Extension tube for 1 to 1 w. 55mm Nikkor??

[GRHazelton]

I just scored the 55mm f3.5 macro Nikkor for my Nikon HP F 3. I gather that an extension tube is needed to focus to 1 to 1. What length tube is needed? The F 3 is quite a contrast to my Pentax LX cameras! The Nikon should make a fine defensive weapon, should the need arise....

 

[Rick A]

I couldn't tell you which one, but if you need extension tubes for a Nikon, I can hook you up for cheap.

 

[narsuitus]

Nikon M2 extension tube adds the 27mm extension for the 55mm f/3.5 macro to obtain a 1:1

 

[George Nova Scotia]

PK-13 would be the matching tube. Also marked 27.5 likely mm.

 

[GRHazelton]

Many thanks for the rapid responses! I should have also asked if anyone has for sale a right angle finder to fit the F 3. While my K series Pentaxes and Olympus O series cameras can share the same RF adapter, the F 3 uses threads for the eyecup, unlike the slots on the Olys and Pentaxes....

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I just scored the 55mm f3.5 macro Nikkor for my Nikon HP F 3. I gather that an extension tube is needed to focus to 1 to 1. What length tube is needed? The F 3 is quite a contrast to my Pentax LX cameras! The Nikon should make a fine defensive weapon, should the need arise....

an extension tube with the identical length of the focal length will always give you 1:1 and reduces the light by 2 stops.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Many thanks for the rapid responses! I should have also asked if anyone has for sale a right angle finder to fit the F 3. While my K series Pentaxes and Olympus O series cameras can share the same RF adapter, the F 3 uses threads for the eyecup, unlike the slots on the Olys and Pentaxes....

Why don't you just take the prism off?

 

[Mick Fagan]

I would suggest you look at purchasing the DW3 waist level finder for the F3, brilliant bit of equipment and travels with me wherever the F3 goes. Takes up minimal space yet enables one to take pictures in really difficult places. Effectively, they make a right angle finder obsolete. Once you use one, you'll never like to go back to a right angle finder.

As an alternative, you can take the prisim head off and use it directly, something I have done several times with my 24mm and held above my head for above the crowd shots, works a treat.

The Waist level finder also has a 6 times centre magnifier, makes for super clear focusing right to the edges of the film. If you really need high magnification for super critical focusing, then the DW4 is about as good as it gets.

I have both of these finders, and they both have their good points, but the waist level finder is the accessory I use the most.

Mick.

 

[GRHazelton]

Why don't you just take the prism off?

A little magnification of the screen is nice. Also, unlike my Pentax LX, I strongly suspect that light falling on the screen would influence the exposure.

an extension tube with the identical length of the focal length will always give you 1:1 and reduces the light by 2 stops.

Right you are! However the 55mm macro, able to focus to 1:2 itself, already incorporates considerable extension, so 55mm added extension would give more than 1:1, not in itself a bad thing.....

 

[GRHazelton]

I would suggest you look at purchasing the DW3 waist level finder for the F3, brilliant bit of equipment and travels with me wherever the F3 goes. Takes up minimal space yet enables one to take pictures in really difficult places. Effectively, they make a right angle finder obsolete. Once you use one, you'll never like to go back to a right angle finder.

As an alternative, you can take the prisim head off and use it directly, something I have done several times with my 24mm and held above my head for above the crowd shots, works a treat.

The Waist level finder also has a 6 times centre magnifier, makes for super clear focusing right to the edges of the film. If you really need high magnification for super critical focusing, then the DW4 is about as good as it gets.

I have both of these finders, and they both have their good points, but the waist level finder is the accessory I use the most.

Mick.

Many thanks for your comments! I have for my Pentax LX a, for the want of a better description, a viewfinder which furnishes a magnified image of the screen. Here's a link: https://www.pentaxforums.com/accessoryreviews/pentax-fe-1-waist-level-magnifying-finder.html However. While it is wonderful for horizontal shots, it is a PITA for vertical format shots, as would be using a waist level finder. Since I enjoy close up shots of flowers, bugs, etc, the right angle finder would be more desirable than a waist level finder regardless of its other virtues.

 

[Mick Fagan]

I have the f/2.8 55mm Micro Nikkor, when I have the PK-13 extension ring on, the edge of the lens is quite close to the subject when focused, I doubt you could use another extension ring to get greater magnification without almost touching the subject.

For some time I photographed postage stamps for a friend, did this on and off for about 5 years. I have three automatic nikon extension tubes, they have their uses, but are not as versatile as a set of bellows; but that is another story.

I've used my F3 without a prisim many, many times, I cannot ever remember light leaking throught the focusing scren to be an issue. Possibly because I almost always use manual metering, sort of cannot remember the last time I used automatic metering. This could be a function of the light meter taking its measurement through the pellicle section of the mirror. If you take the lens off, inspect the mirror at different angles, you'll see a darkened circular section in the centre, behind this is the light meter. If you slowly move the mirror lock, you can see the light meter behind the mirror.

I don't know how other cameras from other manufacturers do their stuff, but the F3 is a wizz at getting very accurate reflected metering.

Mick.

 

[Mick Fagan]

Aha, yes, vertical shots are a problem.

Mick.

 

[Dan Fromm]

However the 55mm macro, able to focus to 1:2 itself, already incorporates considerable extension, so 55mm added extension would give more than 1:1, not in itself a bad thing.....

If you're going to use the lens at magnifications above 1:1 you should reverse it to take best advantage of its optimizations. Nikon makes couplers that screw into its filter threads so it can be mounted reversed on a bellows or tube, also a ring that, when used with a double cable release, will stop the reversed lens down when the exposure is taken.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I have the f/2.8 55mm Micro Nikkor, when I have the PK-13 extension ring on, the edge of the lens is quite close to the subject when focused, I doubt you could use another extension ring to get greater magnification without almost touching the subject.

Remember, Mick, that the 55/2.8 is made to be used oriented normally with the "hood" facing the subject at magnifications no higher than 1:1. It should be reversed when used at higher magnifications. The Nikon F flange-to-film distance is 46.5 mm. All lenses in F-mount focus to infinity (magnification = 0) on the camera. At infinite magnification, a reversed lens in F mount's flange will be 46.5 mm from the subject. At lower magnifications, farther away.

In other words, you've brought up a non-problem.

 

[Mick Fagan]

Remember, Mick, that the 55/2.8 is made to be used oriented normally with the "hood" facing the subject at magnifications no higher than 1:1. It should be reversed when used at higher magnifications. The Nikon F flange-to-film distance is 46.5 mm. All lenses in F-mount focus to infinity (magnification = 0) on the camera. At infinite magnification, a reversed lens in F mount's flange will be 46.5 mm from the subject. At lower magnifications, farther away.

In other words, you've brought up a non-problem.

Dan,
I wouldn't call it a non problem, just pointing out that if you add different extension rings it won't work with the 55mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor.

When photocopying using my bellows and various Nikkor lenses reversed, there are a multitude of variations which will give you lots of variations of magnification on the film. But we are really straying off track.

Mick.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Mick, a 55/2.8 MicroNikkor shouldn't be used mounted normally with more than 55 mm of extension. That includes the lens' focusing helical, whose maximum extension is 27.5 mm, and the extension tube. With more than 55 mm of extension the lens should be reversed.

Thread drift is a fact of life.

 

[Jim Jones]

There were at least 3 Nikon extension tubes for the 55mm f/3.5 Nikkor. The M was introduced in in the mid-1960s, the M2 with the Micro-Nikkor 0f 1970, and the PK-3 in 1977. As far as I know, each could be used with any Nikon mount lens.

 

[Dan Fromm]

There were at least 3 Nikon extension tubes for the 55mm f/3.5 Nikkor. The M was introduced in in the mid-1960s, the M2 with the Micro-Nikkor 0f 1970, and the PK-3 in 1977. As far as I know, each could be used with any Nikon mount lens.

Yes, and all the same length.

 

[cooltouch]

If you're going to use the lens at magnifications above 1:1 you should reverse it to take best advantage of its optimizations. Nikon makes couplers that screw into its filter threads so it can be mounted reversed on a bellows or tube, also a ring that, when used with a double cable release, will stop the reversed lens down when the exposure is taken.

When using a reversed lens, the choice of a wide angle is best for greater magnification. I like to use a 35mm lens, which provides an ample amount of magnification. I don't know how much it is -- to me, it's just "plenty." At least one of Nikon's reversing rings -- dunno what it's' name is offhand, but I own one -- allows you to mount the lens directly to the camera. Lens iris function is manual, of course.

 

[AgX]

Scale 1/1 means extension to 2xF.
With the lens focused at infinity one needs a tube with the effective length of 1xF, in your case 55mm.
As the lens can be focused, measure the maximum extension of your lens and subtract that from those 55mm, resulting in the shortest tube length you can use when close focusing your lens in addition.

 

[chip j]

I have a spare, mint rt angle finder for your F3. $20 incl. ship

 

[Vincent Peri]

I'm curious as to what a Nikon TC-200 (or TC-201) would do with the Nikkor macro lenses? What reproduction ratio are they capable of? They definitely are longer than a Nikon PK-13 tube.

 

[chip j]

I would suggest a Vivitar Macro Focusing Tele-Converter insted of an extension tube.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I would suggest a Vivitar Macro Focusing Tele-Converter insted of an extension tube.

Why cripple one of the best macro lenses for 35 mm still with a second-rate piece of trash? The extension tube costs less used and works better.

 

[AgX]

Basically the use of a extension tube reduces image quality too. Though with a lens designed for macro scale that would be less, if at all.