Nice work Phong, those Z body sensors are really nice at night shooting and high iso as Colin has shown. Something I really miss as the gfx was maxxed out at 12800 when I was shooting the aurora last week.
Good to see you again
cadman342001 wrote:
Nice work Phong, those Z body sensors are really nice at night shooting and high iso as Colin has shown. Something I really miss as the gfx was maxxed out at 12800 when I was shooting the aurora last week.
Good to see you again
Phong.nh wrote:
Thanks
What MG center do you mean?
I was referring to the big MG octagon logos on each side of the Petrolimex station, seeming to indicate that MG's were sold by the Honda dealership. Then I figured there must be a service center because of the big word "SERVICE" on the right in the same colors as the Honda sign. So I naturally assumed they serviced MG's as well as Hondas. But perhaps I was mistaken. I was a Triumph guy back in the old days. Natural rivals. We noticed MG's but otherwise took no notice of them.
I have a question about flickr, if you please. I created an account and uploaded a dozen of so pics (which I've posted here from another server). Then I wondered how I'd get the URL for any one of them. If I right-click them (from windoze) I get an option to copy the URL, but when I paste that URL into a browser header it brings up the whole flickr page, not just the picture. If I wanted to paste a picture's URL into frame tags here, how would I do that?
Thanks.
There’s a share button, under that there’s an option along the lines of forum embed which gives you a code snippet to use. It’s been a while since I did it so maybe varies a bit but find that share button is step 1. jimmuller wrote:
I have a question about flickr, if you please. I created an account and uploaded a dozen of so pics (which I've posted here from another server). Then I wondered how I'd get the URL for any one of them. If I right-click them (from windoze) I get an option to copy the URL, but when I paste that URL into a browser header it brings up the whole flickr page, not just the picture. If I wanted to paste a picture's URL into frame tags here, how would I do that?
Thanks.
AdaptedLenses wrote:
There’s a share button, under that there’s an option along the lines of forum embed which gives you a code snippet to use. It’s been a while since I did it so maybe varies a bit but find that share button is step 1.
I just tried that. First I have to select Photostream after logging in, then click on a particular picture. When that picture comes up it offers a Share button. The Sharon button offers me four options. The last one is BBCode (whatever), which give me a string of embedded URL's. One of the fields contains an img tag set. In that tag set is the URL which when pasted into a browser window gave me the unadorned picture in the size I uploaded it with. Yeesh. Maybe there is an easier way. I will promptly forget this method, I am sure!
Congrats on your first mirrorless Nikon. It certainly is very different than a DSLR and the IBIS is just incredible. Great color on your pictures by the way.
---------------------------------------------
grantgoodes wrote:
I was finally able to quickly try out the Bellows-Nikkor with the PB-4, and as I had always suspected, it's of very limited use at infinity: The bellows is almost entirely collapsed (maybe 2-3mm of extension), so NO movements are possible. Even at closer distances where movements are possible, the image circle is pretty limited, and it easily vignettes if you go too far.
Back when I got the PB-4 I had already estimated that I would need more than 105mm to get any movements at infinity, and would need a larger image circle, so that's why I looked for 135mm medium-format lenses. It turns out the Nikkor 120/5.6 AM-ED is actually perfect for playing with the PB-4, as it allows for (almost) full movements at infinity (though it is of course not optimized for that range), and has a super-large image circle (designed for 4x5).
I will still check out the results of the Bellows-Nikkor (within its limits): It is a very nice piece of kit, and a small piece of Nikkor history....Show more →
I had one for about seven year, used it maybe once, then sold it. It's one of those things that I remind myself of "never sell anything optics related". I hope the person who purchased it really got to enjoy it.
AdaptedLenses wrote:
There’s a share button, under that there’s an option along the lines of forum embed which gives you a code snippet to use. It’s been a while since I did it so maybe varies a bit but find that share button is step 1.
pbraymond wrote:
Just beautiful Andy, love the those rocks and the well lit sky.
---------------------------------------------
That's some really great color for SOOC shooting Jim. That Z5ii really shines.
Thank you! Yes the Z5ii is great and yes they were SOOC. I'm curious how you knew they were SOOC, except that I've said a few times that I rarely do any editing except resize.
Phong.nh wrote:
Thanks. I miss that loud, confident shutter sound from DSLRs. Mirrorless just doesn’t hit the same, It will take sometime to get used to.
That is exactly why I have recently revived my 50+ y.o. Nikkormat. Even found an appropriate non-mercury battery. Shot a roll of ISO 400 color, still at the lab though so nothing to show for it yet. If that process works I'll try the F Photomic I received from my friend Jim R. Still, it's hard to beat a good Z camera.
---------------------------------------------
kwoodard wrote:
Like so…
Got it, thanks. That's what I had found, just not sure how much of that "code" section to quote.
Most times in my case, it's AFTER I buy something that a gazillion show up cheaper and in better condition...
and yes there has been a lot of "hey, you know you want this" going on here.
Glad this thread reignited your acquisition of the 105 f/2.5. If I wasn't awaiting someone to fix my door, I'd have been off to my favorite indoor space to play with lenses. I don't like going there on weekends, way too many people.
grantgoodes wrote:
Thanks for the insights into how this thread functions, and in future I will make sure to include links. I actually wasn't trying to "ignite NAS" so much as comment on the way that when you are looking for something relatively rare (in this case, the Bellows-Nikkor 105/4 that I had been casually seeking for over 30 years), it suddenly seems to start turning up everywhere. I'm happy with the copy I got (I prefer the more modern look of the 92xxxxx serial-number range, with the lens data on the outside), but that 91xxxxx copy with the original packing sure was pretty (and someone got a great deal!). I was actually able to obtain an original box and plastic-bubble for my Bellows-Nikkor for $20, so now it sits on my shelf in near NIB splendour.
I will say that this thread was partly the inspiration for me to resurrect my "first love" of the 105/2.5, which I had foolishly sold long ago to finance the purchase of a Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8. Due to this thread, and the MANY lovely images take with 105's, I've reacquired an AiS copy, and even picked up the original Sonnar version, a 100/2.8 Series-E, and now the Bellows version. I really do appreciate the appreciation of old glass that all you folk demonstrate!...Show more →
grantgoodes wrote:
The prices for used Nikon tubes are a bit high these days for some reason (though numerous after-market sets abound for MUCH less, and some even include AF-support), but you can get a K-ring set for very little money which gives you quite a lot of different combinations of extension, and even allows you to play with compound lens macro (mounting one lens in front of another). And agreed, a BR-2A (or cheaper BR-2 if not on an AF body) is also a lot of bang-for-buck. I have managed to acquire almost all the Nikon tubes and rings for my OCD collection of Nikonia (only missing the BR-1 and BR-5, neither of which I could use), but by being patient managed to avoid paying very much for any of them.
Honestly, I prefer to use my PB-4 rather than just about any of the tubes or rings, even though it is quite bulky: In addition to great results, it just looks so bad-ass!
The BR-1 is really only usable with the older version of the Bellows-Nikkor 135/4 (M39 mount) or the original S-mount version of the same lens., and its purpose is to adapt that lens to F-mount. If I was purchasing a Bellows 135/4, I would look for one that included the BR-1 (as many do), since the combined package is often cheaper than a BR-1 on its own. Keep in mind that the final version of the Bellows 135/4 came with a direct F-mount (essentially had a built-in BR-1), and that's probably the nicest setup for this lens. In any case, the whole package is pretty large, and I prefer the compact Bellows 105/4 in that regard, so I won't be seeking out the Bellows 135/4 (despite its attractive 12-blade aperture)
The BR-5 is a step-down 62mm to 52mm adapter, intended to allow reversing of 62mm filter-size lenses with the BR-2(A). As my only 62mm lenses is the 105/1.8 (and I have _much_ better 105mm candidates for reversing), I truly don't need the BR-5!
Bottom-line: Even my OCD completionist tendencies will NOT be driving me to pick up the BR-1 or BR-5.
I was a Triumph guy back in the old days. Natural rivals. We noticed MG's but otherwise took no notice of them.
