NightOwl Cat wrote:
Most times in my case, it's AFTER I buy something that a gazillion show up cheaper and in better condition...
---------------------------------------------
NightOwl Cat wrote:
BR-2a for anyone looking, BNIB and cheap Even Jim M can not lose too many beers///
He! You aren't going to get me that easily.
It is true that things (and ads) show up after you have bought something. Two of the lenses my friend Jim R gave me are a 55mm f/3.5 and a 105mm f/2.5. Both are similar to mine but a model older. I believe they are the same optics, at least the 105mm. So now I have two of each. Haven't done a comparison yet.
As Kevin has shown, select BBCode and then the image size you want to display.
Copy the complete URL and paste it directly into the FM message.
Note - the URL will be quite long.
That OCD itch will kick in, demanding do be scratched. It's only a matter of time...
grantgoodes wrote:
Nice try! I _will_ resist!
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. ...Show more →
You take the BR-2a, and mount it on the front of your 28, or your 35, or your 50, and it's amazing how magnified it can do. It's only a couple of beers, hardly noticeable in a month's time...
It is true that things (and ads) show up after you have bought something. Two of the lenses my friend Jim R gave me are a 55mm f/3.5 and a 105mm f/2.5. Both are similar to mine but a model older. I believe they are the same optics, at least the 105mm. So now I have two of each. Haven't done a comparison yet.
jimmuller wrote:
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.
---------------------------------------------
Got it, thanks. That's what I had found, just not sure how much of that "code" section to quote.
SiMuMe wrote:
...and looking forward to your feedback. We know exactly how Matt feels about his.
Haven't used it much yet - but so far I love it. But I also really like the Df which many dislikes.
I've been shooting a bit with the 40/2 SE - but only a couple of cake test shots with the 50/1.2 ai-s 😋
BLLX wrote:
Haven't used it much yet - but so far I love it. But I also really like the Df which many dislikes.
I've been shooting a bit with the 40/2 SE - but only a couple of cake test shots with the 50/1.2 ai-s 😋
Cake looks yummy. Photos look great. Seen many a good plate of food, but man am I bad at taking food pictures .
40mm f/2 is quite a nice lens. I sometimes wonder if Nikon knew they will build a Zf in a few years when they released the 40, because it's a good size match but it's mechanics and build aren't of the same level. The 26mm is more like it.
Today, 30 degrees and sunshine. There also were some odd pearl like luster clouds or air. I couldn't quite finger out if it was high in the sky or nearer the tree on the ground, It showed up in two cameras, and every frame of that arear. I thought maybe my sunglasses were the cause, but no. Canon 5DS-R with the Nikkor-P,C_55mm-f3.5-ai'd-micro_20 frame stitch. It is actually on both sides of the tree, and the wind was about 15 knots - so I don't think it was ice crystals?
Beautiful Andy. I wonder if troutt have found that bit off water? I remember finding trout above the falls in Yosemite on the edge of half dome and how they watched ever move I made. Still don't know how they got there.
