James Markus wrote:
Really good set. I recently picked up the only Tessar lens Nikon ever made - the Nikkor 45mm f2.8 GN Auto Non-Ai Lens. A pancake lens. It is very sharp even in infrared. I got it because my Contaflex II has one built in,and also is very sharp
Thanks. I do love this little pancake lens. I bought it as a travel lens, but now it's the only lens I use on the Contax.
James Markus wrote:
Huss, that Sigma Art 35mm f1.4 is really sharp. Every time I look at those f1.4's I chicken out on the size. The Nikkor 35mm f1.4 ais is smaller than an apple, but I can appreciate the results you get.
Yeah, believe you me I would still be using my 35mm f2 AF-D if it did not fail. Loved that lens. Perfect size too.
Here's my 35 1.4 AI-S vs the Art 35:
And this is a pic taken w the 35 1.4 AI-S at 1.4 on Fuji 200:
As you can see, at 1.4 it is a gorgeous, dreamy, almost ethereal render. Completely different from the ultra sharp, clinical and transparent rendering of the Sigma.
Does this make it 'worse'? Not if this is the look you are going for. But the Sigma is much more versatile in as much you can just shoot it at 1.4 at any distance and you will get sharp images.
With the Nikon, at 1.4 you need to be close up and embrace the look. I doubt much can be resolved at mid distance to infinity with this lens at 1.4!
Of course, just stop down but this is to demonstrate the differences. And pretty much why the Sigma is so huge - a lot of glass went into correcting everything.
James Markus wrote:
Really good set. I recently picked up the only Tessar lens Nikon ever made - the Nikkor 45mm f2.8 GN Auto Non-Ai Lens. A pancake lens. It is very sharp even in infrared. I got it because my Contaflex II has one built in,and also is very sharp
I think the 45mm 2.8 P - introduced with the FM3A - is also a Tessar lens. Even smaller than the 45mm GN!
Pic taken with the GN and C200:
Pic taken with the 45 P and C200:
The GN has a very funky focus feel where it feels like there is a dead zone in the middle of the throw - but I think that has something to do with how it is meant to sync with flash settings?
@Desmolicious that 35 ai-s shot looks incredible. I love that dreamy look and have never had a f-mount lens that gives that. I wonder what else pulls it off, ideally that’s cheap.
Cloud75 wrote:
@Desmolicious@ that 35 ai-s shot looks incredible. I love that dreamy look and have never had a f-mount lens that gives that. I wonder what else pulls it off, ideally that’s cheap.
The 35mm f2.0 ai has incredible even bokeh. Not as dreamy or crazy as the f1.4 ais. For some stupid reason I thought I didn't need three 35mm Nikkors and sold my ai. Major regrets.
The GN has a very funky focus feel where it feels like there is a dead zone in the middle of the throw - but I think that has something to do with how it is meant to sync with flash settings?
Back in the dark ages when I still was using Nikons, I bought a 45 GN, found a how to service guide and took it to a local shop. When it returned, the dead spot was reduced with a much smoother transition to focus. It's the design of the lens. Since it was designed to be used with electronic flash, Nikon used a cam to drive both the focus and aperture blades simultaneously to adjust for the flash output. Most of them haven't been used or serviced in decades any they all have the dead spot until the cam connects. It also focuses in the opposite direction of all the other Nikkors.
The GN has a very funky focus feel where it feels like there is a dead zone in the middle of the throw - but I think that has something to do with how it is meant to sync with flash settings?
Yeah, Pretty sure all the 45mm f2.8 Nikkors are Tessar formula. You know that saying about the sincerest form of flattery is imitation. I think Nikon made that lens in honor of the design.
The GN has a very funky focus feel where it feels like there is a dead zone in the middle of the throw - but I think that has something to do with how it is meant to sync with flash settings?
"Technically" the 45p is an Elmar rather than Tessar clone (if we are to believe Leicas nonsense about how the Elmar is actually totally unique and different from the Tessar). The aperture is after the first element (like the Elmar) rather than behind the middle element (like on the GN and most Tessars). All of this is irrelevant if you're like me and you don't even know how to stop down the lens...wide-open all the time.
Nikon changed the design when they switched to the 2.5
My Rollei A110 also uses a Tessar lens!
I should have doubted the claim that I read, because it has to be the most copied lens design for generations. Even my Agfa Solinar lens on the Isolett II are Tessar. When Zeiss sold their IP to Yashica (later acquired by Kyocera) they must have thought - "everyone is using our design anyway".
James Markus wrote:
I should have doubted the claim that I read, because it has to be the most copied lens design for generations. Even my Agfa Solinar lens on the Isolett II are Tessar. When Zeiss sold their IP to Yashica (later acquired by Kyocera) they must have thought - "everyone is using our design anyway".
The Tessar design was patented in 1902 and the patent expired in 1920. So everyone was free to copy the design, including Leitz with the Elmar
Also, after WWII there was practically no IP protection for Carl Zeiss Jena designs and both Soviet and Japanese lens makers copied a lot of Zeiss designs. Many of the early Nikon lenses are heavily inspired by Zeiss lenses e.g. their 85mm f1.8 from 1964 is basically a Biotar copy with some tweaks.
James Markus wrote:
Why is he free climbing? Having a safety line should be obvious.
This is a boulder problem not a rope climb, albeit one that is rather tall at ~16ft/5m. They have a spotter and, blocked by the ferns in the foreground, some crash pads in case they fall. At v0, the challenge is more mental than physical. I was nearby, working on a different boulder problem much lower to the ground.
I was nearby, working on a different boulder problem much lower to the ground.