Just for fun, What are the most extreme 'lenses' you have?

petrochemist

TPF junkie!
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
1,904
Reaction score
664
Location
North Essex UK (despite the German hosting!)
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Feel free to stretch definitions if required & make the extremes in any direction you like, focal length, size, speed, price... but you must include both ends of the extremes, it's no good just listing a sharpest!:excitement:

As an example my slowest lens is a f/128 pinhole in PK mount & my fastest is a 300mm diameter fresnel with a focal length of 200mm (which makes it a f/0.67). I have used both in shots but so far the fresnel only as an auxiliary.

Here's the fresnel (shot full spectrum) as a friend was trying it out.
Fresnel by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr
 
Jeeeeezzzz. I don't have anything remotely that weird.
 
Jeeeeezzzz. I don't have anything remotely that weird.
A good bit on my lens collection is weird, as long as it's reasonably cheap.
I brought the Fresnel for £20 after watching a YouTube video on hypercentric optics (having reversed perspective). I'll probably retire before I finally get to build it. The pinhole was a bit more but my homemade version wasn't up to much & I couldn't be pothered to redo it properly.
 
My 50mm f/2.8 Schneider PC-TS Super-Angulon weighs 28 g per mm of focal length.
My 65mm f/4.5 Leitz Milar weighs 0.615 g per mm of focal length.
 
Nikkor 600mm f/4G, nicknamed Behemoth. It's 11.1lbs and cost a lot more than the D500 at 1.7lbs I use it on. Phenomenal lens for wildlife / birding, but tough on the back.
 
My 50mm f/2.8 Schneider PC-TS Super-Angulon weighs 28 g per mm of focal length.
My 65mm f/4.5 Leitz Milar weighs 0.615 g per mm of focal length.
That's a metric I've never contemplated! With such a significant difference it was just the sort of obscure metric I was after!

My lightest lens would be close to your Milar, but mine is only designed for 110 film.
The images from the Milar I saw on Flickr are very impressive, but it's price is well above what I'll normally spend. I might just add it to my wishlist anyway :)
The tilt shift is also well outside my price bracket. I can probably beat 28g/mm if I sort through the process lenses I've collected to fit onto my 5x4 monorail but none of them have any chance of being anywhere near as useful.
 
Nikkor 600mm f/4G, nicknamed Behemoth. It's 11.1lbs and cost a lot more than the D500 at 1.7lbs I use it on. Phenomenal lens for wildlife / birding, but tough on the back.
I'd love to have a play with a beast like that, but don't kid myself for a second that I'd be able to get results that justify the outlay
 
Canon MPE65mm f2.8 macro
No AF drive; no infinity focus; up to 5:1 magnification

Darn hard to use, but darn good fun too!

5451068014_b2b7db9ab6_b.jpg


5378988644_f9652b3a4e_b.jpg
 
Canon MPE65mm f2.8 macro
No AF drive; no infinity focus; up to 5:1 magnification

Darn hard to use, but darn good fun too!

5451068014_b2b7db9ab6_b.jpg


5378988644_f9652b3a4e_b.jpg
Whoah - did you know that thing was on your door??!!
 
Whoah - did you know that thing was on your door??!!

It's not actually on the door. The door is just the only shot I've got of the thing setup. The bug is called a springtail and they are perhaps 2mm or so in length. You can see them with the naked eye just to track them. But yeah its hard to focus on things that small. Often having to start at 1:1 and then slowly increasing magnification whlist moving to adjust to keep the subject in focus.
 
That's a metric I've never contemplated! With such a significant difference it was just the sort of obscure metric I was after!

My lightest lens would be close to your Milar, but mine is only designed for 110 film.
The images from the Milar I saw on Flickr are very impressive, but it's price is well above what I'll normally spend. I might just add it to my wishlist anyway :)
The tilt shift is also well outside my price bracket. I can probably beat 28g/mm if I sort through the process lenses I've collected to fit onto my 5x4 monorail but none of them have any chance of being anywhere near as useful.
I bought the T-S new, but the Milar came along with a second hand Visoflex bellows, both like new, at a pretty low price. Leica says it's made to render high contrast, while the Summars are recommended for superior color rendition. I'd like to have each of the Milars, Photars and Summars, but have already spent way too much on way too many lenses!
 
Canon MPE65mm f2.8 macro
No AF drive; no infinity focus; up to 5:1 magnification

Darn hard to use, but darn good fun too!

5451068014_b2b7db9ab6_b.jpg


5378988644_f9652b3a4e_b.jpg
Thats a lens thats likely to stay on my wish list. I've found cheaper ways to match it magnification range, but they are far behind in clarity/contrast/sharpness...
Unfortunately the lens is too good to be likely to come down to my price bracket & it only comes in EF mount.
 
Thats a lens thats likely to stay on my wish list. I've found cheaper ways to match it magnification range, but they are far behind in clarity/contrast/sharpness...
Unfortunately the lens is too good to be likely to come down to my price bracket & it only comes in EF mount.
It's been ages since I last looked around so my links are all missing/gone/dead ones now, but I know that there are ways to get the same magnification at a higher image quality. It mostly involved messing with high end 50mm and similar primes and also microscope lenses. The MPE is quite old and technology has come on a long way since it first appeared. That said it's greatest value is the zooming in magnification. Being able to start at 1:1 or 2:1 where you can see what's going on more readily and then increase things up to 5:1.



But don't feel too bad - I'm sitting here jealous at all the 600mm owners :)
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top