Zf and 55/1.2 K at 2.8. About 3 feet of cat, 15lbs, and 11 months old. He weighs about as much as my bowling ball... Kraken is a beast of a cat, and timid as you can get. Even his meow is subdued. I am definitely his person. After work, he'll climb onto my chest and fall asleep purring for a couple hours.
BLLX wrote:
Fantastic shot 👏 I love circular fisheyes. I do a lot with mft
A shame these Nikkors are so rare and expensive
The 10/5.6 OP is an especially special lens, and although I'm not really into fisheyes, I always wanted to find one. As you say, while always rare (only 708 copies over 8 years) and expensive when new, the days when you could reasonably hope to find one in some surplus bin are long gone. KEH has had one for sale for quite a while now for more than $US7K, so for a "fun" lens, I will have to pass.
One interesting Easter Egg about the 10/5.6 OP is that it is apparently the lens Kubrick used to create the Eye of HAL: He just mounted it in a metal frame and backlit it from the rear with a red light-bulb. See " target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this from Adam Savage touring Peter Jackson's movie prop collection, and inspecting an original HAL Eye.
I took the Tommasini out for a spin today. 20 miles on the Mass Central Rail Trail to the old Wayland Train Station and back. A cloudy day, with a bit of sprinkling rain on the return. The Z5ii w/35mm f/2.8 S fits nicely in the handlebar bag.
TommasiniFront
by James Muller, on Flickr. There is a bit of custom artistic fluff on this bike (to go with the lovely factory paint and almost-color-matched accessories). Those brakes are a model once made by Campagnolo. They were named Cobalto because the center nuts on the mounting bolts held decorative domes of blue glass. A friend gave me those brakes, the glass domes lost long ago. When I built up this bike I super-glued faceted blue Swarovski crystals to where the missing domes should be. Subtle, no one notices but me, I'm sure. I also found a blue anodized bottle cage that matches the frame paint. And the labels on the (French, not Italian) Mavic Reflex rims are blue and yellow to complete the color scheme. (I just need to find a darker blue water bottle.)
James Markus wrote:
There are a few of you that use the Nikkor 45mm f2,8 pancake lens, and I have noticed it is generally sharp. While reading Nikon's 1000 nights I learned it is the only classic 4 element 3 group Tessar formula lens Nikon ever made. From 1968-1970 they made 15,423 9 iris blade copies, and all later copies had 7 blades. I found number 154 of that first batch, and i really like it. I think all those folding Zeiss Ikontas etc have me predisposed. I have a Contaflex II with a 45mm f2.8 Carl Zeiss Tessar lens that is crazy sharp. I had to mount it to my Canon 5DSR to get infinity, but a K1 ring lets me use it for close range....Show more →
Jim, I found one of the 9 blade versions with its quirky lens hood in a local camera store several years ago. They were asking just a few dollars more for them than what the hood alone typically sells for. My impression was that it was typical Tessar performance, viz. OK -- but not great -- wide open with soft corners. Pretty good at f/5.6 and really sharp at f/8. I've found Tessars and Tessar-derived lenses interesting since my early days in photography and have a number of them on film cameras: Rollei 35, twin-lens Rolleiflex, Minox 35, and a Takumar for Pentax. I wonder if more images have been made on Tessar type lenses than any other.
Ballard wrote:
Jim, I found one of the 9 blade versions with its quirky lens hood in a local camera store several years ago. They were asking just a few dollars more for them than what the hood alone typically sells for. My impression was that it was typical Tessar performance, viz. OK -- but not great -- wide open with soft corners. Pretty good at f/5.6 and really sharp at f/8. I've found Tessars and Tessar-derived lenses interesting since my early days in photography and have a number of them on film cameras: Rollei 35, twin-lens Rolleiflex, Minox 35, and a Takumar for Pentax. I wonder if more images have been made on Tessar type lenses than any other. ...Show more →
I think it is the most copied lens formula. Agfa , Kodak, Yashica, Kyocero, and i think Ricoh all made copies of the Tessar lenses - as well as those you mentioned.
SiMuMe wrote:
So awesome. Photography mojo's back, which is excellent news. Noob question, is the border something you "plug-in" to the image during PP? Because this border really works with this photo. Never used a fisheye before. You're a master of them.
Hi Siphiwe,
It is just a colored round vignette, easy to apply with post processing, make it round with no feathering. Icolor it with either a contrasting or matching color to what is in the frame.
BLLX wrote:
Fantastic shot 👏 I love circular fisheyes. I do a lot with mft
A shame these Nikkors are so rare and expensive
Do you have a picture of the lens it mounted?
Hi Morten, I don't have a pic of the 10mm OP on a camera, will take one next week as this weekend is my daughter's birthday. For now i can showone of the 7.5mm, this lens is shorter but the same diameter, The OP may extend 40mm more.
grantgoodes wrote:
The 10/5.6 OP is an especially special lens, and although I'm not really into fisheyes, I always wanted to find one. As you say, while always rare (only 708 copies over 8 years) and expensive when new, the days when you could reasonably hope to find one in some surplus bin are long gone. KEH has had one for sale for quite a while now for more than $US7K, so for a "fun" lens, I will have to pass.
One interesting Easter Egg about the 10/5.6 OP is that it is apparently the lens Kubrick used to create the Eye of HAL: He just mounted it in a metal frame and backlit it from the rear with a red light-bulb. See " target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this from Adam Savage touring Peter Jackson's movie prop collection, and inspecting an original HAL Eye....Show more →
HAL lens was the 8mm 1:8 They speculate over modifications, but the lens was used totally standard with a light shining from the back and the included red filter in place.
I agree with you on buying toys, but I am also somewhat of a collector (hoarder?). for many years I looked and looked online and on meets, every so often I would run into a lens at a price I was willing to pay. I paid $2400 for the OP. As a sample of my thought process I would only pay $2000 for a mint NOCT, and have never found one I want at that price.
The two 7.5mm cost me about $600 each complete, viewfinders and cases, the 8mm 1:8 was $500, and the 8mm 2.8 was $1,600 from Germany, it came with a beetle that probably got in from packaging, Nikon cleaned it for $70, which was refunded by the seller. Nowadays Nikon service would not touch it. I would pay $10K for a mint 6mm 5.6.
I took a trip to nearby historic Gold Rush town Arrowtown after work last week. I missed the best of the colour as I was in Australia. Zf plus either NKJ 28/2 or Nikkor 55mm f1.2 -SC
Thanks all for the nice comments on the Ronda tour. It is an amazing place for photography.
Rafael, great to see you back in the groove. Great looking Speedmaster!
The Cannes Film Festival kicked off this week. A couple of photos from last year that just got around to processing. It started on our last day, lucky to have been there.
cadman342001 wrote:
I took a trip to nearby historic Gold Rush town Arrowtown after work last week. I missed the best of the colour as I was in Australia. Zf plus either NKJ 28/2 or Nikkor 55mm f1.2 -SC
Thanks all for the nice comments on the Ronda tour. It is an amazing place for photography.
Rafael, great to see you back in the groove. Great looking Speedmaster!
Serge
Hi Serge, I bought that speedmaster in 1969 for $150 new in Amsterdam. A local watchmaker restored it to like new a few years ago, which killed its collector value.
While back I bought a set of multiphot lenses, but found them not mint so back they went. They are designed for large format but seem to work fine in 35mm.
rafaelcasd wrote:
I agree with you on buying toys, but I am also somewhat of a collector (hoarder?). for many years I looked and looked online and on meets, every so often I would run into a lens at a price I was willing to pay. I paid $2400 for the OP. As a sample of my thought process I would only pay $2000 for a mint NOCT, and have never found one I want at that price.
The two 7.5mm cost me about $600 each complete, viewfinders and cases, the 8mm 1:8 was $500, and the 8mm 2.8 was $1,600 from Germany, it came with a beetle that probably got in from packaging, Nikon cleaned it for $70, which was refunded by the seller. Nowadays Nikon service would not touch it. I would pay $10K for a mint 6mm 5.6.
I have the same process - I come up with a willing to pay price for an acceptable to me condition. Apparently, I am a stubborn sod, because I never seem to move off that determination,
btw, that beetle's name was Dave. His last words were - " Open the door HAL", and HAL said "I can't do that Dave."
James Markus wrote:
I have the same process - I come up with a willing to pay price for an acceptable to me condition. Apparently, I am a stubborn sod, because I never seem to move off that determination,
btw, that beetle's name was Dave. His last words were - " Open the door HAL", and HAL said "I can't do that Dave."
They speculate over modifications, but the lens was used totally standard with a light shining from the back and the included red filter in place.
