Manual Focus Nikon Glass
p.2683 #1Manual Focus Nikon Glass
London's theatre district.
D610 IR and 28/2.8 AI-S
DSC_7112 by Colin McIntosh, on Flickr
D610 IR and 28/2.8 AI-S
DSC_7112 by Colin McIntosh, on FlickrAug 26, 2026 at 11:08 AM
p.2683 #2Manual Focus Nikon Glass
DeltaSigma wrote:
London's theatre district.
D610 IR and 28/2.8 AI-S
Very nicely visualized and framed, and just goes to show that you don't _really_ need the PC-Nikkor 28/3.5 to shoot buildings well! The IR rendering really pops this one too, so kudos for that as well. BTW, I live very close to Prince of Wales Drive in Ottawa, so that name at the top of the tower also grabbed my interest.
London's theatre district.
D610 IR and 28/2.8 AI-S
Very nicely visualized and framed, and just goes to show that you don't _really_ need the PC-Nikkor 28/3.5 to shoot buildings well! The IR rendering really pops this one too, so kudos for that as well. BTW, I live very close to Prince of Wales Drive in Ottawa, so that name at the top of the tower also grabbed my interest.
Aug 26, 2026 at 11:28 AM
p.2683 #3Manual Focus Nikon Glass
pbraymond wrote:
I confess have no idea what I'm supposed to see here, though it apparently sparked something for Jim M.
The contrast of the stark, jagged bare branches against the sky at the end of August when everything else is green and leafy. It's a sign of a troubled world, at least the tree's world.
BTW, that was not a B&W shot but full color in the evening. Sometimes what should have color simply doesn't.
That's what I saw. It may mean less to viewers. I'm not sure it was meant to be pleasant.
Jim
I confess have no idea what I'm supposed to see here, though it apparently sparked something for Jim M.
The contrast of the stark, jagged bare branches against the sky at the end of August when everything else is green and leafy. It's a sign of a troubled world, at least the tree's world.
BTW, that was not a B&W shot but full color in the evening. Sometimes what should have color simply doesn't.
That's what I saw. It may mean less to viewers. I'm not sure it was meant to be pleasant.
Jim
Aug 26, 2026 at 01:52 PM
p.2683 #4Manual Focus Nikon Glass
grantgoodes wrote:
D610 IR and 28/2.8 AI-SVery nicely visualized and framed, and just goes to show that you don't _really_ need the PC-Nikkor 28/3.5 to shoot buildings well! The IR rendering really pops this one too, so kudos for that as well. BTW, I live very close to Prince of Wales Drive in Ottawa, so that name at the top of the tower also grabbed my interest.
The buildings were straightened/transformed in LR.
DeltaSigma wrote
London's theatre district.D610 IR and 28/2.8 AI-S
The buildings were straightened/transformed in LR.
Aug 26, 2026 at 03:40 PM
p.2683 #5Manual Focus Nikon Glass
At Assabet River National Wildlife Refuge we saw a large bird in a tree maybe 200 yards away across a marsh. It looked like an Osprey eating but the white on the head also suggested maybe a Bald Eagle. I snapped almost 30 pics, most with the 200mm f/4 Nikkor Q.
OspreyFullShot3
by James Muller, on Flickr
After we got home a cropping verified it as an Osprey.
OspreyFeeding3
by James Muller, on Flickr
My sweetie raises Monarch butterflies. In a protected environment their survival rate to flying adult is perhaps 90%. In the wild it is estimated to be perhaps 2%. Those which hatch this time of year are probably the migrators destined to fly 2000+ miles to Mexico, sleep over the winter, then awaken to reproduce in the spring and restart the slow multi-generation migration north.
Releasing a female ready for her first flight.
ReleasingFemaleMonarch
by James Muller, on Flickr
OspreyFullShot3by James Muller, on Flickr
After we got home a cropping verified it as an Osprey.
OspreyFeeding3by James Muller, on Flickr
My sweetie raises Monarch butterflies. In a protected environment their survival rate to flying adult is perhaps 90%. In the wild it is estimated to be perhaps 2%. Those which hatch this time of year are probably the migrators destined to fly 2000+ miles to Mexico, sleep over the winter, then awaken to reproduce in the spring and restart the slow multi-generation migration north.
Releasing a female ready for her first flight.
ReleasingFemaleMonarchby James Muller, on Flickr
Aug 27, 2026 at 03:14 AM
p.2683 #6Manual Focus Nikon Glass
Thanks Morten, that's an itch I need to scratch for sure. I'll let you know when I get it 
BLLX wrote:
DF_20260823_BLX_8169.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
how can I get one of these guys?
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486809073_bfc86f7c1e_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8175.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486868749_1975bc7078_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8169.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55487083290_db751800b9_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8174.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486693181_bb7a626dea_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8168.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486868934_1c337684a6_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8144.jpg by -Morten-, on FlickrMy little photo companion is a Checkered Ninja (Ternet Ninja) wooden figure by Boyhood. It's based on a very popular Danish animated film and book series called Checkered Ninja. The figure is only sold in Denmark (as far as I know), so it's pretty rare outside Denmark.
Shop: Link
More of my Ninja shots: Flikr album
BLLX wrote:
NightOwl Cat wrote
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486868749_1975bc7078_b.jpgDF_20260823_BLX_8169.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
how can I get one of these guys?
BLLX wrote
Some 180/2.8 ai-s shot with Dfhttps://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486809073_bfc86f7c1e_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8175.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486868749_1975bc7078_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8169.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55487083290_db751800b9_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8174.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486693181_bb7a626dea_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8168.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55486868934_1c337684a6_b.jpg
DF_20260823_BLX_8144.jpg by -Morten-, on Flickr
Shop: Link
More of my Ninja shots: Flikr album
Aug 27, 2026 at 04:21 AM
p.2683 #7Manual Focus Nikon Glass
grantgoodes wrote:
..just goes to show that you don't _really_ need the PC-Nikkor 28/3.5 to shoot buildings well!
DeltaSigma wrote:
The buildings were straightened/transformed in LR.
Doh! I guess since I'm a Luddite and never do any post-production, that never occurred to me..
Edited on Aug 27, 2026 at 07:22 AM · View previous versions
..just goes to show that you don't _really_ need the PC-Nikkor 28/3.5 to shoot buildings well!
DeltaSigma wrote:
The buildings were straightened/transformed in LR.
Doh! I guess since I'm a Luddite and never do any post-production, that never occurred to me..
Edited on Aug 27, 2026 at 07:22 AM · View previous versions
Aug 27, 2026 at 05:37 AM
p.2683 #9Manual Focus Nikon Glass
B+W mood recently. Grey morning with the 105mm f/1.8. SOOC Neopan from NikonPC.
Aug 27, 2026 at 08:49 AM
|
p.2683 #11Manual Focus Nikon Glass
As some of you may have observed, I do like to photograph reflections, whether at car shows or in bodies of water. So, here a few photos from the Qualicum car show that capitalize on the "Shine" part of "Show 'N' Shine." All of these are brought to you courtesy of my invisibly thorium-coated 35 f/1.4 N with Lens Turbo II (as always) on the Fuji X-T4.
Aug 27, 2026 at 06:00 PM
p.2683 #12Manual Focus Nikon Glass
milt wrote:
More on Scotland
D850 45Pmm 2.8
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55478340772_984b551009_b.jpg_DSC3296 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479315841_30449c0968_b.jpg_DSC3225 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479497079_f59e78b0cb_b.jpg_DSC3253 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479730385_34cfdc9dcb_b.jpg_DSC3386 by Regina, on Flickr
Regina, I've been enjoying your pics from Scotland, keep them coming!
More on Scotland
D850 45Pmm 2.8
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55478340772_984b551009_b.jpg_DSC3296 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479315841_30449c0968_b.jpg_DSC3225 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479497079_f59e78b0cb_b.jpg_DSC3253 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479730385_34cfdc9dcb_b.jpg_DSC3386 by Regina, on Flickr
Regina, I've been enjoying your pics from Scotland, keep them coming!
Aug 28, 2026 at 04:11 AM
p.2683 #14Manual Focus Nikon Glass
A very surprising TC test!
A thread in the Nikon forum asked about whether a Z TC would be a good idea. That prompted me to question the TC-14B I had picked up to use with my 300mm f/4.5 AIS to give me an effective 420mm. The specific question was whether adding the TC would reduce IQ enough to negate the larger image on the sensor (i.e. the 24M sensor in the Z5ii). To put it another way, if images with and without the TC were cropped to produce the same subject size, would the TC actually be better? The pics of the osprey I posted a day or two ago also made me wonder...
So today while my sweetie was buying veggies at a local organic farm stand I took a series of pictures across their fields. Three aperture settings each on the 300mm with and without the TC, and for comparison four apertures with my old faithful 200mm f/4. Also for visual reference a few pics with the 55mm. The day was hazy with slightly diffuse light, not quite direct sunlight. The subject was an irrigation windmill a long distance away almost unrecognizable in the 55mm picture.
In post-processing I zoomed the telephoto shots until they looked large enough on my screen that I could crop a particular detail from the best of each FL, then saved the cropping. I then resized the shorter FL croppings to match that of the 300 x 1.4, i.e. about 960 long dimension. The result was a series of equivalent images, either direct or progressively more scaled.
First, for perspective the full-scale shots (reduced to 1400 pixels across), 50mm, 200mm, 300mm, 420mm. The windmill is visible in the 55mm shot only as a small white spot in the center of the picture.
Now the resized best of each length. 420mm, 300mm, and three examples from the 200mm.
300mm x 1.4
300mm
200mm
The 300mm witjh TC-14B clearly has more detail than the 300mm by itself. I could say I'm a bit disappointed in the 300mm except that at shorter distances it produces superb images, some of which I've posted here. The real surprise is the 200mm f/4, that workhorse tele I bought around 1973 or 1974. It actually matched or bettered the 300x1.4 combination! I included three to demonstrate how the aperture affected the result, which is to say on this particular day not so much. I am amazed.
A thread in the Nikon forum asked about whether a Z TC would be a good idea. That prompted me to question the TC-14B I had picked up to use with my 300mm f/4.5 AIS to give me an effective 420mm. The specific question was whether adding the TC would reduce IQ enough to negate the larger image on the sensor (i.e. the 24M sensor in the Z5ii). To put it another way, if images with and without the TC were cropped to produce the same subject size, would the TC actually be better? The pics of the osprey I posted a day or two ago also made me wonder...
So today while my sweetie was buying veggies at a local organic farm stand I took a series of pictures across their fields. Three aperture settings each on the 300mm with and without the TC, and for comparison four apertures with my old faithful 200mm f/4. Also for visual reference a few pics with the 55mm. The day was hazy with slightly diffuse light, not quite direct sunlight. The subject was an irrigation windmill a long distance away almost unrecognizable in the 55mm picture.
In post-processing I zoomed the telephoto shots until they looked large enough on my screen that I could crop a particular detail from the best of each FL, then saved the cropping. I then resized the shorter FL croppings to match that of the 300 x 1.4, i.e. about 960 long dimension. The result was a series of equivalent images, either direct or progressively more scaled.
First, for perspective the full-scale shots (reduced to 1400 pixels across), 50mm, 200mm, 300mm, 420mm. The windmill is visible in the 55mm shot only as a small white spot in the center of the picture.
Now the resized best of each length. 420mm, 300mm, and three examples from the 200mm.
300mm x 1.4
300mm
200mm
The 300mm witjh TC-14B clearly has more detail than the 300mm by itself. I could say I'm a bit disappointed in the 300mm except that at shorter distances it produces superb images, some of which I've posted here. The real surprise is the 200mm f/4, that workhorse tele I bought around 1973 or 1974. It actually matched or bettered the 300x1.4 combination! I included three to demonstrate how the aperture affected the result, which is to say on this particular day not so much. I am amazed.
Aug 28, 2026 at 03:39 PM
p.2683 #15Manual Focus Nikon Glass
Jim, Telephoto photography is a different technique that takes some time and practice to master, It boils down to this one axiom: the longer the focal length the harder it is to get a sharp image. The reason is motion is exponentially magnified at longer focal lengths by various things. Mirror slap, shutter vibration, wind, poor support (lack of tripod), and the most likely is camera shake - which is the nice way to say it's the operator's fault. The most likely is the last, and the least likely is the first - in my experience. I tend to shoot anything 300mm and up wide open. Occasionally, I will stop down one stop - maybe 5% of the time. I'd rather have as fast a shutter speed, or lower iso as possible for image quality. If you look at your examples - they are equally soft from vanes to background leaves. That's motion. I know a handful of ways that help, but practice really is the best method to learn. After that you can add mirror lockup, self timers, an old sock full of beans laid across the lens to dampen vibration - etc. However the best doodad is a really good tripod. btw - that was an Osprey. I only have a couple decent shots of them, but he/she came to see me right after catching a fish (holding it) - D2X with the Nikkor 300mm f4 afs 19 years ago.
Link
Link
Aug 28, 2026 at 07:50 PM
p.2683 #16Manual Focus Nikon Glass
James Markus wrote:
Jim, Telephoto photography is a different technique that takes some time and practice to master, It boils down to this one axiom: the longer the focal length the harder it is to get a sharp image. The reason is motion is exponentially magnified at longer focal lengths by various things. Mirror slap, shutter vibration, wind, poor support (lack of tripod), and the most likely is camera shake - which is the nice way to say it's the operator's fault. The most likely is the last, and the least likely is the first - in my experience.
[...]
Link
Add to that list "heat schlieren," the density inhomogeneities from temperature differences in the air between lens and subject that make the image dance around slightly. It’s the same effect that make mirages seem to wiggle. Unfortunately, the only way to deal with them is shoot at a different time.
Jim, Telephoto photography is a different technique that takes some time and practice to master, It boils down to this one axiom: the longer the focal length the harder it is to get a sharp image. The reason is motion is exponentially magnified at longer focal lengths by various things. Mirror slap, shutter vibration, wind, poor support (lack of tripod), and the most likely is camera shake - which is the nice way to say it's the operator's fault. The most likely is the last, and the least likely is the first - in my experience.
[...]
Link
Add to that list "heat schlieren," the density inhomogeneities from temperature differences in the air between lens and subject that make the image dance around slightly. It’s the same effect that make mirages seem to wiggle. Unfortunately, the only way to deal with them is shoot at a different time.
Aug 28, 2026 at 09:15 PM
p.2683 #17Manual Focus Nikon Glass
milt wrote:
More on Scotland
D850 45Pmm 2.8
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55478340772_984b551009_b.jpg_DSC3296 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479315841_30449c0968_b.jpg_DSC3225 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479497079_f59e78b0cb_b.jpg_DSC3253 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479730385_34cfdc9dcb_b.jpg_DSC3386 by Regina, on Flickr
Looks like you had great weather in Scotland, Regina. I love the light you had.
More on Scotland
D850 45Pmm 2.8
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55478340772_984b551009_b.jpg_DSC3296 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479315841_30449c0968_b.jpg_DSC3225 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479497079_f59e78b0cb_b.jpg_DSC3253 by Regina, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55479730385_34cfdc9dcb_b.jpg_DSC3386 by Regina, on Flickr
Looks like you had great weather in Scotland, Regina. I love the light you had.
Aug 28, 2026 at 11:38 PM
p.2683 #19Manual Focus Nikon Glass
James Markus wrote:
It boils down to this one axiom: the longer the focal length the harder it is to get a sharp image....and the most likely is camera shake - which is the nice way to say it's the operator's fault.
I appreciate the responses. I certainly don't claim to be a champion camera handler and admit that my vision isn't as good as it once was. But I'm skeptical. For this study I was seated on the bench of a solid, wooden picnic table, body leaning against the tabletop, both elbows solidly on the table, eyepiece pressed against my face. The slowest shutter speed was 1/2500 sec, the fastest 1/8000 sec, and the Z5ii has good IBIS. (That's the same hardware, Z5ii, FTZ, 300mm, no TC, I used for the hand-held-while-standing moon shot I posted a month or two ago.) Of course there is no mirror shake in a mirrorless camera. Well, there is some shutter movement. As always, I focused by using the viewfinder magnifier. Short of using a very good tripod and the foldout screen instead of the eyepiece so my progressive glasses don't interfere, there isn't much I could do to improve stability, and a poor tripod might be worse. The apertures for the 300mm shots were 8, 5.6, 4.5. Of course the TC shots would be effectively smaller by one click. I suppose I could have done this with smaller apertures. I did botch the second of three for the 300mm sequence, I think I nudged the focus ring when shifting my hand for stability. Finally (though I didn't show it), except for that botched shot the general detail was consistent for each lens. If I mishandled the camera then I did it consistently for each lens, and I would expect the 300 x 1.4 shots to be worse than the straight 300 shots. Ever so slight difference in camera balance? I'm skeptical.
One thing I think I imagine I believe I suspect I've observed is that the 300mm by itself works better in medium light than in hazy bright light. I'm not sure why, perhaps it's something related to contrast (Active D-Lighting?) in the camera settings. The lens is clean with no blemishes and almost no internal dust. It has a NISI (1395 Angstroms) UV-C filter. Or perhaps it's the glass itself. Brightness dependency is not a feature I've studied; it just seems that whenever I've been disappointed in a shot it was in a very bright setting.
I can do this experiment again.
It boils down to this one axiom: the longer the focal length the harder it is to get a sharp image....and the most likely is camera shake - which is the nice way to say it's the operator's fault.
I appreciate the responses. I certainly don't claim to be a champion camera handler and admit that my vision isn't as good as it once was. But I'm skeptical. For this study I was seated on the bench of a solid, wooden picnic table, body leaning against the tabletop, both elbows solidly on the table, eyepiece pressed against my face. The slowest shutter speed was 1/2500 sec, the fastest 1/8000 sec, and the Z5ii has good IBIS. (That's the same hardware, Z5ii, FTZ, 300mm, no TC, I used for the hand-held-while-standing moon shot I posted a month or two ago.) Of course there is no mirror shake in a mirrorless camera.
Well, there is some shutter movement. As always, I focused by using the viewfinder magnifier. Short of using a very good tripod and the foldout screen instead of the eyepiece so my progressive glasses don't interfere, there isn't much I could do to improve stability, and a poor tripod might be worse. The apertures for the 300mm shots were 8, 5.6, 4.5. Of course the TC shots would be effectively smaller by one click. I suppose I could have done this with smaller apertures. I did botch the second of three for the 300mm sequence, I think I nudged the focus ring when shifting my hand for stability. Finally (though I didn't show it), except for that botched shot the general detail was consistent for each lens. If I mishandled the camera then I did it consistently for each lens, and I would expect the 300 x 1.4 shots to be worse than the straight 300 shots. Ever so slight difference in camera balance? I'm skeptical.One thing I think I imagine I believe I suspect I've observed is that the 300mm by itself works better in medium light than in hazy bright light. I'm not sure why, perhaps it's something related to contrast (Active D-Lighting?) in the camera settings. The lens is clean with no blemishes and almost no internal dust. It has a NISI (1395 Angstroms) UV-C filter. Or perhaps it's the glass itself. Brightness dependency is not a feature I've studied; it just seems that whenever I've been disappointed in a shot it was in a very bright setting.
I can do this experiment again.
Aug 29, 2026 at 05:12 AM
p.2683 #20Manual Focus Nikon Glass
jimmuller wrote:
I can do this experiment again.
That's what I was suggesting. It took me awhile to hone my technique for super telephotos (400-500m plus). In my case, I was the weakest link - which is common.
I can do this experiment again.
That's what I was suggesting. It took me awhile to hone my technique for super telephotos (400-500m plus). In my case, I was the weakest link - which is common.
Aug 29, 2026 at 06:15 AM