Z7 + FTZ + Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 ai-s EDIF + tripod, ISO 1400, wide open at 1/800s; Not the best light (back-side), anyway, no flash used. For this plant, mature fruits are black-bluish coloured.
Glad to see you using the 800mm 5.6 Jose, I do not use mine much but would not do without it. Some day I will live in a place with abundant birds,
andrewd01 wrote:
Nice lenses and picures!
The VW combi is bizarre. Why remove the suspension like that? It looks ridiculous and the slightest bump in the road would rip off your front bumper bar!
I know of no explanation for lowrider cars in California, a form of attention grabbing, I guess, Makes not sense to me.
rafaelcasd wrote:
Serge, for the official 'Rafael' seal of approval, please send the lens to my house for inspection and a $100 fee for the gilded certificate.
Congratulations on a difficult find, it takes years.
Congrats on adding to your collection with the 13.5cm. Theses are really fine samples and I am continually amazed at these old Nikkors holding their own in the modern digital world.
cadman342001 wrote:
Stunning. They are restoring one of these in the Herbeton Historic Museum in Far North Queensland only it's not a convertible. I assume these were the US equivalent to a Rolls Royce ?
Andy
Duesenberg, Pierce Arrow, Packard, to a lesser extent Cadillac, Imperial, Lincoln. I never see any Duesy's around here, I am sure they abound in Monterrey bay.
RicHammond wrote:
Well done Jay. Did you take any shots with out using the PC?
Thanks very much Ric. Although I have other lenses this one is my favorite and I often go exploring packing just the camera and 1 lens, so in shooting Sanderson I only used the 24mm.
Perhaps you meant did I use the PC controls on the lens? I'm used to a view camera so I generally use the shift and tilt that this lens makes available.
Got me a Z7 for a screaming deal. So before I sent it off to get IR converted, I did test shots. I expected the camera to be great, but I was truly impressed by the lenses.
Z7, Nikkor Auto-Q 135mm f3.5
Z7, Nikkor-H Auto 2.8cm f3.5
The 28mm lens actually doesn't seem to cover full frame. The very corners are cut off. The 135mm absolutely exceeded my expectations. On this day, I feel it out preformed my 180 f2.8ED. I'm a big fan of it.
TheOtherKav wrote:
Got me a Z7 for a screaming deal. So before I sent it off to get IR converted, I did test shots. I expected the camera to be great, but I was truly impressed by the lenses.
The 28mm lens actually doesn't seem to cover full frame. The very corners are cut off. The 135mm absolutely exceeded my expectations. On this day, I feel it out preformed my 180 f2.8ED. I'm a big fan of it.
As an IR shooter myself I'd be very interested in the results you get from your Z7, IR conversion.
I was about to buy a converted Z5 from Lifepixel when I came across a number of reports about a PDAF banding issue that seems to be exacerbated in IR. From what I read it is only evident under some circumstances (scene & ISO).
I struck up a conversation on Flickr with guy who shoots with a full-spectrum Z7. He sent me some raw IR images to play with. Post processing - where dehaze and contrast are applied - makes the banding more visible.
Since that is basically my workflow I didn't proceed with the mirrorless route and opted for my D610 to be converted instead.
The MF Nikkors also sit nicer on the DSLR.
The effect is subtle but I know it would really annoy me.
On the flip side I have seen some amazing Z camera IR images so, like all things IR, the subject matter, camera, sensor, filter manufacturer, filter wavelength, lens used and PP all add into the mix.
rafaelcasd wrote:
Duesenberg, Pierce Arrow, Packard, to a lesser extent Cadillac, Imperial, Lincoln. I never see any Duesy's around here, I am sure they abound in Monterrey bay.
Just looked it up, it's a 1934 Packard Super 8. The 7 passenger sedan iirc. I'll try and see how they are getting on when I'm next up there.
A view from the 32nd floor of The Shard, London.
Not the sharpest of images due to combating the internal reflections and the opaque glass used.
Stupidly I took the 135/2.8 on this trip. This is a lens I have always had trouble using reliably on my D610. Thought I'd give it a good run on the Z6 and I have come to the conclusion that the lens is out of whack and decentered (as well as needing a good internal clean). Left hand side in landsape orientation is not sharp.
I really do need to put to use all of those lens tools, grease, and JIS screwdrivers that I have been gathering.
Has anybody corrected a de-centered lens before? Will it be obvious or do you just have to take it apart, re-assemble and hope for the best?
DeltaSigma wrote:
As an IR shooter myself I'd be very interested in the results you get from your Z7, IR conversion.
I was about to buy a converted Z5 from Lifepixel when I came across a number of reports about a PDAF banding issue that seems to be exacerbated in IR. From what I read it is only evident under some circumstances (scene & ISO).
I struck up a conversation on Flickr with guy who shoots with a full-spectrum Z7. He sent me some raw IR images to play with. Post processing - where dehaze and contrast are applied - makes the banding more visible.
Since that is basically my workflow I didn't proceed with the mirrorless route and opted for my D610 to be converted instead.
The MF Nikkors also sit nicer on the DSLR.
The effect is subtle but I know it would really annoy me.
On the flip side I have seen some amazing Z camera IR images so, like all things IR, the subject matter, camera, sensor, filter manufacturer, filter wavelength, lens used and PP all add into the mix.
Sure thing! I went with a Z because I got a great deal, and because I want to be able to shoot IR via the viewfinder. I have a 830nm+ IR converted D750 that is a fantastic camera. But using live view only isn't ideal. The Z7 will be full spectrum, but I'll be spending most of my time in the N-IR spectrum. I went with full spectrum because I do have a use for UV specific stuff, And that would allow me an enormous amount of flexibility.
I'm not super worried about the banding. I figure I'll be able to work around the quirks of the camera. Like how bad the hot spots and flaring can be in a lens when shooting IR.
The Medival castle style home of inventor John Hays Hammond Jr., Glouceter, MA. He was a student of Thomas Edison and became known as the father of radio control.
This was a crowded tourist spot and needed to take a number to take this one.
