grant.goodes
Allowing Ads
I have always been interested in macro-photography, and after being gifted a Nikon model II bellows and having a bit of fun that and my 105/2.5, I sought out the legendary PB-4 swing/shift bellows and traded my 105/2.5 in for a Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8. For many years, this remained my setup for mostly field-photography (mushrooms being a particular "focus"), but I was never very happy with the results I got with the Micro-Nikkor, especially if I tried any movements. I think part of the problem with the 105/2.8 (aside from being designed to only cover 35mm) is its advanced CRC design, which gives you a kind of "dead zone" when you use more extension, since when shooting from 1:2 to 1:1, the CRC is effectively expecting you to be shooting at longer distances and not close-range.
To address coverage issue, I eventually bought a cheap medium-format lens (Wollensak 138/4.5 Graphic Raptar) to try out, and though this gave more coverage for the PB-4's movements (less vignetting), it was frankly a pretty crappy lens.
I recently got my dream macro lens, the large-format Nikkor 120/5.6 AM-ED (after hunting for MANY years for a sub $500 example), and the results are truly eye-opening. The 120/5.6 AM-ED is very compact mounted on the PB-4, and even allows movements at infinity focus. It takes 52mm filters which is very convenient for a Nikon shooter. It does seem susceptible to flare, but I took some advice from Bjørn Rørslett's old reviews of the lens and bought an HN-3 screw-in shade for it (designed for the 35mm lenses) which helps with the flare but still allows for movements without vignetting.
When deciding on the 120/5.6 AM-ED, I explored the (large) universe of macro-optimized Nikkors, ranging from the APO EL-Nikkors, Printing-Nikkors, short-mount Bellows-Nikkors, to industrial/process lenses generally. As great as all these other lenses sounded, I just couldn't justify their expense (the APO EL-Nikkor 105/5.6 being a particularly bad example of collectors driving up the prices), or else their rarity made them impossible to find. I did recently trip over a listing for a mint condition 105/4 Bellows-Nikkor for sale at $150, so that is on its way to me (to become the 8th 105mm Nikkor in my collection). I realize that the optical design of the short-mount 105/4 is the same as the later Micro-Nikkor 105/4 AiS (with the addition of modern coatings), but I'm curious to see if the coverage is better than my 105/2.8. I guess I will find out shortly, but I'd be interested to hear if any PB-4 users out there have any comments on the characteristics of the Bellows-Nikkors.
To address coverage issue, I eventually bought a cheap medium-format lens (Wollensak 138/4.5 Graphic Raptar) to try out, and though this gave more coverage for the PB-4's movements (less vignetting), it was frankly a pretty crappy lens.
I recently got my dream macro lens, the large-format Nikkor 120/5.6 AM-ED (after hunting for MANY years for a sub $500 example), and the results are truly eye-opening. The 120/5.6 AM-ED is very compact mounted on the PB-4, and even allows movements at infinity focus. It takes 52mm filters which is very convenient for a Nikon shooter. It does seem susceptible to flare, but I took some advice from Bjørn Rørslett's old reviews of the lens and bought an HN-3 screw-in shade for it (designed for the 35mm lenses) which helps with the flare but still allows for movements without vignetting.
When deciding on the 120/5.6 AM-ED, I explored the (large) universe of macro-optimized Nikkors, ranging from the APO EL-Nikkors, Printing-Nikkors, short-mount Bellows-Nikkors, to industrial/process lenses generally. As great as all these other lenses sounded, I just couldn't justify their expense (the APO EL-Nikkor 105/5.6 being a particularly bad example of collectors driving up the prices), or else their rarity made them impossible to find. I did recently trip over a listing for a mint condition 105/4 Bellows-Nikkor for sale at $150, so that is on its way to me (to become the 8th 105mm Nikkor in my collection). I realize that the optical design of the short-mount 105/4 is the same as the later Micro-Nikkor 105/4 AiS (with the addition of modern coatings), but I'm curious to see if the coverage is better than my 105/2.8. I guess I will find out shortly, but I'd be interested to hear if any PB-4 users out there have any comments on the characteristics of the Bellows-Nikkors.
Last edited:
