mysh wrote:
Got my new to me 28mm 3.5 PC today. Overall looks nice and came with hood and hardcase. The body has some marks but nothing serious. Function and glass is great. From seeing this lens in pictures I always thought it was bigger. I am pleasantly surprised with how small it is.
I know some people on here are familiar with this lens so was hoping to get some info. There seems to be 3 areas that can rotate. I think I know all but 1 of them.
1. There is the top one which changes aperture
2. The one below the aperture is the one I am not sure of. Is it just a aperture lock?
3. Rotates the lens so you can shift the opposite direction
4. The knob is for shifting
I have just started learning about the nuances of the 55mm 1.2 SC
Here are two pictures, taken minutes apart, both at 1.2
The background of the first (last year's teasels) is fine as far as I am concerned.
However the second, looking into a witch hazel bush. is a right royal streaky mess.
It would appear to me from a handful of shots that OOF structures with linear elements seem to make a mess of the background whereas as more random background doesn't suffer in the same way.
Early days for me with my new lens so plenty to explore.
Bit of a learning curve there indeed, and the worst bit if that the real magick happens where you don't even see it proper. I always had the feeling that the final image differs a bit from what you see through the viewfinder.
I have used my copy of the 55mm f1,2 Nikkor-S.C quite a lot for the past 3 years, and am quite confident that I can predict what will happen before pressing the shutter release button.
the solitaire wrote:
Some very inspiring work in that museum. Makes me wish for some time to work on a few sculptures I have in the back of my mind (most of them stored there for some years now)
Especially the shadow structures are very well done. Just makes one wonder about why that fire alarm button was located right in the middle of that sculpture. Even though it's fun entertaining the thought that that was intentional, I doubt this is true
A rash can be a considerable problem, very much unlike it's fairly harmless name suggests. Kristina has to deal with it every day, ever since she was born. Only since I met her, I truly learned how severe an impact such an illness can have, and how debilitating it can be, including being unable sleep for days because every inch of your body itches as if you sat down in a beehive....Show more →
With regard to the fast fifties from Nikon, I've commented before about the jittery bokeh found with the 50 f/1.2 AI-s that becomes most obvious when the background has broken elements in it. I've found the 55 f/1.2 S.C. AI to be much more forgiving in such instance. This is perhaps not the best example, but it is the only wide open shot with the 55 that is easily available to me now that I moved images to Flickr.
I personally find these older lenses a delight to use and generally am not troubled by rendering of out of focus areas. That said, I understand the newest lenses with latest coating will handle light better. That fact will not convince me to replace any of the manual focus lenses in my kit.
Here are a couple wildflower shots from the San Elijo Lagoon.
The first one is a Sacred Datura. Elements of this plant (also known as Jimson Weed) are psychedelic, and it was important to Native Americans in their sacred ceremonies. It was also a favorite of Georgia O'Keeffe. One of her paintings of this flower sold for $44 million in 2014.
The second plant is another native of the southwest; the Cobwebby Thistle.
The photo of the Sacred Datura was made with the 180/2.8 ED with the PK-13 extender. Thanks for the tip, Curtis!
CGrindahl wrote:
With regard to the fast fifties from Nikon, I've commented before about the jittery bokeh found with the 50 f/1.2 AI-s that becomes most obvious when the background has broken elements in it. I've found the 55 f/1.2 S.C. AI to be much more forgiving in such instance. This is perhaps not the best example, but it is the only wide open shot with the 55 that is easily available to me now that I moved images to Flickr.
I personally find these older lenses a delight to use and generally am not troubled by rendering of out of focus areas. That said, I understand the newest lenses with latest coating will handle light better. That fact will not convince me to replace any of the manual focus lenses in my kit. ...Show more →
Ahh the Buena Vista! What a great place to hang out.
the solitaire wrote:
Bit of a learning curve there indeed, and the worst bit if that the real magick happens where you don't even see it proper. I always had the feeling that the final image differs a bit from what you see through the viewfinder.
I have used my copy of the 55mm f1,2 Nikkor-S.C quite a lot for the past 3 years, and am quite confident that I can predict what will happen before pressing the shutter release button.
Thanks for the info Buddy - up until now I have been paying more attention on getting the subject I want into the focus plane and have not really concerned myself with the OOF parts. I need to slow down to observe the complete picture and adjust accordingly. I do like the 3D effect from your image.
Seems like the pace picked up after getting through the 6000 page mark, seemed to be dragging for a while, great to see the thread back to fun discussions!
Dave, congrats on the 28 3.5 PC, what a fun lens. I learned a lot especially from Georg's earlier posts with this lens, and his writeup should be bookmarked, maybe linked from Mark's website. This lens is easily my most used one (just went and checked my albums on Flickr). The only drawback is the fuzziness that Georg describes. I try to not keep anything critical (or step back a bit) near the top of the frame where the fuzziness and distortion are the worst.
Another one from Vienna (this a a bridge over the Danube Canal near the town center), with the 28 3.5 PC and Df.
Does it have soft corners at f/8.0? Mine does
Does it rattle when you shake the lens? Mine does
Does it make strange noises when you wiggle the aperture ring? Mine does.
Does it have a bent prong that lens forward at 46 degrees? Mine does.
Bottom line - I think US postal service just killed one. It works, but it sounds like something internal was hit hard when the package was crushed in shipping. It was well packed with just a little wiggle room in the box, but the bent prong and some creases in the cardboard box indicate that the transit to me was not without incident. My bad luck with used lens purchases continues. I think I am striking out 50% of the time.
Bummer Peter. A crushed box is not a welcome sight when it arrives. I don't know anything about filing claims with USPS. Fortunately, none of the packages I've sent or received through them have been damaged. Of course, I always add a line at the bottom of the address in large bright red letters that says FRAGILE...FRAGILE...FRAGILE. I don't know whether that helped or I've simply been lucky. Personally, I believe the seller is responsible up to the point of delivery and if anything untoward happens during shipping it is the seller who would resolve the matter with the shipper. Hope you and the seller are able to work something out.
Here are a couple wildflower shots from the San Elijo Lagoon.
The first one is a Sacred Datura. Elements of this plant (also known as Jimson Weed) are psychedelic, and it was important to Native Americans in their sacred ceremonies. It was also a favorite of Georgia O'Keeffe. One of her paintings of this flower sold for $44 million in 2014.
The second plant is another native of the southwest; the Cobwebby Thistle.
The photo of the Sacred Datura was made with the 180/2.8 ED with the PK-13 extender. Thanks for the tip, Curtis!
You're welcome Jeff. That's a wonderful image. I don't recall what I said but I know beyond a doubt that the 180 f/2.8 ED AI-s is a great lens, however it is used... bare, with extension tubes and teleconverters. So many of the shots taken with that lens and tubes reside in folders I didn't transfer to Flickr when Google pulled the plug on Picasa where I'd been maintaining photos for seven or eight years. They did however, maintain the files so photos previously posted on this and other threads remain active... for how long I don't know. As an experiment, I went to the Shooting with Tubes thread I started some years ago and copied the files below... lets see if they work. All 180 f/2.8 AI-s with one or another extension tube.
Hallelujah, it worked! The first two were shot with Vivitar tubes, 48mm in the first and 36mm in the second. The third shot was with the PK-13. Tubes are a great addition to one's kit.
Does it have soft corners at f/8.0? Mine does
Does it rattle when you shake the lens? Mine does
Does it make strange noises when you wiggle the aperture ring? Mine does.
Does it have a bent prong that lens forward at 46 degrees? Mine does.
Bottom line - I think US postal service just killed one. It works, but it sounds like something internal was hit hard when the package was crushed in shipping. It was well packed with just a little wiggle room in the box, but the bent prong and some creases in the cardboard box indicate that the transit to me was not without incident. My bad luck with used lens purchases continues. I think I am striking out 50% of the time.
