gyoung143 wrote:
Would you say the NC 24mm is sharper at the edges than the later ones? I had an AF, which I think is the same optically as the AiS, and it wasn't impressive at the edges until very well stopped down on digital, even on aps-c.
Gerry
Gerry,
I wouldn't know if the latter ones improve on the corner sharpness given this is the only 24mm I own.
I seem to recall Doug S had a review of 24mm variants (or maybe it was a 20mm comparison?).
Rafael might chip in here since he probably has one of each
My 18-35G at 24mm is better than the 24/2.8 NC however the 24/2.8 NC shines on my infrared DX camera so it spends a lot of time there. Alas, I don't have the hardware to answer your question.
deang001 wrote:
I've noticed this stripe on the side of many of the scans from my F6. This is a really pronounced example, but many of the shots have this on the same side to varying degrees.
rotate frame 180 degrees in the scanner--is the stripe exactly the same?
I wouldn't know if the latter ones improve on the corner sharpness given this is the only 24mm I own.
I seem to recall Doug S had a review of 24mm variants (or maybe it was a 20mm comparison?).
Rafael might chip in here since he probably has one of each
My 18-35G at 24mm is better than the 24/2.8 NC however the 24/2.8 NC shines on my infrared DX camera so it spends a lot of time there. Alas, I don't have the hardware to answer your question.
Colin
Thank you, and Rafael too. Maybe my AF version was a poor one, although I'd had it from new. The 20mm 2.8 tested better on the D7000 at Optical limits, but 24 is a useful fov for me on aps-c, maybe I'll try an NC.
gyoung143 wrote:
Thank you, and Rafael too. Maybe my AF version was a poor one, although I'd had it from new. The 20mm 2.8 tested better on the D7000 at Optical limits, but 24 is a useful fov for me on aps-c, maybe I'll try an NC.
I used to have 50/1.8G that I thought was great until I tried the MF versions.
It was probably a poor example given the reviews it received - but I didn't know any different back then.
I am always learning about this hobby and hanging out here definitely helps a lot (not your wallet though)
Jay, great to see you here. That is one heck of a rig!
Rafael, great looking little lens and seems to be a nice performer. Curious minds would like to know why you prefer the S mount over the LTM.
Take care,
Serge
It is simple Serge, I have no LTM film cameras and no interest in them, I chose to only use Nikkors and Nikons a long tie ago. if I were to get a rangefinder film camera it would be a S2 or S3.
I will use my Nikkor rangefinder lenses on Nikon Z cameras, on these cameras the thread mount is a lesser option, a bayonet mount is much better mechanically than a screw-on lens and the S bayonet Nikkor are more abundant and cheaper than LTM ones. Nikon made every rangefinder focal length on the outside bayonet, which means the lens has its own helicoid, except for the 5cm. The rangefinder 5cm Nikkors I will have to get in LTM to have a focusing helicoid with it. There are focusing inner bayonet adapters but they are expensive.
Wish I had time to keep up with my original posting Forum on FM, but not a lot of time these days with a business to run.
Also, not that many Nikkors left in the lens drawers.
The 16/3.5 is still king of the fisheyes though.
Mount Rainier National Park last weekend.
Paradise Skyline Loop trail - about as high as you can hike w/o committing to go to Camp Muir @ 10,500 ft
My daughter Nat and I and 1,000 of our closest hiking friends were there
BTW - Those volcanoes in the distance are Mt. Adams and Mt. St. Helens.
jhinkey wrote:
Wish I had time to keep up with my original posting Forum on FM, but not a lot of time these days with a business to run.
Also, not that many Nikkors left in the lens drawers.
The 16/3.5 is still king of the fisheyes though.
Mount Rainier National Park last weekend.
Paradise Skyline Loop trail - about as high as you can hike w/o committing to go to Camp Muir @ 10,500 ft
My daughter Nat and I and 1,000 of our closest hiking friends were there
BTW - Those volcanoes in the distance are Mt. Adams and Mt. St. Helens.
Beautiful clear sky John, may it remain like this forever.
Done testing the 3.5cm 3.5 Nikkor S W.C. I test lenses to know what they would do for me. This 3.5cm is very sharp in center at all apertures, improves in the edges and corner as you close it down and is best for 'landscape' detail at F/11 and F/16. Interestingly in the Z6 it does well at F/22.
So, a very usable piece of history.
Here are 4 test shots at small size, in very contrarian light for the first. Full resolution on Flickr as always,
Missouri's Ha Ha Tonka state park south of the Lake of the Ozarks. The opening photo shows a large lake and it is spring fed from the opening in a cave in the last shot. 50 million gallons a day.
I used to have 50/1.8G that I thought was great until I tried the MF versions.
It was probably a poor example given the reviews it received - but I didn't know any different back then.
I am always learning about this hobby and hanging out here definitely helps a lot (not your wallet though)
Colin
Thanks. There's certainly a lot of variety there! I shall see if I can try one. Interesting what you say about the 50s, I have a 'compact' AiS, and an AF, both perform the same, and I have borrowed an original f/2 from a friend who has it on a Nikon F, both of which he bought in 1962, the f/2 is very little different in sharpness to the 1.8s. Tests I've read seem to show the newer G is sharper normally.
