Since the old Nikkor thread remains locked I thought I'd start a sibling thread.
Any Nikkor images welcome even if you don't think the lens classifies as alt. It'll be interesting to see how the truly alt nikkors compare to the modern ones but that'll be hard if no modern Nikkor images are posted ya?
I'll start it off with this 1983 design modification of a 1968 formula; the Nikkor 35-105mm F/3.5 w/ 1:4 close focusing.
Thanks Bifurcator. It's the first time I shot animals with manual tele lens I used to use the Canon tele 100-400L before. Frustating at first, but it's quite fun
Quite sharp and the f2.8 aperture gives more blur OOF.
Yup! Lots of fun! I totally fell in love with MF when I mounted the Canon nFD 300/2.8 L on my GH1 and camped the hunting grounds of a Japanese Kingfisher for a day... and then another day... and another, and another... Man, that was a blast! I think the most fun I've ever had with a camera!
Here's Nikon's first super-zoom lens... or is it their first ever zoom lens, I forget; The Nikkor 50-300mm F/4.5 (constant aperture I think) 20-element lens modeled and designed after a sherman-tank yet shoots like a high performance target rifle:
Nice shots, both of you. I knew the 300 was an excellent lens, but I didn't even know about that zoom, much less how sharp it is. Bif, was the moon shot wide open?
freaklikeme wrote:
Nice shots, both of you. I knew the 300 was an excellent lens, but I didn't even know about that zoom, much less how sharp it is. Bif, was the moon shot wide open?
I dunno for sure but I think that moon is probably at F/8. My copy of the lens has a little internal haze and I'd likely stop down when shooting high-contrast with it in that condition. Looking at the EXIF I guess a full moon at 1/50s ISO100 is not f/4 (wide open) and indeed probably more like f/8.
Sorry to ask, why Bifurcator & crazeazn's photos didn't show up on my browser (with a message on the image frame : "This image is copyrighted by the owner"). No problem with Sebboh photos though.
On[/url] this image why is the focus/out of focus transition so harsh?
I dunno. That's just what it does when about 12" from the focus point and set wide open I guess.
nixland wrote:
Sorry to ask, why Bifurcator & crazeazn's photos didn't show up on my browser (with a message on the image frame : "This image is copyrighted by the owner"). No problem with Sebboh photos though.
Is your browser set right? Which browser are you using? Maybe there's a government conspiracy against Nikon?
If you click on the link in this message does it display or download the file?
I would say also old Nikkors on Nikon bodies. It makes no sense to have the same lens go from alt to non-alt depending on which body it is on. Say, anything pre-AF.
Bif, most of those shots were already in the old thread -- can't you just post the link to that thread (for whoever hasn't seen the old shots yet) and post new shots here?
I meant more that AF-D and AF-S Nikkor lenses on a Nikon can hardly be considered alt, but if someone uses them on a Canon or other camera, more power to them. The question is where there is a line between alt and non-alt w.r.t Nikkors on Nikon bodies.
Yes that makes sense (sorry removed that part of my post before I saw your reply). Shots from AF Nikkors on Nikon bodies can be posted in the Nikon forum of course.
I was hoping all Nikkors - even the newest nano-cyrstal jobbers. I wanna know the differences in comparison. But it's all good. You guys figure it out and I'll just play along. It's not important. Also yeah, I don't think the body makes a difference. Nikkor on Nikon, sure why not?
Ya see, by my thinking, all Nikkors are alts - and are for quite a few folks here as the popularity of NEX and M4/3 has seemingly increased dramatically in the past year or two. Now what, like a third to half the folks posting in the Alt section are on one of those two? So I was thinking that it would be kinda too inconvenient if I have to go to an entirely different section just to compare a MF version with it's AFS Nano Crystal offspring.
Aham, don't fret, that was just to get it going. It's finished.
crazeazn wrote:
On this image why is the focus/out of focus transition so harsh?
that's the way nikon rolls lately with their 50/1.4s. i'm pretty sure it's a lens design thing. certain zuikos are like that too (particularly the OM 90mm macro).
Manual Nikkors on a Nikon camera could perhaps be considered "alt", since they could easily be used on a Canon? I currently only own one Nikkor, which is the old 24/2.8 AI (same optics as the AI-S and AF-D). It's small, light and gives good results for the money. But you have to stop it down on FF for sharp corners.
This is wide open on Tmax 100, slightly cropped on the right side. The reason for showing this particular picture is the very low distortion. Such short focal lengths often require quite a complicaded and large formula to get low distortion, but in this lens the tradeoff is bad corners instead.
And then a shot with a Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8 AI-S on D700, just to show how very sharp and nice it is for semi-closeups (it goes to 1:2). I don't own the lens any more, but if you find one without oil on the aperture blades, it gives stellar performance and zero distortion on FF. It's sharp from f/2.8 and has a very smooth bokeh. This is at f/4:
Man, that was a blast! I think the most fun I've ever had with a camera!
