretched the channels to reduce color fringing. Before, I only zoomed them. CFL bulb. Both the base and the tube are white to the naked eye (athough with slightly different shades). In UV, the base becomes a neutral gray (quite unusual in my opinion) and the tube becomes orange. This color means two things: firstly, the reflectance gradually decreases at shorter wavelengths (a sudden drop would usually look red or yellow), and secondly, the glass the tube is made of is mostly transparent at 387 nm and still partially transparent at 340 nm. I have detected the 365 nm mercury I-line coming from this very bulb in the past: https://www.ultravio...-a-spectrometer Polycarbonate goggles with atypical temples. I already showed them in this topic. Both temples absorb at 310 nm, but only one absorbs well in UVA: Some trees with some haze: Daisy: One day I should try an aspheric lens, if quality is significantly improved. But this lens is still nice and cheap.

I am requesting a spectral plot of the following lens or it's clones. I am also requesting side by side real world photos in UVA around 365nm of flowers to other workhorse UV lenses such as the Ultra Achromatic Takumar, Quartz Takumar or UV-Nikkor. Name of lens: Kyoei Optical Co. LTD. Acall 105mm f3.5 Formula: Triplet Mount: M39, M42 Clones Soligor Sankyo Koki Komura Derivatives Kyoei Super-Acall Petri Orikkor Source: https://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/2013/02/soligor-kyoei-105mm-lens-for-reflected.html Samples take with this lens: https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/4868-liriope-muscari-variegated-lilyturf/ Photo of the lens:

This is "good to know that such things exist" technical information about Olympus microscopy equipment for imaging at 248 nm. The main purpose of this equipment seems to be imaging of semiconductor wafers at resolutions beyond those possible with VIS light. http://www.olympusca...%20Brochure.pdf Some points gleaned from the brochure: This equipment is for incident axial illumination of specimens, not transmitted illumination. The light source uses an 80 W mercury-xenon bulb. The bulb housing appears to be a standard Olympus part, but in this case it is mounted separately from the microscope and connected to the illumination module by a liquid light guide, probably to eliminate vibration sources. The illumination and imaging module mounts below the tube lens (and therefore eliminates the need to use a special tube lens) but on top of a VIS axial illuminator. Presumably the VIS illuminator must be used with its beam splitter or fluorescence cube out of the imaging path, so simultaneous VIS and UVC illumination is likely not possible (except with VIS emitted by the xenon-mercury bulb). Simultaneous DUV imaging and DUV-excited VIS fluorescence observation and imaging might in principle be possible. The objectives have no cemented elements. We already know one reason for this. An additional reason in this case is that optical cement degrades quickly at these wavelengths. There is virtually no information about the DUV camera.

Finalized: Work in progress. Last Update: Leitz 65mm f/4.5 Milar Macro Manufacturer: Ernst Leitz, Wetzlar Manufacturer's lens designation: Milar f=6,5cm 1:4,5 Currently manufactured: No Lens type: Macro Lens, Aristophot System Focal length: 65mm Aperture range: 2/4/6/12 (=reduction rate?), No click stops, Manual, 10 blades Design: TBD Flange Focus distance: - Recommended magnification range: 1:1 - 7:1 Optimal magnification: TBD Mount: M25 x 0.75 Sensor format/coverage: up to 90mm x 120mm, or more Front filter: No Lens coating: No Introduction year: pre 1940? S/N of test object: 35807 Working distance graphs: Image of a Aristophot system Image of the test object: Transmittance SummaryDefinitions of the parameters below Range: The Milar 65mm f:4.5 lens transmits 1-80% in an increasing slope from 308nm to 400nm. TVISmax (%) = 90% T400nm (%) = 80% T365nm (%) = 73% This high percentage is an indicator for relatively short exposure time under typical UV-pass filtration peaking around 365 nm. λUV HMvis(nm) = 332nm λUV HM400 (nm) = 330nm λUV Zero (nm) = 308nm These three values indicate that the lens is working well for upper UV-B photography with some filters and a few for this, suitable cameras. Spectral transmission graphs:UV-NIR, Milar 65mm 1:4.5 The transmission measurement accuracy into the end of NIR range is less good due to limitations in the light source. UV, Milar 65mm 1:4.5 UV-Log, Milar 65mm 1:4.5 Numerical Spectra Data available: Yes General comments about the UV-reach: TBD Filters and how to use them on this lens:It is only 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. Handling and focussing:This lens needs to be combined with a helicoid or macro bellows to set desired magnification. The original Aristophot System was big using long extensions. The possible magnification useable is limited by how you can illuminate the motif, if the lens is used for reflected light photography Flare: TBD Sharpness: TBD Lens distortion: TBD Chromatic Aberration / fringing in UV: Rather big axial chromatic aberration. Can be improved considerably by focus stacking. See more about this at the end in my first post about this lens. The fringing images are up scaled to 240% https://www.ultravio...dpost__p__37525 Image samples:UV: image Filter: UV, Fringing: image Filter: UV, Fringing 100%: image Filter: VIS+NIR: image Filter: NIR: image Filter: long pass 800nm

Remembered an old Ponder & Best /Vivitar 105mm F4.5, three element enlarging lens in storage. Paid $10 for two of them with a load of photo stuff I purchased. Diagram shows 3 air spaced elements. There is a very slight yellowish coating. Lens seems to record UV yellow as well as the El-Nikkor 80 & 135 and the Igoriginal 35mm F3.5 lens. With 3 elements, I'm not sure if it is as sharp. More testing required. Custom WB camera preset, based on block wrapped in plumber's tape . Silkypix Raw converter used to slightly adjust WB and increase color saturation. Adobe Photoshop Elements 11 provided slightl cropping, resizing, and sharpening. Camera: Pentax K-1 full frame modified by Kolari Vision for full spectrum Lens: Ponder & Best/Vivitar 105mm enlarging lens on Pentax bellows. Filter: Igoriginal supplied ZWB-1 2mm and BG39 2.3mm Exposure: F11 3 seconds at ISO 400 in sunlight Comments welcome. Thanks for looking, Doug A

Hi, can anybody recommend a setup for use El Nikkor 135/5.6 with a bellows on a Nikon body? With all those helicoid rings there is not really much movement, and because image circle of this lens is big, part of the image (say a very bright part) reflects fromhelicoid's internals and fogs the image (it's not just the sun, even the entire skies is lightening helicoid's internals and that reflects internally (inside the full tube between the lens and the bod and fogs the image). I want thave a bellows anyway, possibly to try other lenses and (maybe) to be able to mount a large forma lens too (in the future). Can anybody recommend what whould I earch for? I guess it's better (for me) to have Nikon-F<->Nikon-F bellows and mount the F-M42-M39 conversion after the bellows than just looking for M42<->M42 bellows (because with the Nikon-F bellows I can mount all my lenses). Are there bellows that allow tilt & shifts, or later can I mount a lensboard to the bellow and then use a large format lens on it?

Hi, I'm now studying this http://www.savazzi.net/download/manuals/Nikkor_lenses_for_large_format_cameras.pdf A lot of interesting lenses there like (my limit is Nikon-F mount FFD 46.5 mm and then about 20-140 bellows, which gives minimum usable FFD 70+mm, but not much more than 170mm). Also not too long - LF telephotos would be super-telephotos on FF. Big image circle is something not important (sensor is 24x36mm) but it would be fun to have a great one just to focus this on a white wall and see inverted huge image live - like on the ground glass. I also want a reasonably fast lens (say not slower than f=5.6): - M 105/3.5 (4/3 elems, FFD 96.5mm, circle 100+mm). (M series were advertised as APO). - SW 65/4 (7/4 elems, FFD 70.8mm (probably too short - but would be ideal), circle 110+mm). - SW 75/4.5 (7/4 elems, FFD 81.3mm, circle 126+mm). - SW 90/4.5 (7/4 elems, FFD 97.4mm, circle 154+mm). - W 105/5.6 (6/4 elems, FFD 99.2mm, circle 117+mm). - W 135/5.6 (6/4 elems, FFD 133.8mm, circle 156+mm). - W 150/5.6 (6/4 elems, FFD 149.2mm, circle 174+mm). - W 180/5.6 (6/4 elems, FFD 178.8mm (rather too long already), circle 208+mm). The question here is - how can I mount them? I have Nikon body and then bellows 20-140mm (Nikon-F bellows) - I would need some conversion from Nikon-F to those lens mounts - is there any standard there, anybody tried any of them, this M 105/3.5 is 4/3 and for example W 105/5.6 is 6/4 - just like El Nikkors - they might be good in UV, right? And if not UV then possibly in anything else - having so huge image circles would allow crazy T/S on FF sensor right? Sorry for lame questions but I'm just learning - never used any LF lens so far.

Update: 13 April 2021 tweak formatting Nikon TC-16A Teleconverter With modification this moderately UV-capable teleconverter can autofocus Nikon manual lenses on those Nikon cameras having a built-in screw-drive AF motor. (See below for modification link.) Nikons with autofocus motor in body: D50/70/80/90, D100/200/300, D7xxx, D6xx/7xx/8xx, D1/2/3/4, Df. Manufacturer: Nikon Designation: Nikon AF Teleconverter TC-16A 16X Reference: https://www.mir.com....tc16a/index.htm Design: 5 elements in 5 groups Diaphragm: Automatic Exposure measurement: via full aperture method Autofocus: via any Nikon camera with built-in screw-drive AF motor Mount: Nikon F-mount Dimensions: Approx. 67 mm width x 71 mm height x 21 mm Extension: approx. 30 mm from the lens mount: Weight: approx. 150 g Usable lens apertures: f/1.8 to f/32 Effective apertures: f/2.9 to f/51 Focal length: 1.6 x that of lens in use (with focus at infinity) Reproduction ratio: 1.6 x that of lens in use (with focus at infinity) Depth of field: 1/1.6 x that of lens in use (with focus at infinity) Accessories: front cap BF-1A, soft case No. 61, rear cap LF-1 Introduction: 1985 Teleconverter TC-16A Modification Reference: https://www.foologra.../modify-tc-16a/ Jump Pin 3 to Pin 6 to allow the TC-16A to work with digital Nikon DSLRs that have a built-in screw-drive autofocus motor. It is also best to cut Pin 11-2 and Pin 11-3 from ground. This will change the TC-16A to a 145mm f/4 lens. Metering is through the lens, so the camera will report an incorrect aperture. But the exposure will be ok. My current Nikon camera is the Df. This modified TC-16A will work on the Df with any lens that has an aperture ring. It will move the aperture tab to full open for focusing and release it at exposure. So you need to first dial in an aperture. Nikon F-mount lenses without aperture rings will be kicked to fully closed at time of exposure. Example: A UV-capable manual focus 35mm f/3.5 lens with the addition of the TC-16A will become an equivalent 56 mm f/5.6 lens with autofocus. Teleconverter TC-16A Transmittance No integrating sphere was used. My light source is weak into the IR range, so the IR drop-off may be inaccurate. Please interpret this chart with those two comments in mind. The spectrum of the adapter appears useful in the upper UVA range. The UV Cut off is 349nm The 50% transmission value is just below 370nm. UV Range: approx. 350 - 400 nm T400nm (%) = 92% T365nm (%) = 40% λUV HM400(nm) = 368 nm λUV Zero(nm) = 350 nm should be considered the limit even though there is a very small transmittance beyond that. .

Yesterday I carried out a simple UVA test of my 15 lenses and found out an expected leader. The test was consist in illuminating of PTFE plate by the head of Nemo torch ("would be 15W", but not really of course) and imaging it by the testing lenses through the stack of ZWB1 2mm and QB39 2mm. Nemo torch's head was dismounted from torch and powered by Lab Power with 1,50A CC limitation (around 5,5W). The head switched on only for a short periods to avoid light power drift with its heating. Main light output of such high-powered 365nm leds lies in 365-370nm band. All lenses were been mounted on mono ASI183mm camera and all images were been made with gain=200, offset=0 and exposure time 10ms in SharpCap software. After that I opened a RAW images (FITs in reality) in FitsWork and determined a mean value in square region well inside of the PTFE plate. Distance to PTFE plate was around 5m. All images had 16-bit depth so a mean value could vary from 0 (black UVA lens) to 65536 (great UVA lens). All my enterprise was conducted in view of idea to compare some of my lenses in near UVA region (360-400nm) with my Super Takumar 3,5/35mm (SN 3759215) - very good performer in this region. Some note. Because 360-400nm is the most near UVA region - where balsam does not display its blinding influence and where the most old flint glasses have rather good transparency - I suspected that a good transparency in this region should be a function rather (1) a number of air-glass surfaced and (2) a coating of these surfaced. I tested only short focal distance lenses (<55mm) so I adopted that they have not a thick flint glasses inside at all. As I preferred to avoid MC lenses in my test, I speak in point (2) mainly about single-coating or (more frequent) double-coating (TiO2/SiO2 or ZrO2/SiO2 etc) used in 50-70s years. As such double-coating has more frequent purple or bluish tint and had a huge raising of % reflection in Violet and the more so in near UVA - I expected that a winner should be find among simple lens (3-4 elements) without such purple or bluish coating lens, but with yellow tint coating. Or it should have a single-coating, hard seen ever by eye. And now my result. The main "control" lens - Super Takumar 3,5/35mm - showed at f3,5 mean value 33500. A purple coating of half surfaces spoils it a little in UVA... Two samples of Industar-69 2,8/28mm showed at f/4 23400 and 25400 but at f/2.8 they showed 37500 and 42000 - not so bad... But a purple coating. Two samples of T-43 triplet 4/40mm showed at f/4 24500 and 25600 - I expected more... But again a purple coating. Mikar S 4,5/55mm showed at f/4,5 only 16000 - not good for a triplet... purple coating of all surfaces... Macro-Revuenon 3,5/28mm showed at f/3,5 15800 - bad. Revuenon 3,5/35mm showed at f/3,5 24400 - I expected more... Auto Revuenon 1,7/55mm showed at f/3,5 19700 - unexpected high result, in view of its complicated 6/5 design (at f/1.7 it showed more than 65536 value and went off-scale!) Zenitar 1,9/50mm showed at f/1,9 only 13900 - worst of all. Old EL-Nikkor 2,8/50mm showed at f/4 23200 - strange to say, but I expected much more for a lens with all around yellow-tint coating... EL-Nikkor 4/40mm showed at f/4 26200 - not so bad for a modern lens with a modern coating... Old MC Nikkors (35 and 50mm) show such bad result that I won't to say about it. And finally the winner - Soligor enlarging lens 3,5/50mm, triplet, all six surfaces are yellow-tinted. This lens was designed for a working with a photopapers (sensible to UV-Violet region mainly) and was coated in absolutely right manner for a such purpose. Its two-layers coating (I suspect two-layers, but how knows...) has its hotspot wave-length somewhere around 400-450nm - that is very very good for UVA working. At f/3.5 this Soligor showed 49400 ! And I suspect it has T365 more than 70% (may be around 75%), being "another Focotar". If its cut-off point prove to be in 310-320nm region - it will show itself as another best UVA-performer. But I have not such spectrophotometer that would allow me to determine its curve up to UVB. PS. I've received this lens in rather poor condition from ebay, but - alas! - there were no any fungus on its lens. I disassembled it "to the screw" and cleaned all its surfaces to a present good appearance. All unpressed (unmounted) edges of lenses were also blackened by me. I bought it after reading this thread of course ;) - thank you, bvf! It is probably twin-brother for Soligor enlarging lens 3,5/35mm, referred by bvf there.

A lens diagram shows number of elements, shape, and grouping. Can we tell if any of the elements are cemented together? Here is a diagram of Olympus OM film 80mm F4 macro lens from their dealer binder. Thanks, Doug A

The Leitz Milar 6,5cm loupe lens is an interesting old lens designed for high magnifications. As I'm bitten by the lens-hoarding bug I could not resist this lens. I got min with a step up ring for the Leitz Aristophot system, but the lens itself has a standard M25x0.75 thread. With a few step-rings I was able to mount it on my conical tube intended for one type of Nikon microscope lenses The Milar is in the same category as the famous Zeiss Luminar, even if it is not regarded as quite as good. The design is simplistic, with few lens elements and no coating. It has a quite deep UV Reach similar to a Cassar S The blue curve show the relative transmission of the Milar. The brown curve, added as a comparison, is from a 20mm Canon Bellows lens 20mm. As the Milar is designed to work in a very limited magnification range it is reasonably sharp there. Due to the design it has quite some transversal chromatic aberration, generating coloured fringes outside the focal plane Fortunately this problem can mostly be eliminated by photo stacking and some editing. Both images, scale 2.4 : 1, at 100%, grabbed from Zerene stacker, before final editing.

The title reflects the impressions made by the legendary Nikkor-N 5 cm f/1.1 lens for Nikon rangefinders of the late '50s. Thus it certainly qualifies as 'old' most remaining items now would push 60+ years. 'Elusive' is guaranteed by a production run of < 3000 units, of which lenses with external bayonet, the version most desirable, makes up about one-half. The lens was a pinnacle in optical design for Nikon at the time, so not surprising it was regarded as good. However, uncountable photons have struck Earth since the late '50s and optical development since then has been amazing. Thus can such an old item be of any value today, except as a collector's item? When I purchased the Nikon Z fc some months ago, I found it handled superbly with the old Nikkor rangefinder lenses and at least some were surprisingly good performers in optical terms. True, you get 'character' -- often, a lot -- instead of edge-to-edge perfection, but is that the end of the story? So when the opportunity arrived to get a 5cm f/1.1 Nikkor in excellent shape, and my banking account had sufficient depth to it, time had come to get this lens. Which I did and it arrived very quickly thanks to being whisked across the globe by carrier. The old Nikkor complements the Z fc nicely. I had in mind using the lens on the Z fc, plus for more edperi,mental use, on my full-spectrum Primaluce Z5. First test in IR showed a remarkable 'glowing' performance which instantaneously endeared the lens to me. This is at f/1.1 so shutter speeds almost went out of range on the Z5. Manual focusing on moving subjects isn't easy when one gets lazy by all the AF wizardly available to us today, but is doable in a pinch. And 21 Century Mothers move slowly lest they miss a subject on their mobile. 100% crop to show the impressive sharpness even if focus wasn't perfect. Being able to do well in IR wasn't as surprising as going to UV and learn the lens performs there too. The next example is a test with Baader U and the lens on my monochrome Sony NEX-5N. Despite a dull, overcast day, and a low 200 ISO setting, getting UV hand-held was a breeze. Shutter speeds could get up to 1/100 sec. Apparently I no longer have any excuse not to post excellent images. Oh well, to paraphrase our commander-in-chief. Just wish the ambient temperature to go above the freezing point, as I no longer can stand the cold.