Funny, I think the same thing when you post with your 2.8 version. Grass always greener
In the 3.5 theme, I put it on a camera for my evening walk. Getting dark early. Not sure what I am going to do once the time changes in a couple weeks.
These were on a camera I shot for the first time today. Z7 II. Nice having friends in a local camera club where you can swap gear for a couple weeks.
First one from just about the same location as I posted the other day with the 16mm fisheye
All 3 were either f/3.5 or f/5.6. Of course Z cameras do not record the aperture setting and I didn't bother noting it.
George
leighton w wrote:
Keep it up and you're going to force me to get the 3.5 version.
Leighton, the bike is in Clayton, GA if you ever feel the need to see one. Didn’t have long to check it out but the sprocket caught my attention. One more, wanted to tweak the colors to match how I saw it. 50mm f/1.2 at f/11 I think with a CPL.
Minniehaha Falls, near Clayton GA.
NIKON Z 6_20.0 mm f/0.0 lens50mmf/1.21/6s100 ISO0.0 EV
AdaptedLenses wrote:
Leighton, the bike is in Clayton, GA if you ever feel the need to see one. Didn’t have long to check it out but the sprocket caught my attention. One more, wanted to tweak the colors to match how I saw it. 50mm f/1.2 at f/11 I think with a CPL.
Thanks George! It was a great trip with extended family. They left me enough time to grab with with NMFG after a couple shots with the 24-70. Wish I’d had the 25-50mm though. Thought about buying one but was too late deciding.
hmzimelka wrote:
That second shot, for me, is fantastic Love the smooth silver tonality and simplicity.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Martin! It seems as though certain photos just need to be monochromatic, and I think that is one of them.
I've been enjoying the nature theme that's been showing up recently. Here are a few more infrared photos, to show something of how nature might be imagined to look through non-human eyes. The first three are from the 50 f/1.2 Ai-s, and the fourth is from the 24 f/2.8 NC, mounted on the IR-converted Fuji X-T2.
James Markus wrote:
It's price has been a mental thing. How can a $40 lens be so good? More from the 55mm f3.5 AI initial assessment. I've reached acceptance now - cheap can be very good, but it took me over five years to get here. D300 on the gear, D800 on the feather.
Yeah, I have both 55mm Micro Nikons, and I love my f/3.5 versions. I also know how to service them blindfolded by now, I've done so many for myself and friends. My f/2.8 version was super crusty, dented and dirty after sitting without caps on an antique shop shelf for 10 or more years. Got it for the equivalent of under US $ 5.00
Although my custom silver polished 55/2.8 looks better, I prefer my f/3.5.
GeorgeBo wrote:
Funny, I think the same thing when you post with your 2.8 version. Grass always greener
In the 3.5 theme, I put it on a camera for my evening walk. Getting dark early. Not sure what I am going to do once the time changes in a couple weeks.
These were on a camera I shot for the first time today. Z7 II. Nice having friends in a local camera club where you can swap gear for a couple weeks.
First one from just about the same location as I posted the other day with the 16mm fisheye
All 3 were either f/3.5 or f/5.6. Of course Z cameras do not record the aperture setting and I didn't bother noting it.
Yeah, I have both 55mm Micro Nikons, and I love my f/3.5 versions. I also know how to service them blindfolded by now, I've done so many for myself and friends. My f/2.8 version was super crusty, dented and dirty after sitting without caps on an antique shop shelf for 10 or more years. Got it for the equivalent of under US $ 5.00
Although my custom silver polished 55/2.8 looks better, I prefer my f/3.5.
AdaptedLenses wrote:
Leighton, the bike is in Clayton, GA if you ever feel the need to see one. Didn’t have long to check it out but the sprocket caught my attention. One more, wanted to tweak the colors to match how I saw it. 50mm f/1.2 at f/11 I think with a CPL.
Matt, not sure I'd want to go to GA to see that bike, but I would like to go see where you took this wonderful image. Nicely done.
GeorgeBo wrote:
Funny, I think the same thing when you post with your 2.8 version. Grass always greener
In the 3.5 theme, I put it on a camera for my evening walk. Getting dark early. Not sure what I am going to do once the time changes in a couple weeks.
These were on a camera I shot for the first time today. Z7 II. Nice having friends in a local camera club where you can swap gear for a couple weeks.
First one from just about the same location as I posted the other day with the 16mm fisheye
All 3 were either f/3.5 or f/5.6. Of course Z cameras do not record the aperture setting and I didn't bother noting it.
Beautiful set, George. Especially the first one. I remember James sharing various tests with the 2.8 vs 3.5 a while ago and the 3.5 copy looking sharper. These ones are really good examples of what it can achieve. Please buy a 2.8 so you can shoot them side by side .
I'm going through a phase where I think a reboot of my kit is in order. I'm talking to a local shop(okay, they're in Cape Town) about selling them lots of stuff. In the end I'll be left with just the 35-70, 50 pancake, 55 2.8, and the 105 2.5. The zoom and the 55 have turned out to be my MF mainstays.
Did you swap the Zf-c with the camera club for the Z7? How is Z7?
leighton w wrote:
Martin, why do you like the 3.5 better?
BTW, love the simplicity of your beach image.
Thank you.
No real rhyme or reason in favour of the f/3.5, but I have the feeling that every copy of the f/3.5 I've had or tried were sharper off centre for infinity work than the f/2.8 versions. The f/3.5 can also be re-greased to be faster/lighter to focus due to its lack of CRC. Cleaning the aperture on the f/2.8 can be a pain but it's not horrible to do.
For all practical circumstances, I wouldn't hesitate choosing either if the price is right, but then the f/3.5 versions are often so cheap it's hard to resist.
SiMuMe wrote:
Beautiful set, George. Especially the first one. I remember James sharing various tests with the 2.8 vs 3.5 a while ago and the 3.5 copy looking sharper. These ones are really good examples of what it can achieve. Please buy a 2.8 so you can shoot them side by side .
I'm going through a phase where I think a reboot of my kit is in order. I'm talking to a local shop(okay, they're in Cape Town) about selling them lots of stuff. In the end I'll be left with just the 35-70, 50 pancake, 55 2.8, and the 105 2.5. The zoom and the 55 have turned out to be my MF mainstays.
Did you swap the Zf-c with the camera club for the Z7? How is Z7?
Which shop are dealing with if I may ask... what are you planning on selling?
I might be driving down to Cape Town next week to drop off my new and faulty M11.
I have a love/hate (well maybe hate is too strong) relationship with the Z cameras...
I owned the Z6 for a little while when they first came out. Loved the IBIS and that they were full frame 35. Did not like the body style (personal opinion on my part I know), really did not like the original FTZ adapter and especially the part of not capturing the most basic function of recording the aperture when using the FTZ and Nikon AIS lenses.
That said, in my brief shooting yesterday, the Z 7II is a really nice camera. Using the FTZ II adapter without the tripod hump feels a lot better than I remember with the original. Still no aperture recording. I am interested to see how it performs at base ISO 64. I am going to have it a couple weeks and it should be fun to shoot. Still an ugly body
George
leighton w wrote:
Great set, especially the mushrooms. How to you like the Z7 ll?
