rafaelcasd wrote:
Last chapter in the 800mm saga, the seller offered a substantial discount if I kept the lens, so I decided to keep it if it was truly sharp corner to corner, and it is! if you nail focus it is sharpest fully open.
So it will stay with me after all.
I accept the uneven lower left corner illumination, at this level with same vivid processing as the pics above. Glass is pristine so no idea what causes this.
The lens is surely a beauty Rafael and if the price is right, as appears to be the case with the concession seller is making, it seems worth keeping. My guess is that the slight shadow will not pose a problem with your shooting, though looking at your test images, I have to wonder what exactly you'd be doing with such a long lens. I guess that is part of the journey... It is easy to understand how Jose would use such a long lens. He's in the business of shooting birds which are both small and unless being seduced with bananas not easy to approach. We'll watch to see what you do with the lens. Congratulations!
CGrindahl wrote:
No doubt Laura, when the plumbing breaks down problems arise. I have a water heater located beneath a kitchen counter. It leaked badly, flooding both the kitchen floor and the adjacent bathroom. Yes, we were grateful it was clean water, but Sue was concerned about mold developing so our landlord in his infinite wisdom removed exterior boards to air out the cavity beneath the bathtub. Unfortunately, he failed to cover the wall opening and I arrived in the kitchen next morning to be welcomed by a large rat looking for breakfast no doubt. The landlord chased the rat and the baseball bat he was carrying was up to the task at hand.
Amazing the things we take for granted simply because they work as designed. It is always when they go on the fritz that we discover how fortunately we are. Yesterday I was attempting to download software designed to deal with photo noise and realized it was taking forever. I did a speed check of my computer connection and found I was downloading at about 10 mbps on a line touted to run at 150 mbps. After texting with my ISP for ten minutes I was up to 244 mbps. Remember dial-up? I know not everyone has high speed internet, but those of us who do quickly become fans and think nothing of tackling any size download. Downloads in the bathroom are even MORE important...
Glad you got everything in order. Now you can begin saving for the 600mm lens. ...Show more →
Curtis, you can only discuss Nikkor tubing here, ok to use any camera.
The lens is surely a beauty Rafael and if the price is right, as appears to be the case with the concession seller is making, it seems worth keeping. My guess is that the slight shadow will not pose a problem with your shooting, though looking at your test images, I have to wonder what exactly you'd be doing with such a long lens. I guess that is part of the journey... It is easy to understand how Jose would use such a long lens. He's in the business of shooting birds which are both small and unless being seduced with bananas not easy to approach. We'll watch to see what you do with the lens. Congratulations! ...Show more →
To be honest Curtis, I have as much use for an 800mm as I do for the 8mm. There are some opportunities for me in surfing, the San Diego Bay and its ships and buildings, the Zoo and wild animal park, moonscapes.....if nothing else it gives me a much needed workout with the weight.
I just wanted to round up my collection of long lenses, I now have 180 2.8, 200 2.0, 300 4.5, 400 3.5, the original 600 5.6 and the 800 5.6.
As long as my drains hold up I can keep doing this.
rafaelcasd wrote:
it does Laura. The shadow is only .35 stop though. Visible only against the sky and gone at f/8. The lens is perfect otherwise, I can live with this.
Doesn’t this lens have a lens filter holder? Wonder if it’s out of alignment a hair, causing the shadow.
kwoodard wrote:
Doesn’t this lens have a lens filter holder? Wonder if it’s out of alignment a hair, causing the shadow.
I did try without the filter holder and it was the same. Me thinks it has to do with the camera, my D810 and D800 both have the same shadow but the D800 adds a rectilinear shadow at the bottom that is not visible in the D810. Will see what happens with the D3 and with film. The shadow edge is straight which rules out the lens alone as the cause.
These shadows are not even half a stop so I will ignore them from here on as the lens is perfect and perfectly sharp.
They only show with high contrast processing against a clear sky and are easy to fix in post.
Bummer. I'm wondering now, if it's something related to the filter holder. I know the filter is part of the optical formula, but maybe swap out the filter with another?
rafaelcasd wrote:
it does Laura. The shadow is only .35 stop though. Visible only against the sky and gone at f/8. The lens is perfect otherwise, I can live with this.
NightOwl Cat wrote:
Bummer. I'm wondering now, if it's something related to the filter holder. I know the filter is part of the optical formula, but maybe swap out the filter with another?
Ler’s Let it go. This is so minor. It is the same with no filter.
Wow, even Georg decides to show up!
Took a look at prices online - the f/2 vs f/2.8 is pretty ridiculous
Going for the f/2 would probably go over my tax limit and cost even more
I have read similar reviews online, that the f/2 can be quite the dog (extreme curvature, super soft corners, sometimes the image never really sharpens up as its counterpart) and the f/2.8 is the dependable one
Thinking aloud, I ... might consider spending the money on the metabones adapter (I have the speedboost version instead) to replace my cheapo no-name eBay adapter, and hopefully get rid of my infinity focus issues
Hi Chin,
Nancy (I forgot her username here) got really good results with the 24/2 Ais on a DX-sensor-Nikon.
As written before - the 24/2.8 is a fairly safe bet. And the „special” 24/2 might work for me and a few others, but might disappoint most photographers.
PS: But I'm pretty sure that the rendering of the 24/2 is kinda unique (close focus, lens wide open):
The „blobbed” highlights reminds me of the 35/1.4-rendering, but it's still a bit more special.
georgms wrote:
Hi Chin,
Nancy (I forgot her username here) got really good results with the 24/2 Ais on a DX-sensor-Nikon.
As written before - the 24/2.8 is a fairly safe bet. And the „special” 24/2 might work for me and a few others, but might disappoint most photographers.
PS: But I'm pretty sure that the rendering of the 24/2 is kinda unique (close focus, lens wide open):
Yeah and I could use an adapter to force it to crop. Gosh the images you posted are really really really nice, the oof rendering makes the in-focus areas pop even more. And I was just about to pull the trigger on the f/2.8...
rafaelcasd wrote:
Last chapter in the 800mm saga, the seller offered a substantial discount if I kept the lens, so I decided to keep it if ...
Very interested in your opinion on the 100% Flickr sample Jose, this is San Marcos State three miles away.
Wow Rafael, nice detail at so long range! Glad you did not send it back to Japan.
I have not used mine often at infinity, sometimes for the moon with good results.
Next I suggest you experimenting with TCs, my copy is "TC friend" most of them work very well (TCs 14E 17E and 20EIII), not certain about the TC16A yet.
But do not forget:
someday you are getting tired of lugging around this "defective" monster, just let me know
Same for that "horrible" 15/5.6 paper weight
Oh, and even that "low performer" Medical 200/5.6 is interesting me too
Hey guys, hope all are doing well. It's been a while since I posted on here. I did a shoot for my youngest daughter and her husband's family yesterday. Here's one with the X-T2 and 50-135mm.
V1 + FT1 + Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 ai-s EDIF + tripod + gimbal head. ISO 200, lens wide open at 1/320s; 45% cropped (4.5/10MP); the bird was ~22-23m away. This combo is equivalent to a 2160mm tele on full frame format.
