James Markus wrote:
Ken, Is that a low tide area where people clam for geoduck's?
Jim
No, Jim. That's the Columbia River with Beacon Rock in the background. So freshwater and no geoducks. I may have mentioned this in a post from a couple of years ago, that Beacon Rock is the volcanic neck or conduit of a 57,000 year old cinder cone. The scoria, or cinders, were stripped away by the Missoula ice age floods leaving the solidified lava in the conduit.
The photo is beautiful, and now even more interesting - thank you.
Ballard wrote:
No, Jim. That's the Columbia River with Beacon Rock in the background. So freshwater and no geoducks. I may have mentioned this in a post from a couple of years ago, that Beacon Rock is the volcanic neck or conduit of a 57,000 year old cinder cone. The scoria, or cinders, were stripped away by the Missoula ice age floods leaving the solidified lava in the conduit.
Thanks, Jim & Scott. And a question for both of you. I've taken notice that you've both posted really great shots with the 35-105/ 3.5-4.5. My copy seems to be a real dog at infinity, especially at the long end of the focal length range. So bad I expect it to bark at me, . At closer distances it improves to just a muffled growl. I've also noticed that at 35mm subjects at infinity come into focus at 30 ft. on the distance scale.
Several times I've been ready to sell the lens, but I don't even feel right dumping it on somebody else. Also, I occasionally get really good results, just not at infinity. At those times I think I should keep it. The problem is that I just can't trust it to give good results.
Does that seem normal for this lens? I'm aware that it has perhaps the greatest sample variation of any Nikkor lens
Ken, That lens belonged to the newspaper, and when I left in 2008 - it stayed with them. I considered it a good general purpose lens. The image quality did vary, but it covered a wide range of focal lengths. The copy I used was particularly suited to studio product shots.
Jim
Ballard wrote:
Thanks, Jim & Scott. And a question for both of you. I've taken notice that you've both posted really great shots with the 35-105/ 3.5-4.5. My copy seems to be a real dog at infinity, especially at the long end of the focal length range. So bad I expect it to bark at me, . At closer distances it improves to just a muffled growl. I've also noticed that at 35mm subjects at infinity come into focus at 30 ft. on the distance scale.
Several times I've been ready to sell the lens, but I don't even feel right dumping it on somebody else. Also, I occasionally get really good results, just not at infinity. At those times I think I should keep it. The problem is that I just can't trust it to give good results.
Does that seem normal for this lens? I'm aware that it has perhaps the greatest sample variation of any Nikkor lens...Show more →
Ken, this lens is relatively new lens to me and I am still trying to identify its strong and weak points. So far I have been generally pleased but do realize it needs to be stopped down to f8 for sharpness in the extremes. My copy is not that good at 3.5 but acceptable in the center at f4. I am trying the lens out because of its versatile focal length range. There are occasions when I do not want to be swapping primes. I do not expect it to ever come up to their level, but for versatility it could be a nice alternative. I just need to be careful to use it at its strengths. Most of my work with it so far has been on the wide end. It will be interesting to see how it fares at the long end.
I bought my 35-105 back in the late 80s, as I remember, for use on an FM2 when hiking. It seemed like a very useful focal length range. My recollection was that on film it was OK, not outstanding but not really bad either. The mixed results I've experienced on digital are frustrating. If a lens has known and consistent shortcomings, it's possible to "use it at its strengths" as you stated. Sometimes the so-called weaknesses can even be exploited for certain effects. It's just the inconsistency that I find frustrating. When I have time and energy, I'll try to find some old shots that illustrate what I mean.
At one point I did some experiments in PhotoShop using the Find Edges filter followed by the Threshold adjustment to show the curvature of field. It didn't even come close to being a plane of sharp focus. It was U-shaped at most focal lengths. So yes, it really does need to be stopped down as much as possible to get good results.
Torties are special. Momma cat greets Barb and I in bed - over and over each morning. Everytime we stir she gets on my chest to say good morning as it was the first (about 5 times this morning). I remember my shock when she was a feral -thinking her fur looked course (probably due to the four different colors) - and finding she has the softest fur imaginable when i first got to rub her.
DeltaSigma wrote:
My offering... A mere 25 minutes using the Remove Tool and Spot Healing Tool.
I probably missed a few lines. I am not an expert in this so there might have been better methods.
Makes me realize a Wacom pen/tablet would speed things up a bit compared to using a mouse.
It is bit rough in some places but could be overcome with more effort.
leighton w wrote:
A few pages back, Ray shared this really nice industrial image and I told him about Luminar Neo taking out the powerlines. He sent me the image and I ran it through Luminar to see what it could do. Below is Ray's original and the 2nd one is using Luminar's 1 click powerline removal. There may be a few spots that need additional work but not too bad overall.
Closing this exercise out, I played with the image using Photoshop's generative fill. Results below, also viewable larger on the Flickr link. Took awhile to figure out the best prompts to get it to work, but I prefer the prompts to manual painting, cloning, and corrections. There's still minor artifacts but overall I am very impressed. Thanks again to Colin and Leighton for their efforts.
Closing this exercise out, I played with the image using Photoshop's generative fill. Results below, also viewable larger on the Flickr link. Took awhile to figure out the best prompts to get it to work, but I prefer the prompts to manual painting, cloning, and corrections. There's still minor artifacts but overall I am very impressed. Thanks again to Colin and Leighton for their efforts.
Nice!
How long did it take you?
I found the generative fill tooks ages to compute on even a small piece of selected powerline. I didn't provide any prompts so the results were not very good. The central section was by far the trickiest to handle due to the complex backgound.
DeltaSigma wrote:
Nice!
How long did it take you?
I found the generative fill tooks ages to compute on even a small piece of selected powerline. I didn't provide any prompts so the results were not very good. The central section was by far the trickiest to handle due to the complex backgound.
Out of interest what kind of prompts did you use?
About 20 minutes of playing around. I don't remember exactly what I typed, so I redid it with a few different prompts, results below. I selected the "best" of the three options that were presented each time.
*edit, sorry about the quality of the text, somehow the save to JPEG messed it up.
*top left - original
*top right - generative, no prompt
*bottom left - "remove foreground black powerline"
*bottom right" - "remove horizontal black powerline"
The variations are subtle. Takes about 20 seconds for the generative fill, at least for this example. I used the exact same selection each time, backup with the history panel, and changed the prompts. Hope this is useful for some.
Hi, I am back, sorry about the sporadic contact - getting ready to send Nippi out in two or three days. So far I have the following people on the list - still using the Miranda screen names:
GroWeb - BC Canada
NightOwl Cat - Ohio USA
kwoodard - CA USA
Spoupard - GA USA
Adapted lenses - no contact info yet
Cadman - Will get Andy's address when ready to send to Australia or New Zealand or wherever he is at the time
Bruni - Ben is Nikki's original sponsor -Rome Italy
Saph - Samy's contact info pending
Will wait two or three days for the missing contact info and propose and order of shipping at that time.
The lens will go out with one S to Z and one S to Fuji K&F adapters, could not make the LTM/LTM to Z combo work.
I am getting much better for my back, just a pulled muscle, and fully healed from surgery.
Always wanted to have a 15mm QD.C, and AI, and AIS. the three basic models, there are five models altogether - but these three should do it for me. This QD.C happens to have the highest serial number on record - maybe last one made!
This photo below is from 2007, been looking for a QD.C in mint condition for a reasonable price for a long time, to join the ones below.
You have the best luck finding glass…the 15 is one that I have always wanted. I love wide angle, but not really a fisheye fan.
rafaelcasd wrote:
Hi, I am back, sorry about the sporadic contact - getting ready to send Nippi out in two or three days. So far I have the following people on the list - still using the Miranda screen names:
GroWeb - BC Canada
NightOwl Cat - Ohio USA
kwoodard - CA USA
Spoupard - GA USA
Adapted lenses - no contact info yet
Cadman - Will get Andy's address when ready to send to Australia or New Zealand or wherever he is at the time
Bruni - Ben is Nikki's original sponsor -Rome Italy
Saph - Samy's contact info pending
Will wait two or three days for the missing contact info and propose and order of shipping at that time.
The lens will go out with one S to Z and one S to Fuji K&F adapters, could not make the LTM/LTM to Z combo work.
I am getting much better for my back, just a pulled muscle, and fully healed from surgery.
Always wanted to have a 15mm QD.C, and AI, and AIS. the three basic models, there are five models altogether - but these three should do it for me. This QD.C happens to have the highest serial number on record - maybe last one made!
This photo below is from 2007, been looking for a QD.C in mint condition for a reasonable price for a long time, to join the ones below.
Serge,
I love the history, and buildings, but I just have to point out those amazing gorgeous trees. I suspect a lot of work, and time went it to their shape.
Jim
serge07 wrote:
Hi, everyone:
Rafael, you certainly have some incredible gear. Thanks for sharing your 85/2 rangefinder, looking forward to seeing the photos from different lands.
Speaking of different lands, a walk to the Colosseum. It was a gorgeous day but cold and super windy.
. At closer distances it improves to just a muffled growl. I've also noticed that at 35mm subjects at infinity come into focus at 30 ft. on the distance scale. 
