GroWeb wrote:
I don't own a 5.8 f/1.4 (yet), because when I looked into it for use on my D800E I discovered, a) that no Ai conversion kit was ever made for it, and b) that it is extremely finicky to convert with a file due to something about the mechanics and/or dimensions of the area around the lens mount. Thus, unless somebody with a skill set like John White's would be willing and able to do the conversion, I suspect this lens may not be convertible for mounting on a D810.
Here are a few previously unposted photos from mountainous Alberta in May, taken with various anonymous MFNG on the Fuji X-E2....Show more →
Glen, it is easy to convert the lens, to remove the aperture ring, just remember the whole ring screws in and out.
I'm preparing my upcoming trip to Uganda (August 30th).
Besides the big AF guns (24-70E, 70-200E, 200-500E, 300E and D810, D500 + TC's) there's one spot left for one or two MF-lenses.
If I leave the 2.0x TC III at home (and I probably will) there's another spot for a MF-lens (or the 18-35G)
What do you guys think?
The Leighton lens fits exactly.
Rafael - love that red sunspot in the middle of their backs. My 85 f1.8 H has arrived. It's got a 19xxxx serial number so it really is a "Blow Up" lens - can't wait to play with it.
Leighton - that's a lot closer to broccoli than I ever thought I'd get.
Doubleuely (sorry, I don't know your name) - congrats on the 20mm f3.5 UD, it was my first nikkor mf lens too.
Chris Dees wrote:
I'm preparing my upcoming trip to Uganda (August 30th).
Besides the big AF guns (24-70E, 70-200E, 200-500E, 300E and D810, D500 + TC's) there's one spot left for one or two MF-lenses.
If I leave the 2.0x TC III at home (and I probably will) there's another spot for a MF-lens (or the 18-35G)
What do you guys think?
The Leighton lens fits exactly.
Chris
Take 1 camera and 1 lens
You will enjoy the trip much more
Instead of carrying and worrying about all that gear
rafaelcasd wrote:
Glen, it is easy to convert the lens, to remove the aperture ring, just remember the whole ring screws in and out.
Thanks for correcting my misconception, Rafael. The internet's ability both to inform and to misinform seems virtually limitless. At least I know I can always find correct information in this marvelous thread.
Here is another little group of photos from the mountains, starting with a close-up of a cool mountain stream.
Take 1 camera and 1 lens
You will enjoy the trip much more
Instead of carrying and worrying about all that gear
Reagan
Thanks Reagan, but that's not gonna work for me.
Too many different kind subjects from close to distance.
The bag will be most of the time in the jeep.
But I sure will enjoy the trip.
the nikon 85mm f1.8H that Rafael forced me to buy arrived. It's from early in the series so it's from about 1965 - 66. And Rafael you were right - it's wonderful.
some test shots from this morning as soon as I got it - lens gendered on the M10.
bruni wrote:
the nikon 85mm f1.8H that Rafael forced me to buy arrived. It's from early in the series so it's from about 1965 - 66. And Rafael you were right - it's wonderful.
some test shots from this morning as soon as I got it - lens gendered on the M10.
leighton w wrote:
Do you like it better than the HC?
I haven't done a side by side comparison....and this is on the M10 which renders very differently from the Sony and my D800E, so I don't really know. But I do like it. I like it a lot - but the main reason for getting it is that this lens was featured in Antonioni's Blow Up. I bought the HC because I thought it was the Blow Up lens but I only realised later that the HC came out in the 70's. Even most Hs were made in the late 60's. In order to be of the Blow Up vintage it had to be from before 1966 (when the film came out) that meant it had to have a serial number between 188xxx (the first series) and 20xxxx - so that's not many. The early ones are quite rare to find.
Obviously none of that would matter to most people as there's probably no optical difference between the early and later serial numbers and the later ones are more likely to be in better condition, but for me that was the main reason for buying it. I couldn't believe my luck when I found it and now, I've got to admit, that a large part of the fun of using it is because it's from that specific time. Blow Up is not one of my favourite of Antonioni's films, but he was a great director, I still love L'Avventura, La Notte. I saw L'Ecisse again just the other day.
Kristian, love the crop bokeh at the top of the page!
Glen, superb vistas in Alberta. Maybe you can get an orange sun a la John if its so smoky. Hope those fires settle down soon.
Peter, cool racing Lexus.
Leighton, some tasty looking broccoli at the macro level.
doubleuely, cool scene at the basketball court. Welcome to the thread!!
Rafael, love the contemplation wtih the 85 and 180!
Chris, that's a lot of lenses to carry around, even if you're in a jeep. If you have the 200-500, the 300E may not be needed. Maybe the 24-70 + a ~105mm manual Nikkor and you're done?
Ben, manual Nikkors and the M10!! Holy smokes. And I thought I was going crazy over polymorphic lensgendering!!! Would love to see results from the 135 LTM Nikkor on the M10, if you can get that going. I have lots of trouble getting it to focus accurately on the Leica IIIc.
bruni wrote:
I haven't done a side by side comparison....and this is on the M10 which renders very differently from the Sony and my D800E, so I don't really know. But I do like it. I like it a lot - but the main reason for getting it is that this lens was featured in Antonioni's Blow Up. I bought the HC because I thought it was the Blow Up lens but I only realised later that the HC came out in the 70's. Even most Hs were made in the late 60's. In order to be of the Blow Up vintage it had to be from before 1966 (when the film came out) that meant it had to have a serial number between 188xxx (the first series) and 20xxxx - so that's not many. The early ones are quite rare to find.
Obviously none of that would matter to most people as there's probably no optical difference between the early and later serial numbers and the later ones are more likely to be in better condition, but for me that was the main reason for buying it. I couldn't believe my luck when I found it and now, I've got to admit, that a large part of the fun of using it is because it's from that specific time. Blow Up is not one of my favourite of Antonioni's films, but he was a great director, I still love L'Avventura, La Notte. I saw L'Ecisse again just the other day.
In the film a lot of the studio shots were well inside the minimum focus distance...
-Jay-
bruni wrote:
I haven't done a side by side comparison....and this is on the M10 which renders very differently from the Sony and my D800E, so I don't really know. But I do like it. I like it a lot - but the main reason for getting it is that this lens was featured in Antonioni's Blow Up. I bought the HC because I thought it was the Blow Up lens but I only realised later that the HC came out in the 70's. Even most Hs were made in the late 60's. In order to be of the Blow Up vintage it had to be from before 1966 (when the film came out) that meant it had to have a serial number between 188xxx (the first series) and 20xxxx - so that's not many. The early ones are quite rare to find.
Obviously none of that would matter to most people as there's probably no optical difference between the early and later serial numbers and the later ones are more likely to be in better condition, but for me that was the main reason for buying it. I couldn't believe my luck when I found it and now, I've got to admit, that a large part of the fun of using it is because it's from that specific time. Blow Up is not one of my favourite of Antonioni's films, but he was a great director, I still love L'Avventura, La Notte. I saw L'Ecisse again just the other day.
