SiMuMe wrote:
Your recent wide open pictures suggest Nikon was intentional with the bokeh of the Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4.
Well, I think most of what Nikon does is intentional...
From the pictures of the Z 35 f1,4 I've seen so far, I think it is a "remake" of the older 35 f1,4G, but smaller and lighter (and a tad sharper). The new Z primes are all very sharp and render very clean, very modern. The older F primes are softer, and for me personally more "true to the eye" (but take this with a grain of salt, I wear glasses).
Probably Nikon is going the same way Leica is going. They also bring remakes to the table, e g. the 35 Steel Rim. These remakes have a great following and are contrary to the well corrected and super sharp APO and Summilux lenses.
Personally I prefer most of the time the softer (older) variants, but it depends on the subjects. Please keep in mind that I'm just a hobbyist. A professional photographer may see things different of course.
The first Fuji Provia RDP circa 1993 - other than Pantech - is one of the few films that denoise and sharpen filters seem to work well. Colors also seem to match my memory from 31 years ago, and are natural. Scanned with the Epson V300 at 4800 dpi - camera was likely the Nikon FM with the 35-105mm ais
If anyone uses Social Media and feels like helping, this shot with the 20mm f/3.5 AI made the finalists for the local news calendar. First prize is $500 (which would undoubtedly but more Nikon glass!) Not sure if shameless self promotion is okay, but here it is.
First one here I’d be tempted to fix horizontals which probably could t be done in reality but it’s very well seen and a great shot.
James Markus wrote:
The first Fuji Provia RDP circa 1993 - other than Pantech - is one of the few films that denoise and sharpen filters seem to work well. Colors also seem to match my memory from 31 years ago, and are natural. Scanned with the Epson V300 at 4800 dpi - camera was likely the Nikon FM with the 35-105mm ais
AdaptedLenses wrote:
If anyone uses Social Media and feels like helping, this shot with the 20mm f/3.5 AI made the finalists for the local news calendar. First prize is $500 (which would undoubtedly but more Nikon glass!) Not sure if shameless self promotion is okay, but here it is.
AdaptedLenses wrote:
First one here I’d be tempted to fix horizontals which probably could t be done in reality but it’s very well seen and a great shot.
Voted
Matt,
Though my left eye has been distorting the geometry of everything since last October - I have been seeing a retinal specialist, and it is getting better. My right eye was losing acuity, and then my brain tries to make sense of it all by making up some weird blend of the two. But I think offshore mirages - that blank out the horizon in spots - is what may explain the horizon looking off + the distances and angle. Perhaps these visual will help.
Jim
lirain wrote:
Well, I think most of what Nikon does is intentional...
From the pictures of the Z 35 f1,4 I've seen so far, I think it is a "remake" of the older 35 f1,4G, but smaller and lighter (and a tad sharper). The new Z primes are all very sharp and render very clean, very modern. The older F primes are softer, and for me personally more "true to the eye" (but take this with a grain of salt, I wear glasses).
Probably Nikon is going the same way Leica is going. They also bring remakes to the table, e g. the 35 Steel Rim. These remakes have a great following and are contrary to the well corrected and super sharp APO and Summilux lenses.
Personally I prefer most of the time the softer (older) variants, but it depends on the subjects. Please keep in mind that I'm just a hobbyist. A professional photographer may see things different of course.
I hear you. Internet chatter seems to lean on the side of Nikon making a mistake with this lens but your images seem to suggest it is a look they were after. I admit it was a bit of a shock to me too, being used to the 35mm f/1.4G. The Z has strengths(fast focusing, more crisp, less CA, less weight). I quite love it but it doesn't mount on my DSLRs so I have kept both.
To illustrate why I said what I said, I did my own version of torturing the lens when I got it and this sample from my tests is the reason why your pictures suddenly made its bokeh make sense to me.
AdaptedLenses wrote:
If anyone uses Social Media and feels like helping, this shot with the 20mm f/3.5 AI made the finalists for the local news calendar. First prize is $500 (which would undoubtedly but more Nikon glass!) Not sure if shameless self promotion is okay, but here it is.
You have some stiff competition there, Matt and the competition sees and shoots some of the places you shoot at too. Nice neighbourhood. It says you can vote twice a day, so can just keep going every day? Used my quota for today.
SiMuMe wrote:
I hear you. Internet chatter seems to lean on the side of Nikon making a mistake with this lens but your images seem to suggest it is a look they were after. I admit it was a bit of a shock to me too, being used to the 35mm f/1.4G. The Z has strengths(fast focusing, more crisp, less CA, less weight). I quite love it but it doesn't mount on my DSLRs so I have kept both.
To illustrate why I said what I said, I did my own version of torturing the lens when I got it and this sample from my tests is the reason why your pictures suddenly made its bokeh make sense to me....Show more →
Your comparison is very interesting! You can see clearly, that the older 35 1,4G renders a bit warmer, a bit smoother and has more green fringing. But the differences are very subtle, so it really seems to be a remake of the G lens. Whether this is a "mistake" or not depends of course. Personally I like the 35 1,4G and its rendering, and in case I would need a Z 35 I would pick the 1,4 version.
Current mainstream in the Internet seems to favor sharp and clean. On the other hand, there are more and more fans of "old" lenses and their rendering. Will be interesting to see how this develops...
AdaptedLenses wrote:
If anyone uses Social Media and feels like helping, this shot with the 20mm f/3.5 AI made the finalists for the local news calendar. First prize is $500 (which would undoubtedly but more Nikon glass!) Not sure if shameless self promotion is okay, but here it is.
AdaptedLenses wrote:
If anyone uses Social Media and feels like helping, this shot with the 20mm f/3.5 AI made the finalists for the local news calendar. First prize is $500 (which would undoubtedly but more Nikon glass!) Not sure if shameless self promotion is okay, but here it is.
lirain wrote:
Your comparison is very interesting! You can see clearly, that the older 35 1,4G renders a bit warmer, a bit smoother and has more green fringing. But the differences are very subtle, so it really seems to be a remake of the G lens. Whether this is a "mistake" or not depends of course. Personally I like the 35 1,4G and its rendering, and in case I would need a Z 35 I would pick the 1,4 version.
Current mainstream in the Internet seems to favor sharp and clean. On the other hand, there are more and more fans of "old" lenses and their rendering. Will be interesting to see how this develops... ...Show more →
Yep. Quite some green fringing with the G lens but that's also a 100% which is not typical of how I assess images. It is a beautifully-drawing lens that I am happy with.
I think that's enough sidetrack for the day. To make amends, here's an amaryllis that I'm trying to nurse back to flowering this season. Due to neglect, it didn't bother with the blooms last year. This is an older picture.
Df + AI Zooom NIKKOR 35-70mm f/3.5-4.8S | ISO 1600 F5.6 -0.33EV
AdaptedLenses wrote:
If anyone uses Social Media and feels like helping, this shot with the 20mm f/3.5 AI made the finalists for the local news calendar. First prize is $500 (which would undoubtedly but more Nikon glass!) Not sure if shameless self promotion is okay, but here it is.
SiMuMe wrote:
Your recent wide open pictures suggest Nikon was intentional with the bokeh of the Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4.
Interesting observation and subsequent conversation. Character lenses are back in, and Nikon's producing them in the modern Z mount. What times we live in to have that much choice.
---------------------------------------------
lirain wrote:
Fascinating picture Ray! Is this a long exposure?
Yes, a 4-second exposure.
---------------------------------------------
James Markus wrote:
Voted
Matt,
Though my left eye has been distorting the geometry of everything since last October - I have been seeing a retinal specialist, and it is getting better. My right eye was losing acuity, and then my brain tries to make sense of it all by making up some weird blend of the two. But I think offshore mirages - that blank out the horizon in spots - is what may explain the horizon looking off + the distances and angle. Perhaps these visual will help.
Jim
James, I continue to enjoy the mastery you have over your craft. What a deep treasure trove of experiences and knowledge the years as a media photographer has given you.
---------------------------------------------
SiMuMe wrote:
This is such a good look.
Appreciate the comment. Color did not work well, and neither did a straight B&W conversation. Played with sliders quite a bit more than usual on this one.
James Markus wrote:
Can any Flickr users explain how you share (host) images on FM.
Upload to flickr. Click the little download icon in lower right of picture frame, click view all sizes. Click the size you want to link to. Right click image, copy image address. Paste that here.
But I think offshore mirages - that blank out the horizon in spots - is what may explain the horizon looking off + the distances and angle. Perhaps these visual will help.
