Nauticam newest MFO-1

[Architeuthis]

22 minutes ago, ChipBPhoto said:

Thank you so much @Edward Lai for the information, background, and bringing this new product to life.  And thank you @Alex_Mustard for your vision and direction.  It does in fact appear to be a game changing approach with terrific results!  As someone who has taken a significant interest in macro photography, I see quite a number of scenarios where this will prove to be a tool leading to greater success.  I can’t wait to add it to my tool kit.

 

 

It may change a little the way how to use and store diopters. Often, a single flip diopter with SMC and the bare lens in macroport is used...

 

With MFO-1 on the macroport (mounting MFO-1 on the flip diopter would not make too much sense, except to be able to photograph subjects >1m away, what is not the usual application of a macrolens), one could have a SMC on the flip holder, for coming closer for small subjects, but needs to remove the MFO-1 before using the SMC.

So either one uses a double flip holder with both SMC and MFO on it (not really handsome), or one waives the flip diopter, screws the MFO or SMC on and mounts a receipe on an arm to store the diopter not in use...

 

Edited October 22 by Architeuthis

[Dave_Hicks]

1 hour ago, Architeuthis said:

 

With MFO-1 on the macroport (mounting MFO-1 on the flip diopter would not make too much sense, except to be able to photograph subjects >1m away, what is not the usual application of a macrolens), one could have a SMC on the flip holder, for coming closer for small subjects, but needs to remove the MFO-1 before using the SMC.

 

I used a 60mm macro lens to shoot Thresher Sharks in the Philippines with great success. The sharks did not come close enough to fill the frame at 35mm so I switched to a 60mm and got some great pictures.

 

That was a very specific scenario, but its not unheard of for me to shoot a big octopus or crab that comes along when I have a macro lens mounted. That will require getting more like 1-2meters back.

[Isaac Szabo]

Thanks for the info @Edward Lai! It sounds like just the thing I (and others) have been wanting. Do you know if it will also work with 60mm macros on full frame?

[Troporobo]

Thanks a lot for the explanations, it’s clear now.  This does look very promising! 

[JayceeB]

I'm not sure I quite understand the advantage of using this lens on an RF100mm yet. 

Mininum working distance from the port glass of the lens alone is ~80mm for 1.4X magnification.

With the MFO-1, minimum working distance can be reduced to 20mm, but you only get an additional .2X magnification = 1.6X.  

To me, I'd rather have an 80mm working distance to light the subject and miss out on the .2X extra magnification.

 

I think I may be missing something elementary here.

[Isaac Szabo]

45 minutes ago, JayceeB said:

I think I may be missing something elementary here.

 

Image quality is claimed to be far better than shooting through a flat port. It's clear from Edward's post that this is the main reason for this lens.

 

A secondary benefit for some is reducing working distance by shifting the focus range a little closer which helps in poor visibility (so you're shooting through less water). This is a common issue where I shoot but isn't a factor in locations with great visibility. I don't shoot blackwater, but I gather this might help with that too.

 

There is a slight increase in max magnification, but it's not very significant and probably won't be a main reason people buy this lens. There are stronger diotpers available for that purpose. 

 

I'm guessing this lens is probably not going to interest people who are already happy with the sharpness of their macro setups, shoot in really clear water, and/or want really high magnification. 

Edited October 23 by Isaac Szabo

[JayceeB]

10 hours ago, Isaac Szabo said:

 

Image quality is claimed to be far better than shooting through a flat port. It's clear from Edward's post that this is the main reason for this lens.

 

Thank you, Isaac.  I look forward to seeing some samples with and without the MFO-1.

[Isaac Szabo]

2 hours ago, JayceeB said:

 

Thank you, Isaac.  I look forward to seeing some samples with and without the MFO-1.

 

Me too! Hopefully it delivers on the claim. 

[Phil Rudin]

I think several are missing the main up side here, the lens is called MID-range Optimizer. Its main function is not as a closeup lens but as a way to hit a focus range not available on current macro lenses like Canon 100, Nikon 105, Sigma 105 or Sony 90mm. These lenses have a focus limiter switch which gives you only two options for macro. You can set the lens for focus from 1:1 (1.4:1 Canon) to infinity or 1:1 to 0.5 meters that is 50cm. The MFO-1 appears to allow you to now shoot from 1:1/1.1:1/1.2:1 (depending on lens) but now more than doubles the the max working distance to around 114cm or 1.14 meters (+/- depending on lens) which is about as far away as a 90 to 105 could possibly give you a respectable image. This will allow you to more than double working distance without the lens "hunting" like it would it you were set at 1:1 to infinity mode. I can't stress enough what a large upside this could be over having to chose between 0.5 meters max working distance or infinity and the hunting associated with it. 

 

The obvious second upside will be how well it improves LoCA created by the flat port air/water interface. This alone should improve macro images and be worth the price of admission.     

[RVBldr]

Thanks Phil, I get the longer focal range, but to effect that, does it lower the minimum focal distance, extend the max focal distance, or both? In the case of the Sony 90mm, we have the Full, Infinity - .5m, and .5m - .28m. Just trying to clarify how this potentially manifests itself in reality. Does it effectively just minimize the hunting through those ranges? If I select the lower range .28mm -.5m, would we basically get a .28m - 1.42m range? 

[Edward Lai]

On 10/22/2024 at 7:55 PM, Edward Lai said:

A picture taken with one of the 1st MFO prototypes in May, 2024.  The one below is cropped.

 

Edward

Here's the shooting info:

 

Canon 5DsR + EF100mm macro + MFO prototype

ISO200, f/20, 1/125

 

[Phil Rudin]

16 hours ago, RVBldr said:

Thanks Phil, I get the longer focal range, but to effect that, does it lower the minimum focal distance, extend the max focal distance, or both? In the case of the Sony 90mm, we have the Full, Infinity - .5m, and .5m - .28m. Just trying to clarify how this potentially manifests itself in reality. Does it effectively just minimize the hunting through those ranges? If I select the lower range .28mm -.5m, would we basically get a .28m - 1.42m range? 

Hi RV, My guess would be that the limiter switch would be set at 1:1 to infinity and the MFO would do the rest. This however could change from lens to lens and I think Edward would be the better person to ask for clarification. 

[JayceeB]

22 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

I can't stress enough what a large upside this could be over having to chose between 0.5 meters max working distance or infinity and the hunting associated with it. 

So the primary purpose is to eliminate or reduce hunting, and likely negate the need to use the limiting switch.  Secondary purpose is to improve image quality.

[ChipBPhoto]

6 minutes ago, JayceeB said:

So the primary purpose is to eliminate or reduce hunting, and likely negate the need to use the limiting switch.  Secondary purpose is to improve image quality.

Directly from Edward…

 

“- Image quality is far better than shooting through a flat port.

- Literally no noticeable focus hunting as the MFO converts the focus range of the camera lens.

- (for Nikon Z105mm macro) focus range converted to 125mm-1100mm.

- Slightly increases magnification at MFD (Nikon Z105mm macro ~1.2X; Canon RF100mm macro ~1.6X).”

 

A solid overview of what to expect. 
 

Edited October 24 by ChipBPhoto

[Chris Ross]

Edward stated that their engineers are working on measuring data with various camera lenses and it will be uploaded soon.  I would think this data will appear in the port charts, by the time the new lens is released and give a very good idea on what to expect for individual lenses.  Reduced hunting would certainly be welcome.

[humu9679]

On 10/21/2024 at 10:34 AM, ChipBPhoto said:

I've done some checking around today and details remain thin at the moment.  The only thing confirmed is it is a stand alone lens, not used in conjunction with the SMC/CMC, which is what I figured.

 

If it can reduce the MFD for a normal macro lens (i.e. Sony 90 w/ 28cm MFD) and still have a substantially longer focus range than an SMC/CMC, that would be quite useful.  There have been plenty of times I wanted to get closer to the subject, but the MFD would not allow the lens to focus, while at the same time not wanting the extra magnification and super shallow DoF of the SMC/CMC.  This would also match up with the name "Mid-Range Focus Optimizer" in macro terms.  

 

Again, this is just me interpreting the verbiage, but I have no idea if this is actually what it does.

Guess we'll know more in the next 30-60 days....

 

That does sound more useful. I was wondering how to get another lens to work with an SMC/CMC. But this, in effect, will likely increase magnification, say 1:1 to something a bit more. The Canon RF 100 macro does 1:1.4 but might do more, eh?

[pcremone]

I just got back from a long trip to Indonesia, where I was able to extensively test the MFO-1 in Bali and Ambon. I am absolutely satisfied with the improvements that this lens allows you to have, compared to using the plain lens behind a flat port. Certainly, greater ease of focusing and a shorter distance from the subject are the capabilities that emerge immediately with use, then going to view the files comes out a sharpness and a quality of the image of the highest quality.
Here is an example that I got to have all the frame filled.
Setup: Nikon D810, Sigma 105mm macro, Backscatter MF-1 as lighting.

1/250 f16 ISO 250 no crop. 

 

[JS1221]

I spoke to the Nauticam rep at DEMA and he did not have a release date yet, only saying it might be before the end of the year.

 

[makar0n]

Seems that port charts have now been updated. No clue however how will it work with the likes of CMC as well...

 

 

 

452 Euro on Nauticam site:

https://www.nauticam.com/products/mid-range-focus-optimizer-1-mfo-1

 

Edited December 3 by makar0n

[ChipBPhoto]

4 hours ago, makar0n said:

Seems that port charts have now been updated. No clue however how will it work with the likes of CMC as well...

 

My apologies if I am misunderstanding your comment, but the MFO, CMC, etc. are each stand alone lenses.  They do not stack. 

[Architeuthis]

On 11/18/2024 at 5:32 PM, pcremone said:

I just got back from a long trip to Indonesia, where I was able to extensively test the MFO-1 in Bali and Ambon. I am absolutely satisfied with the improvements that this lens allows you to have, compared to using the plain lens behind a flat port. Certainly, greater ease of focusing and a shorter distance from the subject are the capabilities that emerge immediately with use, then going to view the files comes out a sharpness and a quality of the image of the highest quality.
Here is an example that I got to have all the frame filled.
Setup: Nikon D810, Sigma 105mm macro, Backscatter MF-1 as lighting.

1/250 f16 ISO 250 no crop. 

 

 

 

I still do not really understand the advantage of using this new diopter (when looking at the Nauticam portchard for the Sony 90mm macro, I see that max. magnification and working distance are pretty similar with or without MFO-1)...

 

You say that sharpness of the image and other qualities are improved. Can you please explain this in more detail (As far as my understanding is, any additional glass added to a lens (e.g. TC or diopter) leave IQ, at the best, untouched. How is it possible that sharpness improves?)...

 

 

Thanks, Wolfgang

[Chris Ross]

36 minutes ago, Architeuthis said:

 

I still do not really understand the advantage of using this new diopter (when looking at the Nauticam portchard for the Sony 90mm macro, I see that max. magnification and working distance are pretty similar with or without MFO-1)...

 

You say that sharpness of the image and other qualities are improved. Can you please explain this in more detail (As far as my understanding is, any additional glass added to a lens (e.g. TC or diopter) leave IQ, at the best, untouched. How is it possible that sharpness improves?)...

 

 

Thanks, Wolfgang

As I understand things, the issue this deals with is the air-water interface of the flat port, where away from the very centre light rays are refracted through the front port glass which degrades the image.  It is already documented that short macro lenses suffer towards the edges due to this, the situation though is a gradual improvement as each light ray is refracted less and less as the centre is approached so it is only the very centre where light rays are not refracted at all that does not suffer some degradation.  Longer macro lenses also have this abberation in flat ports, however it is just reduced in magnitude, compared to a short macro lens - not eliminated

 

In air it is certainly true that adding glass degrades images by some amount, however in the case of the MFO it is correcting the issues caused by the air water interface of the flat port.  I'm not sure how this is done, perhaps it induces an equal and opposite abberation that is cancelled out as the ray passes through the port glass??

 

Hopefully this is clearly explained.

[makar0n]

20 hours ago, ChipBPhoto said:

 

My apologies if I am misunderstanding your comment, but the MFO, CMC, etc. are each stand alone lenses.  They do not stack. 

 

Still confused about this and somehow had the impression its the cure for short working range on diopters...

Edited December 4 by makar0n

[Davide DB]

49 minutes ago, makar0n said:

 

Still confused about this and somehow had the impression its the cure for short working range on diopters...

 

Re-reading @Edward Lai post I understand that the purpose of the lens is to improve the quality of the flat macro port. Early prototypes also had a slight magnification but the range of focus was prioritized. Thus:

 

• about the same magnification as the macro lens on which it is mounted
• greatly improved image quality
• bonus: extended range of focus

 

Correct me if I am wrong

[humu9679]

4 hours ago, Davide DB said:

 

Re-reading @Edward Lai post I understand that the purpose of the lens is to improve the quality of the flat macro port. Early prototypes also had a slight magnification but the range of focus was prioritized. Thus:

 

• about the same magnification as the macro lens on which it is mounted
• greatly improved image quality
• bonus: extended range of focus

 

Correct me if I am wrong

 

I think you are correct, an improvement in image quality shooting through a flat macro port, with improvements in magnification and range of focus. Here is the Nauticam product page: https://www.nauticam.com/products/mid-range-focus-optimizer-1-mfo-1