Manual Focus Nikon Glass
/forum/topic/929565/2573

1       2       3              2573      
2574
       2575              5886       5887       end

leighton w
Registered: Nov 12, 2010
Total Posts: 12618
Country: United States

Ronny _Olsson wrote:
Great Shot Ray and Leighton

Thanks Ronny.



pburke
Registered: Oct 08, 2010
Total Posts: 3003
Country: United States

CGrindahl wrote:
Peter (Wisconsin) I love your close work. Those images are stunning. And thanks for the link to focus stacking. I'll have to give it a try. Interestingly, the fellow demonstrating the technique was hand holding his camera. Until I buy a tripod that is the only way I'll be doing it and I doubt it will be more than two images...



It should work fine - now that I know how photoshop does it. First it aligns the layers using the same brains it uses to stich overlaying images into a panorama. It finds matching features and bends and scales things until they fit. Obviously, the better the images overlap, the easier the alignment. I had very little shift between the layers once it was aligned, even though the focal length visibly changes when you change focus on the lens (rather than using a macro rail to move the camera).

The hand-holding technique should be great for extreme depth of field shots with handheld wide angles - two quick shots in succession, trying to hold still, while you turn that focus from high to low, then combine and you have better than f22 DOF while avoiding f22 abberations.



rankamateur
Registered: Nov 25, 2007
Total Posts: 877
Country: United States

Sick of cold weather. Sick of snow and longing for these days again. 50 1.4 AI-S



MDoc9523
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Total Posts: 5115
Country: United States

^^^^^^^^^^
"Those were the days my friend, we thought they'd never end"



leighton w
Registered: Nov 12, 2010
Total Posts: 12618
Country: United States

rankamateur wrote:
Sick of cold weather. Sick of snow and longing for these days again. 50 1.4 AI-S

Amen brother!



raboof
Registered: Mar 04, 2011
Total Posts: 2094
Country: United States

^^^^
Curtis has to reason to be excited like we do. It's so "bleh" over the bay.



MDoc9523
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Total Posts: 5115
Country: United States

"....but the snow is so pretty to look at"



kwoodard
Registered: Aug 04, 2012
Total Posts: 4677
Country: United States

rankamateur wrote:
Sick of cold weather. Sick of snow and longing for these days again. 50 1.4 AI-S

Where is the "Love" button??



pburke
Registered: Oct 08, 2010
Total Posts: 3003
Country: United States

Now that my 16mm fisheye hopes on ebay have been thwarted by posting the auction in front of all the fisheye-starved lurkers in this thread... here's something rare on ebay that may interest some folks who collect rare 50 and 55mm gems:

Compensating Micro Nikkor 55mm f3.5











MDoc9523
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Total Posts: 5115
Country: United States

oooops sorry



pburke
Registered: Oct 08, 2010
Total Posts: 3003
Country: United States

MDoc9523 wrote:
oooops sorry Paul


I should buy it anyway - I don't need it. MUST RESIST

I bid on a 16mm f2.8 last week - in no time it went past my max bid. What exactly is the difference between the 2.8 and 3.5 anyway, other than the way they mount the filters?

Peter



MDoc9523
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Total Posts: 5115
Country: United States

pburke wrote:
MDoc9523 wrote:
oooops sorry Paul


I should buy it anyway - I don't need it. MUST RESIST

I bid on a 16mm f2.8 last week - in no time it went past my max bid. What exactly is the difference between the 2.8 and 3.5 anyway, other than the way they mount the filters?

Peter

I think Laura has both versions. I bought the 3.5 on the recommendation of John.
Sorry called you Paul for some reason



pburke
Registered: Oct 08, 2010
Total Posts: 3003
Country: United States

MDoc9523 wrote:
pburke wrote:
MDoc9523 wrote:
oooops sorry Paul


I should buy it anyway - I don't need it. MUST RESIST

I bid on a 16mm f2.8 last week - in no time it went past my max bid. What exactly is the difference between the 2.8 and 3.5 anyway, other than the way they mount the filters?

Peter

I think Laura has both versions. I bought the 3.5 on the recommendation of John.
Sorry called you Paul for some reason


amazing how often this happens - must be a Peter Paul and Mary thing

On the fisheye - hard to find actual reviews of these old lenses. John had both, so I guess there's a reason he kept the f3.5



jhinkey
Registered: Jan 08, 2010
Total Posts: 8403
Country: United States

pburke wrote:
MDoc9523 wrote:
pburke wrote:
MDoc9523 wrote:
oooops sorry Paul


I should buy it anyway - I don't need it. MUST RESIST

I bid on a 16mm f2.8 last week - in no time it went past my max bid. What exactly is the difference between the 2.8 and 3.5 anyway, other than the way they mount the filters?

Peter

I think Laura has both versions. I bought the 3.5 on the recommendation of John.
Sorry called you Paul for some reason


amazing how often this happens - must be a Peter Paul and Mary thing

On the fisheye - hard to find actual reviews of these old lenses. John had both, so I guess there's a reason he kept the f3.5



Yes, I have the review here in this thread somewhere - Curtis knows what page it's on.

Here's the short story:

16/3.5 AI vs. 16/2.8 AIS:
- 16/3.5 not quite as sharp in the center as the 16/2.8 unless stopped down a bit
- 16/3.5 way sharper in the edges/borders/corners at just about all apertures (wide open up to f/11) both on DX and FX
- 16/3.5 has slightly better flare/ghosting resistance when sun it directly in the frame
- 16/2.8 has slightly better flare/ghosting resistance when the sun is just out of the frame
- 16/2.8 has removable/losable rear filters that MUST be used. 16/3.5 has internal filters on a turret.
- 16/2.8 AIS/D model far more common that the 16/3.5
- Don't remember which one weighs more

- John



asiostygius
Registered: Nov 29, 2011
Total Posts: 3287
Country: Brazil

mp356 wrote:
Zichar wrote:
Night-time outing with Anton
Getting way too old for this ... on a work day no less

45 PCE, full tilt and shift



monday night lights (25032013MarinaBaySands01) by Zichar, on Flickr



Nice time exposure Chin. Very sharp and nice colors.

+ 1
great capture.


asiostygius
Registered: Nov 29, 2011
Total Posts: 3287
Country: Brazil

rankamateur wrote:
Sick of cold weather. Sick of snow and longing for these days again. 50 1.4 AI-S







Nice.
Was this a HDR?


NightOwl Cat
Registered: Feb 19, 2007
Total Posts: 9304
Country: United States

Thanks for that link, PS sure makes that easy, so I'm finally going to get that installed tonight, and then right afterwards, install the Nik Software now that the whole collection is so cheap. Those that have bought bits and pieces before, check your emails for info, those that haven't bought it.. BOY IS IT CHEAP NOW!!

https://plus.google.com/112991908363536599988/posts/dwJAcwuphTa

I was alerted to that from this post:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/600984/3621#11441211

And further down, there's a promo code for an additional 15% off, which brings it down to $126.65 before local sales tax. The licensing is per USER, not per machine.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/600984/3621#11441843

I'm a bit late with this, but if you use this PROMO CODE for the NIK software

jclark you'll get an additional 15% off! so then it $126.65


pburke wrote:
CGrindahl wrote:
Peter (Wisconsin) I love your close work. Those images are stunning. And thanks for the link to focus stacking. I'll have to give it a try. Interestingly, the fellow demonstrating the technique was hand holding his camera. Until I buy a tripod that is the only way I'll be doing it and I doubt it will be more than two images...



It should work fine - now that I know how photoshop does it. First it aligns the layers using the same brains it uses to stich overlaying images into a panorama. It finds matching features and bends and scales things until they fit. Obviously, the better the images overlap, the easier the alignment. I had very little shift between the layers once it was aligned, even though the focal length visibly changes when you change focus on the lens (rather than using a macro rail to move the camera).

The hand-holding technique should be great for extreme depth of field shots with handheld wide angles - two quick shots in succession, trying to hold still, while you turn that focus from high to low, then combine and you have better than f22 DOF while avoiding f22 abberations.




asiostygius
Registered: Nov 29, 2011
Total Posts: 3287
Country: Brazil

Thank you for the kind words Peter, but even though I am a history stuff sucker, I have no competence to write a book on ancient Roman cities

A pano of 4 vertical shots with the Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5 ai + polarizer filter (excuse the huge size, but the original was 3 times this size ):

Pompeii's Forum + Vesuvius pano.


Pompeii's Forum + Vesuvius pano with Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 ai by labecoaves, on Flickr

4 vertical shots pano of Pompeii's Forum + Vesuvius.
D7000 + Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 ai hand held + CPL filter, ISO 320, f/8 at 1/800s.
Even with the polarizer the bluish haze is still visible at Vesuvius.



And the same in a B&W version to fix the bluish haze:



Pompeii's Forum + Vesuvius pano - B&W version by labecoaves, on Flickr



jhinkey
Registered: Jan 08, 2010
Total Posts: 8403
Country: United States

So the local guy with the excellent condition 500/4 AI-P that had the front protective element replaced still has it for sale - now down to $1900. It's an hour trip just to get to him to even see the lens. Meanwhile the mint condition one on the B&S has had the price lowered a bit . . . . MFNAS is very catchy these days . . . .



NightOwl Cat
Registered: Feb 19, 2007
Total Posts: 9304
Country: United States

Thanks Ray! those are some standout flowers. I'm beginning to wonder if my tulips, crocuses, and that other bulb I planted are ever going to bloom.. the leaves have been out since the warm spell in January.

MDoc9523 wrote:
Love that last shot Laura!


Thanks Leighton, it doesn't appear that whatever I did is going to heal soon enough for me. I just want to put my own shoes on and carry on, things to do, places to be, people to see


leighton w wrote:

NightOwl Cat wrote:
Lovely shots, Leighton, and I hate to tell you, but it's still snowing here, so you'll probably have more tomorrow.


Thanks Laura, and it's still snowing here as well. If you look on radar, you can see the low spinning and we are getting the wrap around.

I LOVE your indoor shots! Hope you get the boot off soon.


great news Chuong!

raboof wrote:
Awesome images all. I've been busy but did not miss a page since my last post

I did not have to sell 180mm f2.8 ED AIS and the 300mm f4.5 ED-IF!!!
I am glad that a few of us got the fever and picked some up.



It definitely is!

MDoc9523 wrote:
"....but the snow is so pretty to look at"


Yes, you should, Peter. I haven't tested them side by side though, but I believe the 2.8 has a slightly wider angle.

pburke wrote:
MDoc9523 wrote:
oooops sorry Paul


I should buy it anyway - I don't need it. MUST RESIST

I bid on a 16mm f2.8 last week - in no time it went past my max bid. What exactly is the difference between the 2.8 and 3.5 anyway, other than the way they mount the filters?

Peter



1       2       3              2573      
2574
       2575              5886       5887       end