Manual Focus Nikon Glass
/forum/topic/929565/2622

1       2       3              2622      
2623
       2624              5887       5888       end

saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 3699
Country: United States

Thanks Jose! I have also tried to combine the TC16A and the TC301 on the 500mm to tackle the moon at 1600mm but my tripod didn't cooperate, have to work more on stabilizing that particular setup.

Samy

asiostygius wrote:
Samy, fantastic details!
Your manged very well this 800mm f/6.4 heavy artillery.



bruni
Registered: Feb 15, 2012
Total Posts: 1650
Country: Australia

asiostygius wrote:
Wow Ronny, how did you get this "misty" effect around the plane??



+1

double WOW

that's freaky Ronny - yes I'd like to know about that misty effect too.

ben



bruni
Registered: Feb 15, 2012
Total Posts: 1650
Country: Australia

Lieutenant Z wrote:
Hi all,
When my daughter is in the mood for a little spring cleaning......
85 1.8 HC




Phillippe - welcome back - been a long time even for you......too long!! .......don't do that again, please.

amazing focussing with the 85 - Curtis tells me my own copy is on its way back to me (not sure I believe him) but if it ever arrives I'll take it out and see if I can manage this kind of shot (although I know the answer - I've tried it with the zeiss 85 and there's no way - my hat off to you)

ben



designdog
Registered: Oct 05, 2004
Total Posts: 227
Country: United States

Very nice photos here! I even have some of these lenses, but could not get close to the talent on display here!

Perhaps I can be helpful though. For the moment at least, I have decided to abandon Lightroom, in favor of Photoshop. Why? Because I can do everything in Photoshop that I can do in Lightroom, plus (using Smart Objects) go back and rework the raw file after applying layers, etc. Yes, the files can get larger. but there will be fewer of them, as gone will be the tiff files you get going back and forth from Lightroom to Photoshop.

What about all of my Lightroom presets? Here is where I am helpful! I found this:
http://www.fotoff.by/lr2acr.htm
Simply upload your Lightroom preset (you can do more than one at a time) and it is converted to ACR. Then place it in the appropriate folder on your computer, and you are good to go.

This may not last. But for now...



bruni
Registered: Feb 15, 2012
Total Posts: 1650
Country: Australia

rafaelcasd wrote:
This is truly my last 55mm 1.2 SC test posting, I decided to draw a quick comparison between the SC and the 50mm 1.2 ais. I did not want to work too much, therefore decided NOT to use the D800. The differences between these lenses are decades, therefore the difference should be obvious on a D3, right!

Pictures first, comments at the end. I will not post crops, but these pictures are full res in flickr if you care to inspect.

Test under bright sunlight with white subjects in the frame, worst condition for these lenses. ISO 100 D3. NO aberration correction, lateral or logitudinal, Color balance manual to sunlight. NO processing whatsoever other than NX2 RAW rendition as landscape, equal settings.

Both focused carefully in the same spot, a little flower that is in the shade of the white ones, to place the white flowers ever so slightly out of focus.

First the 55 full open
[urlckr

The 50 full open

[url=n Flickr

The 55 at 5.6, optimal aperture for detail definition

[urlckr

The 50mm at 5.6

[urlon Flickr

My conclusions:

The 55 is a tinge warmer, the 50 a tinge sharper, but I am not too sure as these are small diferences.

Hereby I authoritatively conclude:

Maybe I am not such a good tester.

Maybe the difference between these two lenses is really not significant, at least for weed photography in sunlight. One would need to spend a full day with a D800E under all kinds of light conditions, subjects, apertures and distances, which I do not care to do.

Maybe this type of testing is a waste of time. The only good lens test is to verify a lens you bought is not damaged.

PS: Maybe a little frustrated the more beautiful rendition of the 55mm and the much sharper 50mm did not obviate their differences, casting doubt in my pre-conceptions.

Hereby I leave you more enlightened.






Rafael - I think there must be a lot of sample variation.

I agree the 55 renders more beautifully. Mine's pretty good around f2. I didn't find my 50 1.4 SC was any sharper than my 55 - but then I'm not much of a tester. In my case - my 50 1.4S seems a little sharper than the SC - but the differences are so small as to be irrelevant.....probably.

ben



saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 3699
Country: United States

And another one with the 800mm combo at 1/2500s, also effective f/9, and ISO 800.

It may be the dark eyed junco (?), possibly a juvenile. The bird was just comfortably resting against the pine cone.








Foggy14
Registered: May 01, 2010
Total Posts: 1471
Country: United States

George, very nice Wooly Mammoth.

Jorge, the b&w of the girls on the carnival ride is very eye-catching.

Thanks Samy, love the perspective of the Lincoln statue shot. The long-range cardinal is fantastic!

Philip, great "Box Hat Girl" and the garage door is very cool.

David, nice ones of the flowering tree and the great looking dogs.

Ray, I like your bridge shot, even if it's "Not the Golden Gate Bridge."

Ronny, beautiful tube shots.

Jose, terrific detail on the mosaics and a great evening sky.

Curtis, very nice ferry shots.

John, "Really Dad?" is a classic and "Scrabble" proves that MF lenses can capture fast action.

Philippe, very nice ones of your daughter.

Chin, great pano with 45mm PC-E.

Sam, beautiful Iris shot!



saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 3699
Country: United States

And a closer crop image of the day dreaming junco.









Foggy14
Registered: May 01, 2010
Total Posts: 1471
Country: United States

I've been spending so much of my photo time playing with the very addicting silver efex pro, it was time to come up for some air. Here are a couple shots of California Poppies that have been blooming recently:



saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 3699
Country: United States

And finally for today's back yard bird series is the caught in the act look on this cardinal.

800mm, 1/2500s, f/9 effective aperture and ISO 800.








saph
Registered: Jun 10, 2012
Total Posts: 3699
Country: United States

Jeff, really liked especially the first one with the bright orange and yellow poppies against the green background. Very nice!!



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

I was just taking stock of all my images I have stored on my computer and wow, I have a lot...(over 400GB, just from my D7000...I have three other cameras, plus my wife's too) What do you folks do to archive your photos? Do you keep DNG, PSD, NEF...? I was thinking of keeping only the DNG and PSD, plus a web size JPG. What do you folks think?



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

kwoodard wrote:
I was just taking stock of all my images I have stored on my computer and wow, I have a lot...(over 400GB, just from my D7000...I have three other cameras, plus my wife's too) What do you folks do to archive your photos? Do you keep DNG, PSD, NEF...? I was thinking of keeping only the DNG and PSD, plus a web size JPG. What do you folks think?


I have about 900GB myself from the D80/D300/D700 and now D800 + my wife's and my daughter's cameras + my LX7 and m43 GH-2. I also have several thousand slides digitized too which contributes to this amount. Some video, but not too much. I just ordered two 2TB drives to replace my two 1TB drives that are in a RAID 1 config. The D800 files are by far the largest fraction of my images by size.

So, I have a local copy of my images (NEF, JPGs, and some TIFFs) and once a week or so I back this up to a Network Attached Storage (NAS) array. I have no off-site back-up currently, but I plan on leaving a 1TB portable drive with the bank in their safe deposit box once every 6 months or so.

I save my NEFs and usually spit out a downsized JPG (about a 12MP size) for my wife's use (she does not know what to do with NEFs). Her cameras are all JPG output.

John

PS - What I'd like to do, if I had the time, is to put together a rather thick book of images for each year - done with Shutterfly (our preferred printer service) - so that we have at least a hard copy of our most precious family images.



mp356
Registered: May 31, 2009
Total Posts: 5639
Country: United States

Zichar wrote:
Recce-ed for a new spot trying to catch the lightshow from the casino in the horizon
But didn't find a suitable one and the clock was ticking
Went scrambling to an old spot instead sans lightshow
45PCE shift pano



kups by Zichar, on Flickr


Nice cityscape. Great colors and detail.


mp356
Registered: May 31, 2009
Total Posts: 5639
Country: United States

sbarricklow wrote:
Iris from the garden using a 50 mm F1.2 AIS



Very nice!



mp356
Registered: May 31, 2009
Total Posts: 5639
Country: United States

jhinkey wrote:
rafaelcasd wrote:
Lieutenant Z wrote:
Hi all,
When my daughter is in the mood for a little spring cleaning......
85 1.8 HC



Did you notice that Philippe's and John's daughters look alike? MF gene similarity


Hah! Hopefully Philippe's daughter are more well behaved than mine.

Great B&W conversions aren't they?

John


+1 on the conversions (John, I am sure your daughters are angels). Philippe great to see you back. Getting worried about you. Nice work with Nikki's sister.



mp356
Registered: May 31, 2009
Total Posts: 5639
Country: United States

Foggy14 wrote:
I've been spending so much of my photo time playing with the very addicting silver efex pro, it was time to come up for some air. Here are a couple shots of California Poppies that have been blooming recently:



Jeff, wonderful poppy images.



mp356
Registered: May 31, 2009
Total Posts: 5639
Country: United States

saph wrote:
And finally for today's back yard bird series is the caught in the act look on this cardinal.

800mm, 1/2500s, f/9 effective aperture and ISO 800.








Samy. definately busted. Nice shot too!


rafaelcasd
Registered: Jan 07, 2011
Total Posts: 2484
Country: United States

I guess I will fail at my promise of no more test shots, well maybe at least Leighton will find this somewhat interesting.

I took two landscape pictures with the 55mm 1.2 SC on the D800 and I am about to prove to you that this lens is sharper at 1.2 than at 5.6 at this distance. It also has equal depth of field. No I do not indulge in single malt scotch. refer to the evidence.

First the full frame D800 at 1.2, contrast enhanced, no other changes from standard landscape pic control. No sharpening.

Please feel free to peruse full sized in flickr if you like to pass time.

nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 1.2 D800 landscape by Rafael CA, on Flickr

Now at 5.6

nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 5.6 D800 landscape by Rafael CA, on Flickr

The following claims are laid: the 1.2 photo may glow with aberrations and has less contrast but it is sharper than the 5.6 and has identical depth of field.

The proof for depth of field, go look at full size in Flickr.

The proof for sharpness/definition: look at the birds


nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 1.2 D800 landscape crop bird by Rafael CA, on Flickr

nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 5.6 D800 landscape crop bird by Rafael CA, on Flickr

There is more discernible detail in the 1.2 photo below that in the 5.6 one. This lens may peak at 2.8, will have to test that.
Now look at the 'yute'

nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 1.2 D800 landscape crop yute by Rafael CA, on Flickr

nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 5.6 D800 landscape crop yute by Rafael CA, on Flickr

Now just for kicks a lake pic at 5.6 note the people on it

nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 1.2 D800 landscape lake hodges by Rafael CA, on Flickr

It is a couple having their picture taken!

nikon nikkor 55mm 1.2 sc at 1.2 D800 landscape lake hodges crop photoshoot by Rafael CA, on Flickr

This particular sample curves the field in on the extreme right side, not the left, kind of interesting, but it does not ruin the photos. I am happy with it.

No more for now.



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

jhinkey wrote:
kwoodard wrote:
I was just taking stock of all my images I have stored on my computer and wow, I have a lot...(over 400GB, just from my D7000...I have three other cameras, plus my wife's too) What do you folks do to archive your photos? Do you keep DNG, PSD, NEF...? I was thinking of keeping only the DNG and PSD, plus a web size JPG. What do you folks think?


I have about 900GB myself from the D80/D300/D700 and now D800 + my wife's and my daughter's cameras + my LX7 and m43 GH-2. I also have several thousand slides digitized too which contributes to this amount. Some video, but not too much. I just ordered two 2TB drives to replace my two 1TB drives that are in a RAID 1 config. The D800 files are by far the largest fraction of my images by size.

So, I have a local copy of my images (NEF, JPGs, and some TIFFs) and once a week or so I back this up to a Network Attached Storage (NAS) array. I have no off-site back-up currently, but I plan on leaving a 1TB portable drive with the bank in their safe deposit box once every 6 months or so.

I save my NEFs and usually spit out a downsized JPG (about a 12MP size) for my wife's use (she does not know what to do with NEFs). Her cameras are all JPG output.

John

PS - What I'd like to do, if I had the time, is to put together a rather thick book of images for each year - done with Shutterfly (our preferred printer service) - so that we have at least a hard copy of our most precious family images.

So you only keep the original files, not the digital negatives, some JPG/TIFF, and nothing else? I guess once I print a picture, I don't necessarily need to keep the PSD files (those are the big ones, sometimes 300mb each). That would certainly keep my storage in check. I plan on backing up to DVD here soon. I know hard drive space is cheap, but I don't have any cash at the moment to use that medium.

Any other thoughts on the subject?



1       2       3              2622      
2623
       2624              5887       5888       end