Interesting interpretations of "one lens from each manufacturer" we've got going here.
Canon: 35/2 LTM
Nikon: 500/4 P
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Minolta: 58/1.2
Olympus: Pen 25/2.8
Sigma: 120-300/2.8 (almost useful enough to justify putting up with AF)
Zeiss: APO-Macro 120/4 (subject to change after I get my paws on the new APO 135)
Leica: Summilux-R 35/1.4
plasticmotif wrote:
I like your list. Have you tried G28, Oly 50/2 Macro, Nikon 105/1.8, Sigma 150 Macro and Pentax 85/1.4 A?
I have G28/2.8 Biogon and like it a lot,though prefer C/Y 28/2.8Distagon for it's more even sharpness across the frame.
I used to have Sigma 150/2.8 in EF mount (sold it when decided to shift to MF alt lenses as my main equipment) - truly great lens with it's own character.
Never had or tried Nikon 105/1.8,Pentax 85/21.4 and Oly 50/2 macro,but who knows,maybe I'll spot one of these somehow?
c/y 35/1.4
leica m 40/2
zuiko pen f 42/1.2
jupiter-3 50/1.5
rokkor 58/1.2
rokinon 85/1.4
nikkor 105/2.5
for my ideal setup on a FF mirrorless:
canon 17/4 TS-E
c/y 35/1.4
leica m 50/1.4 asph
jupiter-3 50/1.5
rokkor 58/1.2
pentax 77/1.8
rokinon 85/1.4
nikkor ltm 105/2.5
cv 125/2.5 APO
sony 135/2.8 STF
zuiko OM 250/2
if i'm allowed same company different mounts i'd add:
ZF 21/2.8
cv 21/1.8
zm 25/2.8
rokkor-m 40/2
contax g 45/2
contarex 85/2
za 135/1.8
leica R 280/4 APO
minolta 400/4.5 APO
Nice! Phillip, I scored a MD 135/2.8 last night for $17 USD. Small scratch on front element, but still. I love the copy I have now. I'm building up a kit for my wife. She's got a MD 28, MD Sigma 50 Macro, MD 135 now.
My preference for 35mm sensor
Canon: 70-200mm F2.8 L IS II (own)
Zeiss: 21mm Distagon F2.8 (own)
Sigma: 35mm F1.4 (own)
Nikon: 14-24mm F2.8
Tamron: 24-70mm F2.8 VC (The new Canon is better anyway)
Sony: 135mm F2.8 STF
Not sure about the AIS but there is a nice 105mm f1.8, I've seen them in three different used shops over the years, its one of the lenses that keeps pushing me towards a dcs14n.
SoulNibbler wrote:
its one of the lenses that keeps pushing me towards a dcs14n.
The dcs14n always surprised me, a full frame 12Mpx camera 2001? Those specs still hold their own. Is everything but the name in fact a Nikon? Why didn't kodak continue down this path?
The mechanicals were nikon, but the sensor and processing were from kodak. One of the odd bits about the camera is that they used a cmos sensor from fillfactory (a micron spinoff i believe) so it was rather a queer duck with kodak doing pretty much all of the engineering but using someone else's camera and yet another company's sensor. The nikon its based around is actually one of the consumer models which I think held it back a bit as far as perception goes.
As to why they didn't continue further? I can only speculate, but likely the source of bodies became rather scarce when nikon and canon started competing heavily in dslrs and kodak didn't have a lens mount to use for independence. Also, there was a evidently a bit of corporate resistance to kodak cannibalizing film sales, and i doubt it was easy to sell the fraken-camera internally since it depended on so many external suppliers. Its sad since the images from the camera are astounding and so very filmic if you keep it in the meat of the iso range. It was also plagued with delays and bugs.
NOTE: I haven't researched this in a few years so I could be wrong on some details, also I was in highschool when this was current knowledge but the kodak image thread is inspiring to say the least.
Took a stab at some stats so far:
Where people listed multiples, I went with the first one they mentioned. Only nominal data scrubbing so far, but thought I'd share.
Any guesses at the top three lenses mentioned the most so far? I'll reveal after I finish data scrubbing (since there were so many variants at how people wrote the lens info).
