Got another picture posted from yesterday's mountain run for stars. This is a composite of 5 shots. Each used for a purpose. One for stars, one for the foreground and rest from light painting using my iPhone and light painting from my car headlights.
Was difficult as it was pitch dark but I think I like the outcome.
Thanks for the comments and likes, and sharing your photographic talents! So many contributions, street scenes, IR, dogs, cars, trains, and old lenses. (sure I missed some) but I appreciate them all.
Been sticking close to home, more backyard finds...
CGrindahl wrote: That is a problem only for the few of us who became obsessed with scalloped metal focusing rings... I know you're in that club... so am I. That is why the f/3.5 Q stays in the camera bag and the f/2.8 Q.C. stays in the cabinet...
AND, I don't own a f/3.5 Q.C. for exactly the reason you mention. It has improved coatings but gives away the silver nose... I don't think that matters to Ben.
of course the silver nose matters to me. I have the AI version of the f3.5 and I think it's fantastic (and compact) so I'm not busting for the QC version. I also have the f2.8 ais version but for some reason I'm very tempted by the 2.8QC.
See, this is how it starts and it's crazy. I have 6 135 mm lenses, including the zeiss 135 f2 which is by far the best of all of them optically (but it's huge).......and here I am on the edge of buying another. Sheesh, I know I've just come back but I really need to get off this thread.
ben
Same here. I've been driving around the east coast but no time to take pictures. It's hard to take the time composing shots with three kids running around. iPhone was good enough.
raboof wrote:
Same here. I've been driving around the east coast but no time to take pictures. It's hard to take the time composing shots with three kids running around. iPhone was good enough.
I bet it is a challenge with 3 kids. Funny you mention the iPhone, my favorite photo of our recent vacation on the Outer Banks was an image my wife got on her iPhone. It is all about what you have with you at the time and an eye for composition.
bruni wrote:
of course the silver nose matters to me. I have the AI version of the f3.5 and I think it's fantastic (and compact) so I'm not busting for the QC version. I also have the f2.8 ais version but for some reason I'm very tempted by the 2.8QC.
See, this is how it starts and it's crazy. I have 6 135 mm lenses, including the zeiss 135 f2 which is by far the best of all of them optically (but it's huge).......and here I am on the edge of buying another. Sheesh, I know I've just come back but I really need to get off this thread.
ben ...Show more →
You really don't need to buy anything else Ben
We don't want to chase you off again
He's pulling our collective leg Reagan. If there were no drama Ben would be sure to create some, just to keep the juices flowing. You're right, of course, he has so many manual focus Nikon lenses that he hardly needs to buy more... but somehow, SOME of us, want to experiment with MORE. It is only the more restrained among us like you and Leighton that can get by with three, four or five lenses. In the meantime, we'll all keep playing.
ben
(you and Curtis should start a coven. Oh wait, you have! It's evil what you do)
Ben, you mean this one? Nippon Kogaku Tokyo S Mount, MIOJ . That renders the most unique of all the 8.5/85mm lenses I have? That just happens to be mounted on an X-T2?
NightOwl Cat wrote:
I root for two teams... The Red Sox, and anyone playing the Yankees....
Still smarting over Babe Ruth?
When you made the first comment the second was completely unnecessary Laura. Every Red Sox fan hates the dreaded Yankees and wishes nothing but harm for them. You no doubt already know that the Twins took the series two games to one. From what I understand, that seldom happens in Minneapolis and it never happens in New York.
leighton w wrote:
I regret getting rid of my 135/2.8 QC. But that thing is so darn heavy! I bought the battery grip for the X-T2, so It may come back to my bag one of these days.
Curtis, that comparison pic you posted was the one that lead me to the QC in the first place.
Meanwhile, I am the happy/guilty party who aided Leighton in developing this feeling of regret by buying his 135/2.8 QC from him; and I am now also the guy who clicked the Buy It Now button for the 135/3.5 QC at the E-Bay link Curtis-the-Evil-Enabler-Coven-Master posted earlier today. This place is doing serious wonders for my development as a hobbyist photographer (or, at least, as a hobbyist photographic gear owner)!
Here are a few more images from the north shore of Lake Superior (the "Inland Sea"). The first is from the 200 f/4 Q, and the third is from the 16 f/3.5 Ai. I'm not sure which lens I used for my attempt at an artsy sky photo in image #2.
While the X-E2 that I used for these shots required a deep menu dive to choose from a limited register of pre-defined manual focal lengths---meant for registering certain Leica primes in the EXIF data---I am happy to report that the X-T2 allows me to put that menu item into a custom top level menu, and it also allows me to manually set the registered focal length for the lens I am using. It's not quite as convenient as the D800E's non-CPU lens registry, but it's good enough for me.
Well done Glen, on both counts! It seems Nikon isn't capable of making bad lenses at 135mm. Since you're not shooting a silver Df the Q.C. version of the f/3.5 lens should serve you well, especially so since it has the Nikon AI conversion kit installed. Definitely the price is right. Now all you need is a bit of patience, though in my experience, lenses coming from Japan can get here faster than items shipped from the East coast.
That is a problem only for the few of us who became obsessed with scalloped metal focusing rings... I know you're in that club... so am I. That is why the f/3.5 Q stays in the camera bag and the f/2.8 Q.C. stays in the cabinet... 
I don't think that matters to Ben.
