Collin, these are excellent. They really have a special feel to them that the Z62 seems to bring out in certain of our favorite MF lens. Sure hope you 50/2 HC is not damaged! Keep those pics coming!
I am guessing that the space behind these doors used to be old boat houses - long before the sea wall was built.
The mish-mash of old and new styles, along with the use of natural rock, traditional sandstone or painted concrete blocks, gives the place its charm. 50/2 as usual!
DeltaSigma wrote:
...and finally a bit of a heavily cropped image showing a cruise liner and the tiered ramparts where previously shown images were taken from.
Similar but on a smaller scale, a Catamaran returning from Low Isles on the Great Barrier Reef off Port Douglas, showing the size of the boat compared to the old Sugar Wharf. I was waiting for ages for this boat to pass the wharf on the way back into the marina, and was shocked by the size of it compared to the wharf. Fortunately, the crop chosen in camera is not permanent and can be changed in LR.
My lenses arrived today
The 180 that I wrote is in pretty bad shape
Everything works and there is a scratch on the front lens
even the aperture blades are not so fine .. but seem to expose as they should
the scratches don't seem to disturb anything in particular .. at least not in the light that I tested tonight .. hihi it was pretty bad light
barely tested but just took a few quick pictures of our cat Morris ( have 2 cat now and the other is called Zeb and they are Maine Coons )
I don't really know what to expect for the price I paid .. MF-Nikkor are quite highly valued in Sweden as some lenses are not available on the used market
I paid about 110 US dollars .. if the lens had been in fine to mint condition, it would probably have cost 3 to 4 times more
for 105 Nikon Ai-s 105mm/2.5 which was in fine condition
there were a couple of very small marks on the rear lens
otherwise not much to comment on
I paid 90 dollars .. which is a very good price in Sweden .. Also the nikkor 55mm 2.8 micro was in fine condition and I paid about 115 dollars for it, which can also be considered good good here
However, I think the focusing is sluggish focus, which I understand is a very common problem with these .. that the fat solidifies
As I said, I don't think I can expect better condition for this money on any of the lenses
Hahaha Rafael would probably have cried a lot if he saw the lenses
let's hope they last a while anyway
Ronny Olsson wrote:
My lenses arrived today
The 180 that I wrote is in pretty bad shape
Everything works and there is a scratch on the front lens
even the aperture blades are not so fine .. but seem to expose as they should
the scratches don't seem to disturb anything in particular .. at least not in the light that I tested tonight .. hihi it was pretty bad light
barely tested but just took a few quick pictures of our cat Morris ( have 2 cat now and the other is called Zeb and they are Maine Coons )
I don't really know what to expect for the price I paid .. MF-Nikkor are quite highly valued in Sweden as some lenses are not available on the used market
I paid about 110 US dollars .. if the lens had been in fine to mint condition, it would probably have cost 3 to 4 times more
for 105 Nikon Ai-s 105mm/2.5 which was in fine condition
there were a couple of very small marks on the rear lens
otherwise not much to comment on
I paid 90 dollars .. which is a very good price in Sweden .. Also the nikkor 55mm 2.8 micro was in fine condition and I paid about 115 dollars for it, which can also be considered good good here
However, I think the focusing is sluggish focus, which I understand is a very common problem with these .. that the fat solidifies
As I said, I don't think I can expect better condition for this money on any of the lenses
Hahaha Rafael would probably have cried a lot if he saw the lenses
let's hope they last a while anyway
leighton w wrote:
Congrats Ronny. Maybe now you'll stick around awhile longer.
That's a beautiful picture of a beautiful cat.
Thanks Leighton !
I'll see how I do with the lenses .. will call the photoshop tomorrow and hear what they say .. the 55 has an abnormally sluggish focusing which the next one is unsustainable .. have tested a little more tonight and I have to grip very powerfully to turn the focus ring . .don't know if I really want it like that even if the price was OK
Ronny Olsson wrote:
I'll see how I do with the lenses .. will call the photoshop tomorrow and hear what they say .. the 55 has an abnormally sluggish focusing which the next one is unsustainable .. have tested a little more tonight and I have to grip very powerfully to turn the focus ring . .don't know if I really want it like that even if the price was OK
The focusing helicoids need to be re-lubed, which alas would likely cost more than the lens is worth, unless you can do it yourself! My experience with a 85mm/1.4 AiS which developed stiff focusing was that it just got worse over time, and unless I used it every day, eventually became unusable. For that lens, I felt it was worth the cost of a CLA (about half of what I paid for the lens).
For the 180mm/2.8, a scratch on the front element is not too worrisome. It was a professional's bread&butter lens, and they are almost all "well used" in my experience (my copy is the most cosmetically challenged lens in my collection), but it will undoubtedly perform well, and the price you paid is excellent (not even taking into account the "Sweden" effect).
Steve, taking the cue to chime in again after a long absence.
I love the 100-300mm 5.6 for close-up work. Here are a couple of pictures I took on a Z6 with PN-11 extension tube.
And these without tube near minimum focusing distance.
I also had an 85/1.4 that virtually seized solid, I tried to dismantle and relube it myself, made a mess of it, had someone else CLA it for half its value and it was never the same again so sold it cheap.
Can you return the 55? I have always bought the f3.5 as heard the 2.8 had issues with oil on the blades.
Andy
Ronny Olsson wrote:
My lenses arrived today
The 180 that I wrote is in pretty bad shape
Everything works and there is a scratch on the front lens
even the aperture blades are not so fine .. but seem to expose as they should
the scratches don't seem to disturb anything in particular .. at least not in the light that I tested tonight .. hihi it was pretty bad light
barely tested but just took a few quick pictures of our cat Morris ( have 2 cat now and the other is called Zeb and they are Maine Coons )
I don't really know what to expect for the price I paid .. MF-Nikkor are quite highly valued in Sweden as some lenses are not available on the used market
I paid about 110 US dollars .. if the lens had been in fine to mint condition, it would probably have cost 3 to 4 times more
for 105 Nikon Ai-s 105mm/2.5 which was in fine condition
there were a couple of very small marks on the rear lens
otherwise not much to comment on
I paid 90 dollars .. which is a very good price in Sweden .. Also the nikkor 55mm 2.8 micro was in fine condition and I paid about 115 dollars for it, which can also be considered good good here
However, I think the focusing is sluggish focus, which I understand is a very common problem with these .. that the fat solidifies
As I said, I don't think I can expect better condition for this money on any of the lenses
Hahaha Rafael would probably have cried a lot if he saw the lenses
let's hope they last a while anyway
Welcome back Paul, these flower shots are beautiful!
Andy
Paul Gabel wrote:
Steve, taking the cue to chime in again after a long absence.
I love the 100-300mm 5.6 for close-up work. Here are a couple of pictures I took on a Z6 with PN-11 extension tube.
cadman342001 wrote:
Congrats on the lenses AND the cat Ronny.
I also had an 85/1.4 that virtually seized solid, I tried to dismantle and relube it myself, made a mess of it, had someone else CLA it for half its value and it was never the same again so sold it cheap.
Can you return the 55? I have always bought the f3.5 as heard the 2.8 had issues with oil on the blades.
Andy
I bought both the 55/2.8 and the 55/3.5. The 2.8 was great out to infinity, but wasn’t as sharp as the 3.5 up close and at 1:1. My 2.8 also seized up, and since I bought it cheap, I sold it cheap for what I paid for it…fully disclosed the focus issue. I want to say the guy that bought it spent $80 on a CLA to have it serviced. I still use the 3.5 to this day.
I had luck with an 85 and flushing it several times with lighter fluid (it tried to seize more than once while initially flushing it. Get it extended to expose as much helicoid as possible and try and wipe out what you can with cloth & tooth picks. After 4-5 rounds of it start relubing. I have a giant tube I think Rafael recommended. If anyone needs any, I’ll ship you a tube.
cadman342001 wrote:
Congrats on the lenses AND the cat Ronny.
I also had an 85/1.4 that virtually seized solid, I tried to dismantle and relube it myself, made a mess of it, had someone else CLA it for half its value and it was never the same again so sold it cheap.
Can you return the 55? I have always bought the f3.5 as heard the 2.8 had issues with oil on the blades.
