I tend to side with Thomas Pindelski who writes a very commonsense blog about photography but who has also, in the past, written about modifying old Nikkor lenses. His view is that very few are "collectors items" and that most aren't worth very much. Some like the Noct obviously have rarity value.
One more note about Thomas Pindelski - he has installed CPU's on numerous MF lenses which saves a heap of trouble when using them. He has also created lens correction profiles for use with lightroom to correct CA etc and these can be downloaded from his blog free.
He has recently re-entered the Nikon arena having used smaller cameras and smartphones for a while. He has a wealth of knowledge to share including how to build your own "Mac". Very interesting guy and not afraid to speak his mind - I like this.
CGrindahl wrote:
Laura is shaming me into posting a few flower photos, so you can all blame her...
All shot with the 85 f/1.4 AI-s which is still on my camera after a shoot on Saturday.
I didn't set out this morning with the intention of taking flower photos but when I drove past displays on both sides of the street Laura's words came to me and I knew I needed to stop. Inspiration may not be present, but I know how to follow instructions...
Me, me, me! I would like a photo of the... laundromat
NNL. wrote:
Thank you for the advice. I will keep an eye out for the SC version. I was thinking it might be cheaper to buy a pre-AI then have John White convert it than to buy the AI version. What exactly is your aversion to modifying a pre-AI one? Is it just that it's not "original" anymore or is there more to it?
I've said this before on the thread but that post is long lost... there are only so many of these old lenses in existence. I liken it to something like a 1957 Chevrolet BelAire hardtop, a very beautiful car from my youth... beautiful, rare and irreplaceable. Nikon made conversion kits for pre-AI lenses that allowed them to be used on newer cameras. The three copies of the 55 f/1.2 S.C. lenses I own all have the conversion kit installed. Of course, as they stopped producing pre-AI lenses they also stopped producing the modified aperture ring to convert them. I know John White does a credible job of converting pre-AI lenses by cutting the existing aperture ring. Our friend Jose in Rio does a fine job of converting his own lenses. But once you're cut a forty year old aperture ring there is no going back to the original lens.
There are a couple of solutions to the problem. One is to buy what is an outstanding camera, the Nikon Df which will accept pre-AI lenses without conversion. I bought that camera and am happily using it, though I'd built my kit before buying that camera so practically all of my pre-AI lenses already have the AI conversion kit installed. I have subsequently bought a few lenses that have not been converted, a 5.8cm f/1.4 S, a 5cm f/2, a 28 f/2 N.C. a 50 f/2 H and an 85 f/1.8 H.C. You also can mount unconverted lenses on other cameras using an adaptor. I imagine that will be possible with the new Nikon mirrorless cameras.
There are only so many 1957 Chevrolet BelAire hardtops in the world. Every time one of those crashes there is one less. The same is true of these classic lenses. I not only love shooting with them, I love appreciating their beauty unmarred by even the most carefully applied metal file. But that is just me. I put together my kit at a time when the lenses I sought were available. It took time and I probably paid a premium for a few of the lenses I bought. I'm happy I did AND I'm happy I bought the Df, which is a wonderful camera.
Here's a photo of my Df with a recently purchased copy of the 28 f/2 N.C., an unconverted lens. It doesn't get better than this!
Zichar wrote:
Me, me, me! I would like a photo of the... laundromat
Sadly, if you want a photo from the laundromat you'll have to come back for another visit Chin...
When Picasa abandoned all of us who'd used that site as a host, I had the painful decision to make about how many of my photos I'd move to Flickr. Alas, those shots from the laundromat didn't make the cut. Finding them now would be like looking for a needle in a haystack.
Don't forget Chin, we had a meal directly across the street from the laundromat and your room was only three blocks away! You have NO excuse...
I tend to side with Thomas Pindelski who writes a very commonsense blog about photography but who has also, in the past, written about modifying old Nikkor lenses. His view is that very few are "collectors items" and that most aren't worth very much. Some like the Noct obviously have rarity value.
I make no claim for righteousness or even logic here Peter. I know there are folks whose approach to all of this is very pedestrian, utilitarians who simply want to USE the lenses to take photos. Of course, from that perspective it could be argued shooting with these older lenses is accepting outdated technology since new designs and coatings will produce "better" results. We can argue, of course, that these lenses allow those of us with limited resources to play a game we couldn't otherwise. I wouldn't disagree with that. We also could argue that the imperfections found in rendering by these old lenses has its own charm.
And all of that is beside the question of aesthetics when it comes to the lenses themselves. Granted, for many this is meaningful only when it comes to the economic value of the product. Pristine quality of a mundane product will certainly not enhance its value. We all learn eventually that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me these old lenses have utilitarian value because I can and do mount them on my camera and use them. But I also have a deep appreciation for them as objects of beauty in and of themselves. I recall when Dean was active on the thread and the topic came up about buying the cleanest possible copy of a lens. Of course, he had the resources to do anything he wanted, so paying a premium was not a problem for him. The same could likely be argued about Rafael's kit. Buddy appreciates well used lenses with the patina that comes from use. It is all good.
At the moment I'm a bit more of a "collector" than a user of my rather extensive kit of lenses. Funny thing, however, is that on those few occasions when I've sold a lens, I've always sold it for the price I paid. I've no interest in making a profit on my carefully put together kit. I still intend to use it. But I still love picking up a lens and appreciating the feel in my hand, still love turning the focusing ring or the aperture ring and feeling the precision of its manufacture. Cutting an aperture ring would feel like chopping off the finger of someone I loved. Irrational perhaps, but here I am. I would never judge someone else for making a different decision. I appreciate that Jose's access is limited because of location and the tax policy in Brazil. I also appreciate that he is a very skilled person who does an exquisite job of modifying aperture rings, unlike the butcher Ben has spoken about who brutalized so many of his lenses. I can almost hear their pain...
I guess this is one dimension of my decision to start this thread and to guide it through its formative years. And look what happened when the subject came up... I started babbling again...
CGrindahl wrote:
I make no claim for righteousness or even logic here Peter. I know there are folks whose approach to all of this is very pedestrian, utilitarians who simply want to USE the lenses to take photos. Of course, from that perspective it could be argued shooting with these older lenses is accepting outdated technology since new designs and coatings will produce "better" results. We can argue, of course, that these lenses allow those of us with limited resources to play a game we couldn't otherwise. I wouldn't disagree with that. We also could argue that the imperfections found in rendering by these old lenses has its own charm.
And all of that is beside the question of aesthetics when it comes to the lenses themselves. Granted, for many this is meaningful only when it comes to the economic value of the product. Pristine quality of a mundane product will certainly not enhance its value. We all learn eventually that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me these old lenses have utilitarian value because I can and do mount them on my camera and use them. But I also have a deep appreciation for them as objects of beauty in and of themselves. I recall when Dean was active on the thread and the topic came up about buying the cleanest possible copy of a lens. Of course, he had the resources to do anything he wanted, so paying a premium was not a problem for him. The same could likely be argued about Rafael's kit. Buddy appreciates well used lenses with the patina that comes from use. It is all good.
At the moment I'm a bit more of a "collector" than a user of my rather extensive kit of lenses. Funny thing, however, is that on those few occasions when I've sold a lens, I've always sold it for the price I paid. I've no interest in making a profit on my carefully put together kit. I still intend to use it. But I still love picking up a lens and appreciating the feel in my hand, still love turning the focusing ring or the aperture ring and feeling the precision of its manufacture. Cutting an aperture ring would feel like chopping off the finger of someone I loved. Irrational perhaps, but here I am. I would never judge someone else for making a different decision. I appreciate that Jose's access is limited because of location and the tax policy in Brazil. I also appreciate that he is a very skilled person who does an exquisite job of modifying aperture rings, unlike the butcher Ben has spoken about who brutalized so many of his lenses. I can almost hear their pain...
I guess this is one dimension of my decision to start this thread and to guide it through its formative years. And look what happened when the subject came up... I started babbling again...
gbohannon wrote:
Boy I missed these posts and great discussions. Glad you are back Curtis.
Now where is Leighton and Reagan?
George
You mean all the blabbermouths?
Of course, I agree with you George. The real pleasure of this thread has always been the rich conversations that sometimes focused on lenses but at other times on life. A dear friend of one of our members will likely be ending his life this coming weekend after a 13 year journey with stage four cancer. He lives where assisted suicide is legal. I've been in communication with this person so am every aware of what is happening at the moment. And a moment ago a good friend sent an email with photos of a condominium unit about a hundred yards from his own that was gutted by fire last evening, threatening the whole complex. Life is much more turbulent than is generally apparent.
Stay well everyone. Life is a fragile thing worthy of celebrating.
Belated 8th everyone. Late to the party and back after a hiatus. Hope to visit more often.
Wonder whether the mirrorless Z6/Z7 buzz and the promise of a new noct is keeping everyone here excited?
Have been mostly using the Ricoh grII in 2018, primarliy due to time issues, but dearly miss Nikon colors and rendering. Picked up my NMF glass after what seemed ages.
From the Pride in Amsterdam earlier this month.Df & 85 f/1.4ais mostly open
With my daughter in the Hallerbos. D800e & 50 f/1.8e wide open
For someone who wants a 55 f/1.2 without the hassle of dealing with unconverted lenses here are two lenses that look pretty clean. The first is a late version AI lens. Remember that there is NO AI-s version of this lens. Nikon moved to the 50 f/1.2 AI-s instead. It is listed as "near mint," but you can judge for yourself from the photos.
gbohannon wrote:
Boy I missed these posts and great discussions. Glad you are back Curtis.
Now where is Leighton and Reagan?
George
Reagan is looking for a camera again
Curtis can spin a tale and usually it comes out how
I am thinking about it but I could never put in words
The feel of the old lens is my attraction and turning the aperture ring is very satisfying
making me feel like a part of the cog in the wheel
Probably why I love the Fuji's so much
Modern metal lens with aperture dials
I figured you couldn't be too far away Reagan and why am I not surprised that you're once again looking for a camera? I'm guessing the XT-2 is still in your kit. The D810 also? So you're looking for a THIRD camera or to replace the D810?
I was looking at Sony cameras this afternoon. All this talk about mirrorless cameras at the moment gets the juices flowing. But I'm basically a cheapskate so it is doubtful I'll buy anything right now. The Df is still keeping me happy, at least on those rather rare occasions I pick it up.
Hope you're enjoying your summer Reagan. Sue plans on visiting Delray Beach in early October, but I'm holding down the fort in California. But I definitely have Florida on my mind at the moment since tickets were bought today...
Thought you loved the (D750) (D810) you had (I can't remember what you've had)
Reagan wrote:
Reagan is looking for a camera again
Curtis can spin a tale and usually it comes out how
I am thinking about it but I could never put in words
The feel of the old lens is my attraction and turning the aperture ring is very satisfying
making me feel like a part of the cog in the wheel
Probably why I love the Fuji's so much
Modern metal lens with aperture dials
