I tried a couple of the Air DX lenses and they’re pretty amazing for the price. A lot less fun to use, but optics are exceptional.
DeltaSigma wrote:
Talking of lens comparisons in the 85mm realm.
I am not really into the 85mm focal length but have ended up with 3 variants.
AI-S H f/1.8, the G f/1.8 , and a non-Nikon, f/2, Z mount Viltrox with AF and a clickable aperture ring.
I was so intrigued by the well received, low cost, low weight Viltrox that I ordered one a couple of days ago. Now I need to compare these 3 side by side.
jimmuller wrote:
That could be in the Northeast instead of the PNW.
Thanks, Jim. The vegetation could certainly be in the Northeast, but I’ll bet that you don’t have that kind of lake there. But I’m definitely not an expert on the geology of the NE. The lake formed in a very small maar, a phreatic explosion crater formed when hot magma hits groundwater and flashes into steam. These can be some of the most violent volcanic events.
Here’s a shot from several years back of Hole in the Ground, a much larger maar in central Oregon. It’s about a mile across, 490 feet deeper than the surrounding terrain not counting the rim of ejected material which varies from 100 – 200 ft above the terrain. A very impressive hole indeed!
Ballard wrote:
Thanks, Jim. The vegetation could certainly be in the Northeast, but I’ll bet that you don’t have that kind of lake there. But I’m definitely not an expert on the geology of the NE. The lake formed in a very small maar, a phreatic explosion crater formed when hot magma hits groundwater and flashes into steam. These can be some of the most violent volcanic events.
Here’s a shot from several years back of Hole in the Ground, a much larger maar in central Oregon. It’s about a mile across, 490 feet deeper than the surrounding terrain not counting the rim of ejected material which varies from 100 – 200 ft above the terrain. A very impressive hole indeed!
Ballard wrote:
Thanks, Jim. The vegetation could certainly be in the Northeast, but I’ll bet that you don’t have that kind of lake there.
No volcanic explosions. Around here almost everything is very old granite. But we do have what are called kettle ponds, dug out by glaciers. Typically very deep, often round or nearly so, and fed by underground springs but no obvious tributaries. Walden Pond is one, roughly oval shape, 1/4 x 1/2 mile, said to be over 200 ft deep.
Your pic could be Sargent Pond in Acadia National Park, nestled in the notch between Sargent and Penobscot Mountains. Sorry, I have no MFNG pics of either Walden or Sargent to post.
Coltrane wrote:
I have both the AIS and D versions of the 85mm 1.4 and did a comparison earlier this year. The bokeh was very similar with the D being a bit smoother. The biggest difference was the sharpness at 1.4 where the D had slightly better center sharpness and the AIS had much better edge and corner sharpness. Stopped down, center sharpness becomes even, but the D never quite catches up to the AIS with the corners and edges.
My comparisons of the two 85/1.4 lenses were more casual, but I would concur that my impression was that the AiS version gave a little bit more overall sharpness wide-open. I'm not the biggest Bokeh guy (despite this lens being the "cream machine"!), so didn't actually notice the difference you highlight. Overall, I kind of prefer the AiS just because of how badass it looks: A true mechanical gem from the heyday of Nikkor lenses. Also the AF-D goes from 72mm to 77mm filters and has a simply gigantic hood, so aside from the fact that it is AF (resulting in more in-focus shots in low-light/concert shots), I really prefer the shooting experience with the AiS version.
Morten, congrats on the pair of D200s. I am a familiar with the body as it is the same used on the Fuji S5 Pro. Have fun with the CCD sensor.
The pond located at 102nd Street and Central Park West. I returned a few days later for softer light but the leaves were mostly blown off. It is an amazing area next to a concrete jungle and heavy traffic.
I’ve missed this pond, it’s been tough to get too for a number of years. I need to go back again with a tripod next time. Pre-sunrise with the 85mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4
I had a lovely message from Colin aka Delta Sigma asking
But I could not get on to the Forums until the last couple of days. Password expired etc
My failing eyesight has forced me to go AF almost totally. But I still cling to a couple of Manual lenses
I wanted to post some pics on the MF shooters using AF lenses but cannot find the thread. So any direction would be appreciated
I am due for some surgery in the next 2 weeks (only been waiting for a year now, which has limited my expeditions out . So hopefully it will be sorted by the new year and some pix will be forthcoming.
I see a few old names and a few new ones too.
I have a fair bit of catching up to do !!
It is a joy to 'see' your pictures
I had a lovely message from Colin aka Delta Sigma asking
But I could not get on to the Forums until the last couple of days. Password expired etc
My failing eyesight has forced me to go AF almost totally. But I still cling to a couple of Manual lenses
I wanted to post some pics on the MF shooters using AF lenses but cannot find the thread. So any direction would be appreciated
I am due for some surgery in the next 2 weeks (only been waiting for a year now, which has limited my expeditions out . So hopefully it will be sorted by the new year and some pix will be forthcoming.
I see a few old names and a few new ones too.
I have a fair bit of catching up to do !!
It is a joy to 'see' your pictures
AdaptedLenses wrote:
I’ve missed this pond, it’s been tough to get too for a number of years. I need to go back again with a tripod next time. Pre-sunrise with the 85mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4
Love those reflections
---------------------------------------------
jimmuller wrote:
A few quick test shots with the new-to-me 300mm produced this:
The other day I realized I still had Nikon Capture NX 2 installed on my old photo editing PC. Seemed to remember it working better for me on a lot of the RAW shots out of the D300 over what I could pull off with my meager Photoshop skills. For fun last night I played with some of the old images using just Capture NX 2. .I honestly don't remember my old process with this software as it's been years since I used it. All shots below captured via my old manual focus Nikon 800/5.6 on a D300.
I still have the white beemer, a 2008, and the 2008 Taurus, and the 2003 Ranger.
Drove off the lot with the odometer reading 933 miles... since I'm older, and not as agile as I once was, when I could get under the car and under the hood better, I decided that I probably should have a dependable ride. And, as a certified pre-owned (USED, in other words.. ha ha) the warranty on this is longer than the warranty on brand new. I kept resisting, but in the end...
I don't know if it's the battery or the camera, yet. Webeesee. When I put the battery in, I'll see the icon do this scrolling flash, but it does read as a three. I should find my D3 wherever I hid it.
pbraymond wrote:
Nice ride, did not know you switched out from the white beemer. Bummer about the D700, I wonder what gives?
---------------------------------------------
I continue to enjoy your choice of color processing Morten. That first and third shots jump out at me in a great way.
And there's just something about turning the rings to get focus and aperture that your brother is missing out on...
jimmuller wrote:
Hmm, not quite yet! I'm liking working with the old lenses. They keep me honest, and I haven't yet learned how to do it..
One of my brothers who has owned several Canon digital cameras asked my why I bought a fancy new new camera but then didn't go with auto-focus, auto-exposure, focusing automatically, setting ISO for me, auto-focus, aperture management, and did I mention auto-focus? I told him I was cheap, that I already owned the MFNG lenses. But truth be told, I like the challenge and the learning experience. That's going to go on for a while!
