Thanks a lot for the advice. Unprofessional repair meaning all those "stab" marks around the front? I hadn't even noticed those, I was more concerned about the orange haze - not knowing if that was normal. Glad I asked.
Will keep a lookout for other 50/58s to pop up. This thread is very inspirational with all the wonderful photos.
a question about the rokkor - leica connection. i know the 24mm f2.8 and the 40mm rangefinder is virtually identical to its leica counterparts optically. are there any other lenses in minolta's lineup that shares this connection?
banpreso wrote:
a question about the rokkor - leica connection. i know the 24mm f2.8 and the 40mm rangefinder is virtually identical to its leica counterparts optically. are there any other lenses in minolta's lineup that shares this connection?
arduluth wrote:
Your little guy makes the best faces. :-D
thanks, he likes to ham it up and has a pretty sweet sneer, but i actually have trouble catching the smiles. i make him grin by grinning big at him, but he stops when i put the camera in front of my face. i usually end up focusing then sticking my head to the side to make him smile again.
I don't mean to turn the thread into a sebboh fawnfest, but I love your birds. Between your processing, composition and the lens you make some of the most interesting bird photos I've seen. I admit that I don't have a very wide exposure beyond what I see in forums and on walls, but your birds are quite different from most of what I see, atmospheric and painterly.
I was just thinking about your recent chickadees when I was out hiking yesterday. Thanks for sharing more!
Have to agree, great shots, all of them sebboh. I also picked up a copy of the Rokkor RF 500/8 reflex lens myself just before Christmas on the strength of my experience with the 250mm version, but I haven't had a chance to use it much yet.
i note you seem to say the 55/1.7 is sharper at f/1.7 than the 58/1.2 at f/1.2, or you just saying it has better bokeh? in my experience (and i believe in your tests) the f/1.2 is sharper wide open though it has much busier bokeh.
i note you seem to say the 55/1.7 is sharper at f/1.7 than the 58/1.2 at f/1.2, or you just saying it has better bokeh? in my experience (and i believe in your tests) the f/1.2 is sharper wide open though it has much busier bokeh.
I think at short distances the 55 is sharper. But I will compare them directly in the near future to be sure, thanks for pointing it out
Phillip Reeve wrote:
I think at short distances the 55 is sharper. But I will compare them directly in the near future to be sure, thanks for pointing it out
it's possible, i was just thinking of infinity as i never really do close range comparisons anymore. the 58/1.2 is definitely much sharper at infinity than close up whereas the 55/1.7 seems to be a little sharper at near focus than infinity.
I just did the comparison and the 55 has a little less detail but noticeably less SA while the 58 has a little more detail and much less contrast.
My Canon nFD 1.4/50 makes both look pretty weak.
