Gonga wrote:
Went back to Austin Falls yesterday. All images 28-50mm f3.5 AiS Zoom.
I wanted to test this lens up against my primes. I did sharpness tests on it last summer and was very surprised that it had better sharpness than some of my primes (such as the 20mm f4 Ai). It's really amazing to spend hours with one cheap, tiny old lens and get results like this. All I needed was this one little lens for wide angle, normal, and pano aspects. It suffers just a bit with regard to sharpness, but otherwise is a wonderful little gem. I must admit though, on my next trip I'm leaving the zoom home. By the way, unlike my one modern zoom (28-300 3.5-5.6 AF-S), and I bet most of them, this one has one single non-parallax point for all focal lengths (80mm). That's amazingly useful for panoramas. It's inconvenient to have to look up the NPP every time you change focal lengths when making panos. I wonder why? It's a push-pull design, and the front rotates with focus....Show more →
Great images Dan. i',m afraid I don't understand the following -
this one has one single non-parallax point for all focal lengths (80mm) . Does this relate to your 28-300 since 80mm is beyond the focal length of 50mm or is it a misprint. I take a lot of panos and to be honest have never even thought about parallax! We learn something new every day !
bobbelbob wrote:
camped out last night on a really beautiful place. Unfortunately I wasīnt able to shoot very much due to bad weather and very few hours with available light. Even though, hereīs a few from today and yesterday.
No fishing allowed in this creek, unfortunately. Thereīs a special kind of trout in the lake up streams this river that only reproduce down stream. This kind of behaviour is very unusual for being a salmonide. Most of them swim upstream to reproduce. The trout is now highly protected since it was about to become extinct in the 70īs and 80īs due to overfishing and acidification.
50-135mm f/3.5 ais https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4560/37647769744_c86487da5d_b.jpgOld Bridge by Kristian Hagelin, on Flickr
Lestor, loved all three in the b&w set, but the third one has the extra goods! Great moment which I'm sure will be treasured.
Kristian, interesting camping setup. I sometime wonder if the warnings you read about open shelters like this and potential diseases from animals being spread to humans simply due to sleeping on the floor of the shelter is overblown. When I used to camp a lot more than now, it's always been in a tent or bivy, or under the stars (with a tent close by in case of rain). Regardless, it's nice to get outside.
Here's another fisherman picture, the setting sun really popped the colors on the fisherman. D800 - 70-210 Series E - 1/160 at f4.0 - ISO100.
pbraymond wrote:
Lestor, loved all three in the b&w set, but the third one has the extra goods! Great moment which I'm sure will be treasured.
Kristian, interesting camping setup. I sometime wonder if the warnings you read about open shelters like this and potential diseases from animals being spread to humans simply due to sleeping on the floor of the shelter is overblown. When I used to camp a lot more than now, it's always been in a tent or bivy, or under the stars (with a tent close by in case of rain). Regardless, it's nice to get outside.
Here's another fisherman picture, the setting sun really popped the colors on the fisherman. D800 - 70-210 Series E - 1/160 at f4.0 - ISO100.
Thanks Ray. I havenīt really heard about any risks like that here in Sweden, we dont have the same fauna here and in some parts we have very little fauna at all, due to farm land..
What they have warned about have been about eating fresh blueberries and such in the forest because of a very dangerous parasite worm that comes from some kind of racoon. 97% who gets infested with this parasite dont make it. Even though the probability is extremely low that this worm is present is very small, I rather take the berries home and cook em before I eat.
Our plan this trip was to overnight hammocking with a tarp and everything but we had very few hours of light so we decideed to take the shed instead.
Nice shot with the lights on the fisherman. Googled walleye. Seems like a very popular fish. Donīt have em here
bobbelbob wrote:
camped out last night on a really beautiful place. Unfortunately I wasīnt able to shoot very much due to bad weather and very few hours with available light. Even though, hereīs a few from today and yesterday.
No fishing allowed in this creek, unfortunately. Thereīs a special kind of trout in the lake up streams this river that only reproduce down stream. This kind of behaviour is very unusual for being a salmonide. Most of them swim upstream to reproduce. The trout is now highly protected since it was about to become extinct in the 70īs and 80īs due to overfishing and acidification.
50-135mm f/3.5 ais https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4560/37647769744_c86487da5d_b.jpgOld Bridge by Kristian Hagelin, on Flickr
Apologies - about to kill the autumnal colour - again. Colour ones to follow but I have not processed them yet.
South coast of England near Christchurch, Dorset
Loads of people enjoying the weekend sunshine in quite windy and cold ( 6 degrees C) conditions.
D7100 IR with 105/2.5 PC and 180mm ED for the heavily cropped last one.
DeltaSigma wrote:
Apologies - about to kill the autumnal colour - again. Colour ones to follow but I have not processed them yet.
South coast of England near Christchurch, Dorset
Loads of people enjoying the weekend sunshine in quite windy and cold ( 6 degrees C) conditions.
D7100 IR with 105/2.5 PC and 180mm ED for the heavily cropped last one.
Df and 300mm f4.5 K, non-ED lens. The lens is very sharp wide open. I was thinking it may be less weighty than the 400 5.6 ED AIS that has been my standard walkaround tele. But it didn't feel like it, and sure enough its 1100g, only a 100g less than the 400. It is a bit shorter (a good 60cm in fact) though, so perhaps for trips it may still be more convenient to throw it into the suitcase.
Happen to know the difference between the K version you are using and the AI version?
Kevin, no straightforward answer to that question. I hadn't quite paid attention to how many 300 4.5 versions there were, even after the P and H versions. A visit to the photosynthesis page was quite interesting.
There were three sets of the 300 4.5 made after the H version ended in 1974. Each had a K, and an Ai or AI/AIS versions. The first one was started in 1977, that's the K version I have now, the "plain vanilla" kind. The other two sets were distinguished by ED glass, and then IF-ED which was the most advanced version. The optical formula evolved, staring with 6/5, then 6/4 and finally 7/6. Interestingly, the 6/4 optical design is similar to the 300 4.5 H version. However, the K version from ~1975 that I have, appears to be sharper than my 300 4.5 H. Or maybe its all about the individual copies of the lenses I have run into
So if you are talking about the ED or IF-ED AI/AIS lenses, then the optical formula would be different. Otherwise, the "plain vanilla" 300 4.5 AI should be similar to that original "K".
saph wrote:
Kevin, no straightforward answer to that question. I hadn't quite paid attention to how many 300 4.5 versions there were, even after the P and H versions. A visit to the photosynthesis page was quite interesting.
There were three sets of the 300 4.5 made after the H version ended in 1974. Each had a K, and an Ai or AI/AIS versions. The first one was started in 1977, that's the K version I have now, the "plain vanilla" kind. The other two sets were distinguished by ED glass, and then IF-ED which was the most advanced version. The optical formula evolved, staring with 6/5, then 6/4 and finally 7/6. Interestingly, the 6/4 optical design is similar to the 300 4.5 H version. However, the K version from ~1975 that I have, appears to be sharper than my 300 4.5 H. Or maybe its all about the individual copies of the lenses I have run into
So if you are talking about the ED or IF-ED AI/AIS lenses, then the optical formula would be different. Otherwise, the "plain vanilla" 300 4.5 AI should be similar to that original "K"....Show more →
Yeah, I am referring to the plain vanilla version, not the ones with the ED glass. I know with mine, if there is any bright spots that over expose, I get a lot of color fringing (purple or green, depending on if its in front of the focal plane or behind it). It tends to be kind of big too, so its harder to correct without causing color issues elsewhere. In more even light, the lens does well like yours demonstrates. I don't shoot with mine very often because I don't often have light that helps.
