uhoh7 wrote:
I think the true competition is at least double the price, although the steal once again is the nFD 200/2.8, which is cheaper and reputably excellent.
It's a very famous rock concert lens
Phillip Reeve wrote:
From what I have read the nFD 2.8/200 shows quite a lot of CA, how does the ED 180 compare here?
I think with the nFD tele lenses, you'll definitely benefit from higher performance with the L series models. I.e. 300/4 vs. 300/4L. At 200, the only L was the 200/1.8L introduced at the very end of the FD system, or the 80-200 you have. Therefore, I wouldn't be surprised if the 200/2.8 suffers somewhat compared to the Nikkor 180/2.8 with the benefit of ED optics. Information at Canon's lens museum site implies there were two versions. I think the second was internal focusing. Optics were changed, so it's possible the second version was improved...
Fantastic images Phillip!
BenM wrote:
Quick snaps with the A7R + ZM 85 f2 whilst walking the kids and dog this arvo. Interestingly it appears as though the lens vignettes. I can't remember what aperture I shot at, but the dark corners appear in a number of shots I took.
Great to see this lens in use. Absolutely love the rendering! How easy is it to focus on the a7R?
Edward, the menus are very intuitive, and really fun to setup. There is a thread in this forum, on setup that is very helpful
Martin, very nice bike shot! The Oly 55/1.2 is a neat package, and probably be an excellent combo
Shot from the other evening with A7r and 50 Cron Rigid DR at f/2.0. I am still having problems using the EVF in bright ambient light, even with the settings turned off, particularly when I have the f stop at f/5.6. The LCD is fine, adjusted for bright sunlight, but the EVF tends to be very dark.
rscheffler wrote:
I think with the nFD tele lenses, you'll definitely benefit from higher performance with the L series models. I.e. 300/4 vs. 300/4L. At 200, the only L was the 200/1.8L introduced at the very end of the FD system, or the 80-200 you have. Therefore, I wouldn't be surprised if the 200/2.8 suffers somewhat compared to the Nikkor 180/2.8 with the benefit of ED optics. Information at Canon's lens museum site implies there were two versions. I think the second was internal focusing. Optics were changed, so it's possible the second version was improved...
I am surprised that the Canon 80-200/4 L isn't more popular. It is reasonyably sized, really sharp and has a much better CA correction than the classic 135/2.8 or 200/4 lenses.
Of course one always hungers for the faster lenses but if I am honest I do not think that a 180/2.8 would benefit my images much. A Canon nFD 300/2.8 though ...
Picking my A7 up in an hour, it was ready last Tuesday but I was already camping at Zion/Bryce. FE35 should be here Thursday. Ready with Oly 21/3.5, CY 28/2.8, CY 50/1.7, and Nikon 105/2.5 AI.
