J5/V2 user - Need a little advice on upgrading my kit for Macro photography of miniature models

[Naia]

Hi all, I am new member of the forum, I’ve been reading them for a long while, and finally decided to take the plunge and join in

I’m so happy to see there is still some love for Nikon 1 out there. Still makes me so sad that they are discontinued!

I am a devoted Nikon 1 user, I just love the flexibility and portability the system offers, and I’m always amazed at the image quality delivered by such a small sensor.

During Lockdown, I have been really enjoying Nikon 1, and I’m currently trying to fill the gaps in my kit, while there is still the option to order Nikon 1 accessories.

My current dilemma is finding the best macro solution for my Nikon 1 kit.

Current Kit:

N1 Cameras:

Nikon V2 body

Nikon J5 body

Flashes:

Nikon 1 SB-N7 external flash for V2

Lenses:

1 Nikkor 10mm f/2.8

1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8

1 Nikkor 32mm f/1.2

1 Nikkor VR 6.7-13mm f/3.5-5.6

1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6

1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom

1 Nikkor VR 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6

1 Nikkor VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (recently purchased online and eagerly awaiting its arrival)

Nikon FX Prime Lenses (considering purchasing a second hand FT1 adapter for Nikon one to use these)

Nikon 60mm f2.8 G AF-S ED Micro Lens

Nikon 50mm f1.4 G AF-S Lens

So the dilemma is what is the best way to achieve closeup photography with this Nikon one set up. The main examples of how I want to use macro is for indoor photography of miniature models, and other close up work, as well as some outdoor photography close ups like plants, insects etc.

I have spent a lot of time on this forum, and other sites researching and have found quite a few options. The three that are available to me right now are:

1. N1-CL1 MC CLOSE-UP LENS 40.5mm - Filter attachment will fit 3 of my N1 lenses (10mm, 30-110mm and 10-30mm) (link:https://store.nikon.co.uk/n1-cl1-mc-close-up-lens-40.5mm/VJG00002/details) no longer available through Nikon, but I’ve found a few on other sites Price around £25 there is also a Polaroid option which sounds similar and offers more filter sizes, I don’t know if anyone has tried these?
2. Extension Tubes - (I’ve managed to find a set of these which are AFS on amazon, the brand I’m considering is Movo. Three tubes with AFS connectors Price £57 (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Movo-Photo...o+af+extension+tubes+v2&qid=1614593344&sr=8-2)
3. FT1 Adapter to use with my FX 60mm Micro lens. Price around £110

I’m really keen to know if there is anyone on here that’s tried two or more of these options? Or has a preference, I’m not too fussed about the cost difference between the three, I know that the FT1 adapter has some limitations, such as only being able to use the central focus point, but I don’t mind that, if it’s the best option image quality wise. Any advice, links or comparison photos would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you all for any advice/help you can offer

 

[rich_cx139]

Hi

In general I would be looking at an achromat to add to the 30-110 or the 70-300. Just use step up/down rings to fit. You can get some cheaply on the net - sometimes.

They both work well and have a reasonable working distance.

There is always the Raynox 250 or 150 - very useful.

Good resources include:

http://fuzzcraft.com/achromats.html

http://extreme-macro.co.uk

I have tried tubes for the shorter fl lenses and they work but personally not keen.

You have the 60 afs G and it’s an excellent macro albeit with a short working distance at 1:1 but with the crop of 2.7 on the 1 inch sensor it might be fine - I’ll try my afd version on a v2 tomorrow and post some samples on your thread.

I definitely suggest you get an ft1 - opens up a lot of opportunities as well as macro.

I don’t know the nikon close up lens you mentioned - the classic Nikon achromats are the 3,4,5,6 T - which you can get if you persevere. Use the calculators on the extreme macro site to help you decide what diopter you need for an application. The fuzz craft site lists most achromats available. All are good - some are cheaper than others. The easiest to get are the Marumis followed by the Kenkos.

richard

edit: achromats are miles better than simple single element closeup lenses which I suspect are the polaroids you mentioned. There are some polaroid achromats but they are hard to find - I did actually pick up one for 20 quid a few years ago. For the 30-110 best avoid the olympus mcon achromats - they are heavy !!

 

[RichDitch]

Welcome to the N1 forum.

you've got a great set of lenses and a pair of nice N1 bodies.

Yes, the lack of a dedicated macro for the Ni system is one of those flaws that we all work around. All the solutions you list will work for you, and you'll find all three used by various members of the forum. Many of us have multiple arrangements for macro, and I have all that you list: diopters (the screw on close up "filters"), extension tubes (10mm and 16mm in my set), and the FT1 to use DX or FX Nikon macro lenses.

I've always preferred a lens that gives me a complete range of focus, from infinity to macro. So my preferred solution is the FT1 with the DX 40/2.8 Nikon macro. It is a lens that fits the smaller size of N1 gear better than the longer macro lenses. Your 60mm AF-S lens would work well. I've also got the 85/3.5 macro and it too works well on the N1 cameras with the FT1. I've even used my ancient manual focus 200/4 Nikkor macro, but that is definitely a tripod setup as it has a very narrow angle and rather touchy focus.

There are others in the forum who do great work with the 70-300 on extension tubes, and there are many here who prefer the 30-110 with diopters.

 

[rich_cx139]

Some very quick and nasty shots handheld with my v2 and af_d 60 f2.8 just to give you some idea of working distances. used on camera flash or sb7.l Sorry about focussing/jighting etc etc.

Haven't used the 60/2.8 myself - I imagine it could be very nice with a large range of mag. available by focussing.

The last shot is about 13 mm wide with a working distance ( lens front to tape ) of about 90mm


elephant is about 70 x 50 - working distance 340


tortoise is about 60 long. working distance 300

and two pics of a tape measure ( mm scale )


working distance 200


working distance about 90

this is a v2 plus ft1 and the 60/2.8 - the af-s G will be similar - not too big and handles nicely

 

[sybersitizen]

... I know that the FT1 adapter has some limitations, such as only being able to use the central focus point, but I don’t mind that, if it’s the best option image quality wise.

An FT1 will be the 'best' option (when paired with an actual macro lens) if you value flat field capture at wide apertures.

Extension tubes are certainly adequate and offer a lot of flexibility if you can accept some softer corners and/or stop down further with your non-macro lenses.

The same goes for close-up lenses, but I personally would skip the single-element N1 version. There are better close-up lenses of a larger size that can be used with step-up rings.

 

[Paul Pasco]

Welcome to the forum! I have tried lots of macro options for my V1s and I keep coming back to the 30-110 with ether a Nikon 3T or 4T close up lens. I am totally happy with the sharpness on the 10 mp sensor as well as the working distance this gets me. I need to point out that I am not trying to work at super high magnificaions.

 

[Daniel Oh]

Welcome,

I have filters, extension tubes, and FT-1 with 85 mm DX Micro.

I agree with others. I recommend FT1. 60 mm is the sweet spot between 40 and 85. And you can use on a DSLR or Z.

To me FT1/Macro lens better than Extension Tubes better than Macro Filter.

Have Fun!

 

[RichDitch]

I didn't think to add photos to my original post, so here are a couple. The 40/2.8 on a V@, and a quick shot using it.











--
You can see a lot just by looking.
WSSA #449

 

[Michael Benveniste]

You may find this page to be of interest:

Using Extension Tubes with Nikon 1 - Small Sensor Photography by Thomas Stirr

This article provides tips on using extension tubes with Nikon 1 gear and shares some images captured hand-held at the Niagara Butterfly Conservatory.

smallsensorphotography.com

Without knowing what size models you are thinking of photographing, I can't say which approach would work best for you. But if you decide on an accessory close-up lens, I would choose an achromatic model such as the Nikon 4T, Canon 250D, or Marumi 330 DHG instead of the single element N1-CL1.


If you wish, I can post an example of appropriate size with a V2, an FT-1 and a 60mm f/2.8D (manually focused), but I don't have either N1 extension tubes nor a small diameter close-up lens.

 

[Naia]

Wow! Thank you all so much for all this super helpful information! And the photos are great, it’s wonderful to see examples! Thank you so much for taking the time!

I really am tempted the most by the FT1 adapter! Also it will enable to me to use other lenses and probably be more versatile, all round. Seeing the photos of the macro lenses on the V2 body has really helped too, they don’t look anywhere near as bulky once they’re on there, and that photo of the ruler was very helpful too! I’m going to have to start hunting for a good second hand deal.

I’m definitely taking the N1-Cl1 off the list then, and I will have a look into achromats, and see what kind of prices I can find. Thanks for all the suggestions, The links are really helpful!!!

The miniatures are 35mm, so without the macro options, I currently need to be a fair distance from them with my other lenses. I’m looking forward to seeing how the 70-300mm fairs when it arrives (so excited about this lens). But I do want the option to be able to do other macro photos.

Getting super close to subjects is about the only thing missing in my N1 range. I’ve really fallen back in love with this range, I’m so sad they never brought out a dedicated macro N1 lens. Still dream that they’ll realise one day what a mistake it was discontinuing the N1 range and bring it back from the dead, if only!!!!

Thanks again for all the advice, I’m gonna get on with researching these options, and start hunting for that FT1!!!

 

[rich_cx139]

Wow! Thank you all so much for all this super helpful information! And the photos are great, it’s wonderful to see examples! Thank you so much for taking the time!

I really am tempted the most by the FT1 adapter! Also it will enable to me to use other lenses and probably be more versatile, all round. Seeing the photos of the macro lenses on the V2 body has really helped too, they don’t look anywhere near as bulky once they’re on there, and that photo of the ruler was very helpful too! I’m going to have to start hunting for a good second hand deal.

I’m definitely taking the N1-Cl1 off the list then, and I will have a look into achromats, and see what kind of prices I can find. Thanks for all the suggestions, The links are really helpful!!!

The miniatures are 35mm, so without the macro options, I currently need to be a fair distance from them with my other lenses. I’m looking forward to seeing how the 70-300mm fairs when it arrives (so excited about this lens). But I do want the option to be able to do other macro photos.

Getting super close to subjects is about the only thing missing in my N1 range. I’ve really fallen back in love with this range, I’m so sad they never brought out a dedicated macro N1 lens. Still dream that they’ll realise one day what a mistake it was discontinuing the N1 range and bring it back from the dead, if only!!!!

Thanks again for all the advice, I’m gonna get on with researching these options, and start hunting for that FT1!!!

Great!

OK 35mm is quite large. People are recommending the ft1 since that’s all you need with the lenses you have i.e. the 60 micro ( or another nikon micro ).

They have got them at mpb for 104 quid at the mo.

If you want cheaper, I have a range of achromats and tubes and could do a test shot or so to confirm what you think you want to get when you have decided - let me know - otherwise, good look with your miniatures photography.

richard

 

[Naia]

They have got them at mpb for 104 quid at the mo.

If you want cheaper, I have a range of achromats and tubes and could do a test shot or so to confirm what you think you want to get when you have decided - let me know - otherwise, good look with your miniatures photography.

richard

Yeah I’ve been looking at the two available on mpb the last few days umming and ahhing

I would absolutely appreciate that, as I think I may well go one of those two routes as well as the FT1 eventually. I like the idea of having an even more portable option as well, the achromats or tubes would definitely take up way less space in the kit bag, for travel situations. But the collector in me probably won’t be able to resist the FT1. I’d really love to get even more use out my SLR lenses! Gonna have a deeper look into these achromats and see which ones people have mentioned are currently available over here. But it would be great to see how they stack up against the tubes. Is there any difference in light between the two options? Obviously want to keep the ISO as low as poss! Thanks again!

 

[rich_cx139]

They have got them at mpb for 104 quid at the mo.

If you want cheaper, I have a range of achromats and tubes and could do a test shot or so to confirm what you think you want to get when you have decided - let me know - otherwise, good look with your miniatures photography.

richard

Yeah I’ve been looking at the two available on mpb the last few days umming and ahhing

I would absolutely appreciate that, as I think I may well go one of those two routes as well as the FT1 eventually. I like the idea of having an even more portable option as well, the achromats or tubes would definitely take up way less space in the kit bag, for travel situations. But the collector in me probably won’t be able to resist the FT1. I’d really love to get even more use out my SLR lenses! Gonna have a deeper look into these achromats and see which ones people have mentioned are currently available over here. But it would be great to see how they stack up against the tubes. Is there any difference in light between the two options? Obviously want to keep the ISO as low as poss! Thanks again!

The tubes will lose you a bit - as do all lenses when you focus in. The effect is reduced with achromats cos they reduce the focal length of the lens.

If you like vids, this guy explains things ( slowly )

There is also the Cambridge in Colour site with relevant stuff to your question about aperture/exposure in macro:

Photography Tools

www.cambridgeincolour.com

Tubes are probably most useful on shorter FL lenses - haven’t actually tried any on the 70-300. The rule of thumb for 35 mm is tubes for FL less than 100 and achromats for teles.

For achromats it’s probably useful to have at least a couple of diopter eg for the 30-110, as Paul uses, the Nikon 3T and 4T at 1.5 and 2.9 - the Canon equivalents are 2 and 4 I think. the larger dia 5T and 6T are better for the 70-300. Takes patience to track these down on ebay but they do come up.

Easiest to find are the Marumis and Kenkos in the UK via amazon but expensive.

Raynoxs are good for high magnification. The one I got was £19 from cash converters. You just have to keep your eyes open.

 

[iserp]

I have used extension tubes (a set made of a 10mm and a 16mm) with both the 30-110 and the 70-300. I like the results, but I have not compared them to other solutions.



The combination with the 30-110 is very easy to use, as it is very small and manegeable, specially for insects near the ground. However, it loses contrast easily if used at 110mm at its widest aperture. I try to use it in the middle of the range (60-80mm) and usually stopped down (f/8). I guess that makes it too dark for inside shots. Here are a few examples (I think I have stacked both the 10 and 16 mm tubes for all of these):













The 70-300 is more difficult to handle. I would say that at 70mm, the focusing distance and magnification is not too different to the 30-110. However, the longer you go, the less magnification you have (I guess I could use longer extension tubes, but i dont have them). Here are a few examples:

 

[iserp]

As a fun exercise, here is a photo of me taking the frog picture. Can you see the frog? :-D

 

[Naia]

The tubes will lose you a bit - as do all lenses when you focus in. The effect is reduced with achromats cos they reduce the focal length of the lens.

If you like vids, this guy explains things ( slowly )

There is also the Cambridge in Colour site with relevant stuff to your question about aperture/exposure in macro:

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/photography-tools.htm

Tubes are probably most useful on shorter FL lenses - haven’t actually tried any on the 70-300. The rule of thumb for 35 mm is tubes for FL less than 100 and achromats for teles.

For achromats it’s probably useful to have at least a couple of diopter eg for the 30-110, as Paul uses, the Nikon 3T and 4T at 1.5 and 2.9 - the Canon equivalents are 2 and 4 I think. the larger dia 5T and 6T are better for the 70-300. Takes patience to track these down on ebay but they do come up.

Easiest to find are the Marumis and Kenkos in the UK via amazon but expensive.

Raynoxs are good for high magnification. The one I got was £19 from cash converters. You just have to keep your eyes open.

Oh great, thank you so much for all this info, I will watch the vid and check out the link. And see what I can track down

 

[Naia]

As a fun exercise, here is a photo of me taking the frog picture. Can you see the frog? :-D

Yesssss I see him!!! Took me a while to spot him

Thanks so much for the info and sample photos too, they look incredible! I’m amazed how well these tubes work.

 

[RichDitch]

Very nice images!

 

[sybersitizen]

... Gonna have a deeper look into these achromats and see which ones people have mentioned are currently available over here. But it would be great to see how they stack up against the tubes. Is there any difference in light between the two options?

Tubes always reduce the effective aperture because they cause physical extension. The more extension, the smaller the effective aperture.

Close-up lenses don't do that, so they have that advantage. However, they almost always cause more edge softness than you'll get with tubes. If you want to control that you have to stop down more, so the light advantage is lost.

Maybe summarize it like this: Close-up lenses are more convenient and provide more magnification for long lenses. Tubes are less likely to introduce aberrations and provide more magnification for short lenses.

 

[rich_cx139]

... Gonna have a deeper look into these achromats and see which ones people have mentioned are currently available over here. But it would be great to see how they stack up against the tubes. Is there any difference in light between the two options?

Tubes always reduce the effective aperture because they cause physical extension. The more extension, the smaller the effective aperture.

Yes and it’s the same for a lens which has a much larger focus throw - such as macro lenses for example- always dimmer as you approach 1:1.

Close-up lenses don't do that, so they have that advantage. However, they almost always cause more edge softness than you'll get with tubes. If you want to control that you have to stop down more, so the light advantage is lost.

Maybe summarize it like this: Close-up lenses are more convenient and provide more magnification for long lenses. Tubes are less likely to introduce aberrations and provide more magnification for short lenses.