The lens is sharp in the center wide open with the corners being a touch soft...stopping down to f5.6 sharpens up the corners...stopping down to f8 it's sharp across the image and even sharper at f11...stopping down any further image sharpness declines on DSLR's including full frame...there is vignetting wide open on FF bodies,requiring stopping down to f8 or f11...This old copy is a fairly well traveled 18mm and has been used on probably 18 different Nikon bodies including two Nikon DSLR's as well as three Canon DSLR's...compared to the Zeiss 3.5/18mm the Nikkor is sharper in the center,with the Zeiss being sharper in the extreme corners.
Thanks for your comments. The adapter is from Fotodiox and I never had issues with adapters from them before, so this was really my least likely hypothesis. It must be the lens then, maybe I won't give up on it and try an other one.
I have three of the Fotodiox adapters,the chipped,the pro,and the cheap consumer version....all work as intended...I would be in agreement it's not the adapter...
Does the lens come into to sharp focus from minimum focus distance to infinity?One other the note...I find the Nikkor 18/3.5 is sharpest in closeup work up to about 30 meters,so what were your shooting distances?
I don't know if you would be interested in a Zeiss 21/2.8 ,but I convinced this lens is quiet sharp at closeups as well as further shots to infinity.This would be the lens I would recommend for FF shooting if sharpness to the corners is imperative.A close second for less cashola would be the Zeiss 18/3.5 for excellent corner sharpness,but the Nikkor 18/3.5 is a touch sharper in the center.
Depp wrote:
I have three of the Fotodiox adapters,the chipped,the pro,and the cheap consumer version....all work as intended...I would be in agreement it's not the adapter...
Does the lens come into to sharp focus from minimum focus distance to infinity?One other the note...I find the Nikkor 18/3.5 is sharpest in closeup work up to about 30 meters,so what were your shooting distances?
I don't know if you would be interested in a Zeiss 21/2.8 ,but I convinced this lens is quiet sharp at closeups as well as further shots to infinity.This would be the lens I would recommend for FF shooting if sharpness to the corners is imperative.A close second for less cashola would be the Zeiss 18/3.5 for excellent corner sharpness,but the Nikkor 18/3.5 is a touch sharper in the center.
I have not tried close focus with the Nikkor, but since I primarily wanted to use it for landscape it would kinda defeat the purpose. I concur that the ZE21 is the best in this class and I tested a few alternatives to search for the "next best thing" and of the few I have tested, the Zuiko 21/3.5 will do for now, pretty good for price and portability. Until the nest one comes around...
Thanks for your input.
^^ Indeed a classic combo. You'll love it.
You may find it hard to use at first especially wide open but once I got an improved focussing screen for my 5DII it I was able to get much better pictures with it. Something to consider.
Looks like a very nice copy of the Nikkor ED 500/4P...sold a the Nikkor 400/3.5 and half a dozen faster Nikkors to fund my foray into DSLR's....have plans on acquiring a nice copy like yours of the 500/4 P,soon I hope...
Got tired of having to shade the front element of the lens with my hand in some situations with the sun just above the frame, especially with a polarizer attached. It makes a huge difference in some difficult situations, and none whatsoever in others. You can see in the upper right image that the flash from the camera does not hit the front element of the lens. That's what only such a huge contraption can offer. It remains to be seen how much I'm actually going to use it, it was kind of fun building anyway.
Lens is a Distagon 25/2.8 and the shade is tailored for the crop sensor of the Fuji.
Got tired of having to shade the front element of the lens with my hand in some situations with the sun just above the frame, especially with a polarizer attached. It makes a huge difference in some difficult situations, and none whatsoever in others. You can see in the upper right image that the flash from the camera does not hit the front element of the lens. That's what only such a huge contraption can offer. It remains to be seen how much I'm actually going to use it, it was kind of fun building anyway.
Lens is a Distagon 25/2.8 and the shade is tailored for the crop sensor of the Fuji. ...Show more →
Why'd you make the shade this big? I imagine if you're outside and there's a bit of a breeze this will induce shake, no?
Bigger is more effective, it will kill stray light from sources that are closer to the frame, and there's no way around that fact. If the shade was only half as long, the flash would have hit the front element in the upper right picture.
Of course I can always remove material, and the first spot to do this would be on the underside, making the shade asymmetrical, since there are rarely light sources from below the camera (save reflections off bright objects maybe), but I wanted to start with the maximum effect.
While on the subject of alt hoods on alt lenses, here are pics of my hooded Biotars.
Shown are Zeiss Jena Biotars 2/58 and 1.5/75, both with B+W Hoods.
Being both German, they work very well together!
More pictures of my Aluminum Zeiss Jena lenses you can find in this gallery: http://www.miedema.dyndns.org/galleries/czj-alu/index.html
Here you also see the lenses without Hood , and Photos made with these lenses.
Just a quick demonstration of what the "monster shade" can do in certain situations (sun just came out for the first time in a couple of days).
Hoya HD polarizer attached, the sun is about 45° above the horizon. The filter doesn't make much of a difference reagarding flare/stray light, this is just to demonstrate how the extreme loss of global contrast counteracts the use of a polarizer for getting saturated colours.
The shade is made of 3mm hard foam sheets that are lightweight, quite strong and easy to work with. Glued together with superglue, robust enough to be dropped or kicked across the room without issues. Probably not robust enough to sit on it. Weighs maybe 100g, doen't make a difference in handling at all, except for the bulk and weird looks of course. The inside is covered with matte black spray paint.
As long as you're going to this much trouble might I suggest using flocking cloth instead of flat black paint. The differences are said to be substantial!
the main purpose of the shade is just to keep light from a bright source outside the frame (sun) directly hitting the front element. Wen shooting from a tripod, I've shaded the front element with my hand in the past, wich gives almost the same effect. It's just a pain to get the best effect and stay out of the frame with your hand.
I applied the black paint mostly because I could, the shade worked very well even without it (slightly glossy grey foam material). I don't think flocking is worth the trouble for this application.
Now I'm working on an idea for a shade for the Contax 35-70/3.4, which is in more need for it than the Distagon, but the rotating front element requires a workaround for attachment. It's worth it though to keep light from hitting the front element, the lens looses a lot of its great contrast if it isn't protected from sunlight properly.
