Nanoha 5X MFT Macro Lens from Texas Media Systems on Vimeo.
For the very first time the Yasuhara x5 macro lens has been reviewed at ePhotozine (Click here): “I enjoyed using the lens which opened my eyes to textures that you don’t normally see. Objects took on a whole new life at this magnification.” The only real major drawback is the relative slow aperture of F/11.
More info about the lens here: yasuhara.co.jp/nanoha/index-e.html. P.S.: Yasuhara is known for making [shoplink 26291 ebay]M-mount lenses and cameras[/shoplink].
24 Responses
f/11 aperture is no drawback on a macro lens of this caliber. Imagine how shallow the DOF will be with an aperture of f/2.8…
I created these two short films with the Nanoha.
http://vimeo.com/36766291
http://vimeo.com/32141950
Nicely done!
Yowza, great stuff (and otherworldly music).
beautiful
at last a lens which can be used as a good excuse to get extremely close to a juicy photomodel
She may not like the way any imperfections of her skin will be displayed though, perhaps you’d have to consider what she may shoot of you in return!!!!! Certainly a fantastic piece of kit though for the shooter who wants to try his hand at serious Macro Photography, without he huge outlay of some systems nor the bulk of a bellows and the added lighting.
Doesn’t look good to me. Not a single of the sample images is sharp. Not even close…
It’s sharp. Check this still from one of the video’s I created with this lens. http://www.flickr.com/photos/22948809@N07/6346832957/sizes/o/in/set-72157628135978252/
It cannot be sharp as the diffraction limit is somewhere around f/5.6 with the new generation of m4/3 sensors.
Also reviewed this lens a while back. http://www.beeldlab.nl/deep-inside-breakdown/
yeah nice video Hugo!
Very nice creative vides by Hugo Goudswaard. Likewise I liked Seb Farges video, and videos in general.
If this lens had a bigger magnification range I might even get one, but I think the 4-5x magnification is far too limiting. Getting that sort of magnification with good quality is not very difficult and possible for a lot less money. A reversed wide angle manual focus lens or even a reversed 50mm can easily get you into that territory. Englarger lenses are a very good alternative to manual focus lenses. As with other lenses at greater than 1:1 it is best to reverse them for the best image quality. A bellows, focusing helicoid or cheap manual extension is all you need for the extension. Add a cheap LED ringlight, and it will have cost you a lot less than the Nanoha.
The working distance of the Nanoha is a bit short, being only 11mm at 5x, whereas I think it is about 40mm at 5x on my Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 1-5x @5x.
Incidentally the “extension tube” used by Hugo Goudswaard is actually a focusing helicoid. You can find them on eBay by just searching for “focusing helicoid”. I think you can get some in m4/3, but most of them tend to be m42, or sometimes m52 at one end. Generally they come from Chinese or Hong Kong dealers. They are a good alternative to bellows as they are easily torn in the field or on location.
I’m not sure if these are actual or effective apertures. For instance on the Canon MP-E 65mm, the nominal aperture may go down to f16 at 5x, but the effective aperture is actually f96 at a camera indicated f16.
One tip for using continuous lighting at this magnification. Any slight touching or movement of the camera will produce a lot of shake. It is best to work on a concrete or other similar solid floor, and not floor boards. When working on floorboards simply shifting your weight from one leg to the other, even standing back from the camera is likely to produce significant movement of the camera, or whatever the camera or subject is on.
Good points (and in the post below as well)! You are discussing a real top notch lens though (in the Canon MP-E). 🙂
This is the lens I missed up in my purchase .
As I’m not really a macro shooter so I’m not rushing to get it . Nice review overall !
Would hope for a fast tele prime lens if Yasuhara can make one for M4/3 .
Video test here 😉
http://vimeo.com/30433716
Is this just a fancy reverse macro with some LED lights
“The only real major drawback is the relative slow aperture of F/11.”
wtf is ePhotozine smoking. If this lens has say an f/2.8 aperture at the max magnification, it will be as big and as long as the 200mm f2. Plus, no one use f2.8 at the max magnification.
The Canon MP-E 65 f2.8 1-5x has an f2.8 nominal maximum aperture. It also goes all the way from 1:1 to 5:1 (5x). It is not that big, although it is gets pretty long when it extends. It’s only I think just over 2x the weight of the Nanoah. However, it should be noted that although it has a nominal aperture value of f2.8, the effective aperture is always much smaller than this. So with a camera indicated f2.8, the effective aperture is actually f5.6 @1x to f16.8 @5x. It should also be noted that f11 at 5x or even 4x is well into the diffraction limited zone. I notice that at fll on Canon APS-C the image gets noticeable softer over about 3.5x with the Canon MP-E 65mm. This is not surprising being that the effective aperture is about f50. Opening the lens up just a bit crispens the image up. Although you always have to make compromises because even at small apertures the DOF is wafer thin at 5x.
@SteB, could you compare the magnification of the two lenses? I assume the Nanoha is 5x magnification since it’s marketed for MFT. But is the Canon effective 10x on MFT? Or are they both using the same 35mm standard for their magnification?
Thanks for all your comments, insights, and macro expertise!
There is not very much information on the specification of the Nanoah lens. I’m guessing by 5x they mean 5:1, which would make it the same as the MP-E 65mm at max magnification. Strictly speaking the reproduction area is the same regardless of the format. However, FF is just over 2x the frame width and just under 2x the height of m4/3. So in terms of frame filling power 5x on FF is close to 10x on m4/3.
But it’s not really as simple as that being that most people including myself mainly use APS-C Canon for macro photography. The differences are not so great here as the frame height is less than 2mm higher on Canon APS-C over m4/3. This makes the 2 formats far more similar in terms of frame filling power. So the factor is nowhere near 2x as regards APS-C.
Providing the Nanoah is 5:1, the MP-E 65mm would give exactly the same if fitted to a m4/3 camera. It’s already doable because if you pre-set the aperture on a Canon body you can use it stopped down on m4/3. Being as most of time I use f11 I should manage okay. I hope to put up some sample shots with the MP-E 65mm on m4/3 when it warms up in the next couple of months and my macro season starts.
Of course what I say is as it is regards the full m4/3 frame. Whereas of course in video you have additional cropping with ETC on the GH2 etc. So in 720 you get nearly 4x the frame filling power of m4/3.
I’m not sure to what extent Seb, Hugo and Jean-Baptiste used the crop function on the GH2 with their videos. At least some of the stuff looks much higher than 5x on m4/3 so I’m guessing that they used it for at least some of the footage.
This gives some idea of the range of magnification the MP-E 65mm covers. The one below is full frame at about 2x on Canon APS-C. The one below that is a close-up of one of the parasitoid eggs attached to the Sawfly larva, but at about 10x, after putting a Raynox MSN-202 on the MP-E 65mm.
2x
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5258/5551862757_dc0d3df088_o.jpg
10x
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5014/5551862767_664f310ab3_o.jpg
Wow, thanks @SteB for all the information, more cool ideas, and the sweet photographs. I look forward to your gallery.
It’s an amazing lens, I have just crafted this video shot on NanohaX5 :
https://vimeo.com/36937717
Wunderbar! Love it. I just wish you could have held the video a bit more on a few of your subjects! Sweet. Thank you for sharing.