Manual Focus Nikon Glass
/forum/topic/929565/2707

1       2       3              2707      
2708
       2709              4264       4265       end

kwoodard
Registered: Aug 04, 2012
Total Posts: 2900
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: 2078
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: 5101
Country: United States

oooops sorry



pburke
Registered: Oct 08, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
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: 5101
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: 2078
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: 5996
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: 2622
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: 2622
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: 7719
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: 2622
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: 5996
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: 7719
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



NightOwl Cat
Registered: Feb 19, 2007
Total Posts: 7719
Country: United States

Sounds like someone is telling you the time to buy is now...

jhinkey wrote:
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 your 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 . . . .



MDoc9523
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Total Posts: 5101
Country: United States

Another wow shot Jose. I like the color version better



pburke
Registered: Oct 08, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: United States

jhinkey wrote:



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


thanks for the summary. Sounds like the f3.5 is the clear winner. I suppose the "f2.8" part was the selling point of the design change, but - duh. Perhaps they behave differently on film cameras, but that's not relevant for me.

Peter



jhinkey
Registered: Jan 08, 2010
Total Posts: 5996
Country: United States

Simply awesome Jose! Love them both!



philipj
Registered: Dec 01, 2010
Total Posts: 850
Country: Switzerland

Glad to see the thread is humming along just fine. Free time is at a minimum these days, but I try to at least keep up with the photos, if not the conversation. So many great photos of such a variety of subjects, a truly unique corner of the internet.

Margot passed her half-year milestone a week and some days ago, and is growing in leaps and bounds. She army crawls around, has started eating solids, has gotten a bit better at being able to sleep, and is as beautiful as any little girl could be. A portrait from today with the 180mm f/2.8 AI-s, wide open, as this lens should be used.


Eeyore by philipjohnson, on Flickr



pburke
Registered: Oct 08, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: United States

Another stacked image - a model of probably my favorite race car of all time

first the real thing - last summer at Road America, D7000 with 300mm f4.5 ED-IF AIS, iso 220, 1/500s f11 (GoPro cameras should not be allowed at vintage races...)







and my own copy, 1/32nd scale, about 6 inches long






9 image focus stack, taken with the D600 and 105mm f2.5 and K2-5 extension tubes. All images iso 100, 1/60s f8, two remote strobes and some diffuser cloth. I had to do some clone tool cleanup in some areas, because the master images were spaced just a little too much, although you can only see that in full zoom.


100% detail crop






the full image here


pbraymond
Registered: Oct 23, 2009
Total Posts: 1080
Country: United States

Philip, Margot is just too adorable.

John, I'd love to see the very capable 500mm f4P in your very capable hands!

Jose, very much like the pano of the forum in Pompeii.

Laura, beautiful arrangement of bananas and strawberries.

Leighton, I'm glad some of us at least have beautiful scenery to go along with the snow, nice captures this morning.

Goran, welcome. Good series in the baseball themed shots.

Curtis, your shot of bay bridge photographers reminded me of something we saw in Italy last year - a lot of tourists who did not mind toting around an ipad as their main camera. I wonder what all the camera designers are thinking, keep downsizing or maybe get the right balance of features to attract the masses.

Laura, I did not get anywhere for March Madness, the BB shots are from the University of Toledo, participating in the WNIT tournament.



1       2       3              2707      
2708
       2709              4264       4265       end