Top: February 2010, D3 at ISO 400 and 1/500s.
Bottom: January 2019, Z7 at ISO 200 and 1/640s.
Both taken with Nikkor-PC 105mm f/2.5F ai'd (Gauss) @ f/8 + Polarizer filter, hand held. Light and colours are not the same, but the framing is exactly the same, so we can examine changes in 9 years.
Some more buildings and less trees, although in the Park at the centre the trees grew a little bit during last years.
I must have knocked the focus ring and screwed up the zone focus.
That's what happens when you are in a rush and photography is limited to grab shots whilst jockeying for position on the pavements of London.
DeltaSigma wrote:
I must have knocked the focus ring and screwed up the zone focus.
That's what happens when you are in a rush and photography is limited to grab shots whilst jockeying for position on the pavements of London.
I hope you don't mind me listing this photo-journal article from the BBC that appeared in a side banner whilst I was reading the news on the BBC website this morning.
I think this adds context/background to your amazing images and shows how dedicated you are to exploring landscape photography and presenting your pictures to us.
Colin Those London folk do not look too happy! Brexit?
Snoqualmie falls! ?
Another view of this roadside waterfall in the greater Seattle area, site of an old hydroelectric station, hotel, restaurant and probably lots of other things.
Another view of this roadside waterfall in the greater Seattle area, site of an old hydroelectric station, hotel, restaurant and probably lots of other things.
I got lucky and found a parking place!
D800 24mm PC-E
Some of you folks might be knowing. This is the place in David Lynch's super strange, sometimes plain weird, incredibly dramatic cult classic TV show the Twin Peaks. The hotel that show's one of the main characters makes his base is the one seen on top left corner of the picture (Salish Lodge) although interior scenes were shot elsewhere. The fall itself does not appear in the show (as far as I remember) but it is shown in title credits - which are as eerie as rest of the show.
I hope you don't mind me listing this photo-journal article from the BBC that appeared in a side banner whilst I was reading the news on the BBC website this morning.
I think this adds context/background to your amazing images and shows how dedicated you are to exploring landscape photography and presenting your pictures to us.
asiostygius wrote:
Nice test Rafael; Need to put my 800 in the Z7, no time lately.
I have noted that the front curtain is an absolute necessity for long teles, even hand held (my experience with the 500/8 mirror and 400/5.6 ED).
Wow, unbelievable: Rafael has an Achilles heel It is the PC 105/2.5 Gauss design!
Mine is the 15/5.6 QDC version
Remember Jose, the 105 P is the Sonnar design. The P.C. is the Gauss design that carries forward to the remaining versions of the manual focus lens. That, of course, was the first thought that crossed my mind when I read of Rafael's "remaining wishes." He likely would want them both but I've no doubt he is aware they are of two different designs. Were I in a selling mode... which despite the fact I haven't picked up a camera in over a month, is not happening, I bought a pristine copy of a P.C. lens from Canada eons ago. For the P, I had to buy TWO of them... one an EX WITH an AI conversion kit that I then salvaged to mount on a mint copy I found without one. Yes, having cameras that allow us to mount a pre-AI lens is certainly a joy since the options widen dramatically and the prices definitely drop.
Happy to hear about your Z7. I'm enjoying catching up a bit at how folks on this thread have responded to the recent mirrorless offerings...
CGrindahl wrote:
Remember Jose, the 105 P is the Sonnar design. The P.C. is the Gauss design that carries forward to the remaining versions of the manual focus lens. That, of course, was the first thought that crossed my mind when I read of Rafael's "remaining wishes." He likely would want them both but I've no doubt he is aware they are of two different designs. Were I in a selling mode... which despite the fact I haven't picked up a camera in over a month, is not happening, I bought a pristine copy of a P.C. lens from Canada eons ago. For the P, I had to buy TWO of them... one an EX WITH an AI conversion kit that I then salvaged to mount on a mint copy I found without one. Yes, having cameras that allow us to mount a pre-AI lens is certainly a joy since the options widen dramatically and the prices definitely drop.
Happy to hear about your Z7. I'm enjoying catching up a bit at how folks on this thread have responded to the recent mirrorless offerings... ...Show more →
I have an 105/2.5 very late serialbnr 28xxxx from 1971/ Is that a sonar too? I have a 10.5/2.5 too.
How can you see this or is it just the serialnbr.
Actually, I return at this moment because I receiving a message through Skype from Chin mentioning that our Canadian friend Glen shared a few days ago the news about his brother who is contending with a life-ending illness. I've read through the pages and note the generous response from folks on the thread. Glad you're doing as well as you are Glen. There is a lovely book I encountered some years ago titled "Loving What Is." We have a much easier time loving the good things that come our way, but are often challenged when life gives us moments of disappointment or pain. Those often come with a nasty medical diagnosis.
I've been a bit pre-occupied the last year by the fact that three people with stage four cancer came into my life. The youngest of the three turned 58 the beginning of December. He dutifully went in for a colonoscopy shortly after he turned fifty years old only to be told by the doctor after the test that he had stage four cancer. His two sons were 12 and 14 at the time. For the last almost seven years he has been treating the incurable cancer with chemotherapy. Shortly after his birthday another person I'd been meeting with took prescribed drugs to end her life. She was 74 at the time and took advantage of a recent law in California that now offers end of life options to people with incurable disease.
It is good we are able to offer one another support when life brings us painful news of the sort Glen recently received. We will all have opportunities to face these challenges, whether through the death of loved ones, or through our own infirmities. Amazingly, this thread has been around for so long we have known many births and many deaths of loved ones. Deepest respect to all who choose to spend time on this thread, sharing what life has to offer, whether through the lens of a camera or simply the vicissitudes of the moment. Generosity of spirit will always lighten the load both for those who give and those who receive.
Chris Dees wrote:
I have an 105/2.5 very late serialbnr 28xxxx from 1971/ Is that a sonar too? I have a 10.5/2.5 too.
How can you see this or is it just the serialnbr.
I'm not smart enough to share other than what I find from photosynthesis.co.nz and they indicate that EVERY F version lens that is designated 105 f/2.5 P is a Sonnar optical design. Of course, it seems at the end and beginning of changes to optical designs there can be some overlap. Your lens is late enough it "may" have the Gauss design. This won't help, but it is on the topic...
Well, the original 10.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor-P designed for the rangefinder Nikon was introduced as early as in 1948. The lens was almost a replica of the Sonnar design in a 5 elements 3 groups optical design; the lens carried over to the initial F-mount and finally went throughout another round of upgrade in 1971 by renown Nikkor optical designer, SHIMIZU, Yoshiyuki. The revised optical formula is a 5 elements in 4 group design which was used until today in the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5s. The amazing thing is, the design has literally remained unchanged all these years as Nikon thought such "perfect "optical formula needs not be revamp at all. IS that good enough ? I thought so and I always tell many Nikon users that lens is really one hell of a lens - combining a economical, extremely high built quality and a world beater in its optical performance. However, with the convenience zoom lenses provide today, too often, many users choose to ignore my recommendation....Show more →
Looks like the series e 100mm f2.8 shares the same (excellent) optical formula in slightly shorter FL. So if 105s are too expensive, series e will suffice
Edit: I stand corrected. They are different. But still very good considering the price difference.
It is the PC 105/2.5 Gauss design!
