This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010A fairly useless exercise
p.6 #1A fairly useless exercise
Rodolfo Paiz wrote:
Scarry analogy, but if that is what you enjoy [...]It's only scarry if he gets careless or if he's not real high on the dexterity index. 
Or if his blade gets rusty ... ewwww!
Andre Labonte wrote
Scarry analogy, but if that is what you enjoy [...]Or if his blade gets rusty ... ewwww!
Sep 27, 2010 at 06:45 PM
p.6 #2A fairly useless exercise
Dj, you know I love the Zeiss but your 2.8 is clearly out of focus. The f/4 looks to be in focus, but it looks horrible, the AI-S that is. I think you have a bad copy
Sep 27, 2010 at 06:46 PM
p.6 #3A fairly useless exercise
OK tried another go and again allowed the camera to meter in aperture priority (the Nikkor meters noticeably darker at the same manual settings).
I think maybe focus could have been better on the flower test with the Nikkor so please disregard. Maybe a little misleading as a result.
Here's f2.8 with a thrilling subject material. Closer this time but you can still see the difference in color transition, contrast and sharpness. Focus is nailed this time I'm fairly convinced with both lenses.
I'll let you guess which is which (again 100% crops at the focus point):
http://djsphotography.smugmug.com/photos/1025198567_yeKmk-O.jpg
http://djsphotography.smugmug.com/photos/1025198687_995Bd-O.jpg
I think maybe focus could have been better on the flower test with the Nikkor so please disregard. Maybe a little misleading as a result.
Here's f2.8 with a thrilling subject material. Closer this time but you can still see the difference in color transition, contrast and sharpness. Focus is nailed this time I'm fairly convinced with both lenses.
I'll let you guess which is which (again 100% crops at the focus point):
http://djsphotography.smugmug.com/photos/1025198567_yeKmk-O.jpg
http://djsphotography.smugmug.com/photos/1025198687_995Bd-O.jpg
Sep 27, 2010 at 07:09 PM
p.6 #4A fairly useless exercise
And no, I don't speak French unfortunately... I took a picture of the French label from the can. Not sure why except it was facing forward.
I DO think the Nikkor improves from stopping down to f4 from f2.8 though, so again, this isn't a be-all test absolutely...
I DO think the Nikkor improves from stopping down to f4 from f2.8 though, so again, this isn't a be-all test absolutely...
Sep 27, 2010 at 07:10 PM
p.6 #5A fairly useless exercise
dj dunzie wrote:
I don't think I've misfocussed, but maybe it wasn't nailed enough.
Yeah right....
I can get a sharper image with my iPhone 4's camera....
S-
I don't think I've misfocussed, but maybe it wasn't nailed enough.
Yeah right....
I can get a sharper image with my iPhone 4's camera....
S-
Sep 27, 2010 at 07:16 PM
p.6 #6A fairly useless exercise
dj dunzie wrote:
Focus is nailed this time I'm fairly convinced with both lenses.
No, it is not.....
S-
Focus is nailed this time I'm fairly convinced with both lenses.
No, it is not.....
S-
Sep 27, 2010 at 07:18 PM
p.6 #7A fairly useless exercise
Dude, I think there is something seriously wrong with your copy of the Nikkor. 
Not only is not nearly as sharp as it should be, it's also looking like the contrast is really reduced.
BTW, new test is up:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/940944
Not only is not nearly as sharp as it should be, it's also looking like the contrast is really reduced. BTW, new test is up:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/940944
Sep 27, 2010 at 07:50 PM
p.6 #8A fairly useless exercise
OK. Well why don't I just share a couple 105/f2.5 AIS photos I like for you instead S-...
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1053.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_0987.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1016.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1113.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1040.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1053.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_0987.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1016.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1113.jpg
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m70/dj_dunzie/NikonCafe%20in%20Toronto/U_D3S_1040.jpg
Sep 27, 2010 at 08:01 PM
p.6 #9A fairly useless exercise
Todd Adamson wrote:
I do believe you just called Jammy and Ryan princesses.
My eyes have been forged into mean weapons of ruthless analyzing by seven years in fiery art school hell. 5 years later I have less nightmares about it all, that's good.
Really though, I think it's mostly visual education and training your eye. There was a point I could tell who did a painting by the brush stroke style. Not so much now.
I do believe you just called Jammy and Ryan princesses.
My eyes have been forged into mean weapons of ruthless analyzing by seven years in fiery art school hell. 5 years later I have less nightmares about it all, that's good.
Really though, I think it's mostly visual education and training your eye. There was a point I could tell who did a painting by the brush stroke style. Not so much now.
Sep 28, 2010 at 12:13 AM
p.6 #10A fairly useless exercise
Todd Adamson wrote:
EDIT: BTW, I was using the Zeiss ZF.2, which made it possible to shoot at f/2.5, which I don't think I can do with the ZF version.
I think you can. IIRC, the ZF(.1) 100 has half-stop aperture clicks.
EDIT: BTW, I was using the Zeiss ZF.2, which made it possible to shoot at f/2.5, which I don't think I can do with the ZF version.
I think you can. IIRC, the ZF(.1) 100 has half-stop aperture clicks.
Sep 28, 2010 at 01:23 PM
p.6 #11A fairly useless exercise
lbloom wrote:
I think you can. IIRC, the ZF(.1) 100 has half-stop aperture clicks.
Not that you need click-stops to use intermediate apertures. I often shoot between clicks with my Nikkors. It won't be possible to select an ultra-precise f-stop, but that's rarely necessary.
Todd Adamson wrote
EDIT: BTW, I was using the Zeiss ZF.2, which made it possible to shoot at f/2.5, which I don't think I can do with the ZF version.Not that you need click-stops to use intermediate apertures. I often shoot between clicks with my Nikkors. It won't be possible to select an ultra-precise f-stop, but that's rarely necessary.
Sep 28, 2010 at 01:52 PM
p.6 #12A fairly useless exercise
lbloom wrote:
I think you can. IIRC, the ZF(.1) 100 has half-stop aperture clicks.
Yes, although the display and exif don't necessarily record the actual 1/2 stop... it shows f2* for both f2 and f2.5, etc... it adjusts the shutter speed in aperture priority to meter the half stops, but doesn't record the precise aperture.
Todd Adamson wrote
EDIT: BTW, I was using the Zeiss ZF.2, which made it possible to shoot at f/2.5, which I don't think I can do with the ZF version.Yes, although the display and exif don't necessarily record the actual 1/2 stop... it shows f2* for both f2 and f2.5, etc... it adjusts the shutter speed in aperture priority to meter the half stops, but doesn't record the precise aperture.
Sep 28, 2010 at 03:00 PM
p.6 #13A fairly useless exercise
... and (thanks to Todd for prompting me to check) I've suddenly become depressed to learn my 105/f2.5 AI-S lens that I've owned only since early summer (and bought from my dealer, no less) has a nice coating of fungus taking shape on an inner element. What are the odds they'd take it back?
Sep 28, 2010 at 07:50 PM
p.6 #14A fairly useless exercise
That sucks DJ. I would certainly try to return it somehow. It really is a great lens - especially when you have clean elements!
Sep 28, 2010 at 07:57 PM
p.6 #15A fairly useless exercise
Thanks Gary... looks like a 90 day return policy and I am JUST within that window right now. Time to go visit... I guess I didn't pay enough attention to the inside of the lens before purchasing - although again it is only on pixel peeping you really see the effects. It's fairly well-coated now. I doubt fungus grows that fast.
Anyway, thanks. Wouldn't mind seeing if they have another clean version of the lens to be honest...
Anyway, thanks. Wouldn't mind seeing if they have another clean version of the lens to be honest...
Sep 28, 2010 at 08:27 PM
p.6 #16A fairly useless exercise
Can't you just have it cleaned/repaired/adjusted? Or is there a downside to that path?
Sep 28, 2010 at 11:30 PM
p.6 #17A fairly useless exercise
Rodolfo Paiz wrote:
Can't you just have it cleaned/repaired/adjusted? Or is there a downside to that path?
you can but the fungal growth actually eats the lens coatings ........
Can't you just have it cleaned/repaired/adjusted? Or is there a downside to that path?
you can but the fungal growth actually eats the lens coatings ........
Sep 29, 2010 at 12:08 AM
p.6 #18A fairly useless exercise
Now I want a Nikon 105 f2.5 AIS!!!.. NAS strikes again..
Sep 29, 2010 at 01:13 AM
p.6 #19A fairly useless exercise
jmcfadden wrote:
you can but the fungal growth actually eats the lens coatings ........
And you risk contaminating your other equipment. Best just to be rid of the thing.
Sorry to hear the bad new DJ.
Rodolfo Paiz wrote
Can't you just have it cleaned/repaired/adjusted? Or is there a downside to that path?And you risk contaminating your other equipment. Best just to be rid of the thing.
Sorry to hear the bad new DJ.
Sep 29, 2010 at 07:02 AM
p.6 #20A fairly useless exercise
Todd
I have not really taken the time to go through the entire thread, but I don't think it's a useless exercise, thanks for sharing. It should make everyone think a little longer about lens performance, value, and reality in the resulting pictures.
BTW, I only got the second pair guessed correctly, must mean I should not spend my $$$ on a Zeiss for now
I have not really taken the time to go through the entire thread, but I don't think it's a useless exercise, thanks for sharing. It should make everyone think a little longer about lens performance, value, and reality in the resulting pictures.
BTW, I only got the second pair guessed correctly, must mean I should not spend my $$$ on a Zeiss for now
Sep 29, 2010 at 10:19 AM