sebboh Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
justruss wrote:
My take is that this lens had a particular value at the time because of what it could allow and given the constraints of the age. These days, the value is almost purely in the historical/rarity/collector's arena.
I find the drawing of OOF regions quite distracting-- even jarring. Particularly for bright shots, but even, to an extent, for dark/night shoots. I think this drawing style was a better fit in the age of film and film-grain noise; with such clean, high-ISO digital images as we see today, the peculiarities (and not in a good way... obviously a subjective thing) of this lens are more visible and come to the fore.
But, as in all things, this is subjective. I find this lens takes away from shots that I would otherwise enjoy more if shot with something else. I even see that in some of the examples posted in this thread.
In some ways I see it as analogous to the Canon EF 1200mm. Still stupid expensive, but I'd much rather have a 600mm + 2x, or 800mm + 1.4x, from an image/use standpoint. ...Show more →
hmm, the bokeh looks better to me than that of most f/1.2 lenses. it also seems closer in drawing to the rokkor 58/1.2 than either of the other nikon f/1.2 lenses. speaking of which, is there a chance those of you who posted images can repost them in the f/1.2 lens thread? there isn't much representation there from this lens.
with regard to what the lens's intended use is, i'd be curious to see what a wide open starfield shot would look like with it. stars aren't going to be sharp no matter what due to atmospheric blur and any other f/1.2 i've shot with would ruin the shot with coma.
|