Random Thoughts... [Photographic Edition]

The practical man goes for the 105/2.5 AI-S. Yes, it's pretty much the iPhone of Nikkors if we're talking hype, and yes, it's only f/2.5. But it is the iPhone of Nikkors because it's a gem, and it was used for portraits needing seperation for years, and still is, for a reason. It's great.

A 50/1.2 is a lot of fun. Shallow DOF is a lot of fun. And there's waay too many pictures taken without any sort of meaning or purpose that people only view because of shallow DOF.

Just ranting, pay no attention. But yes, the 50/1.2 is a good lens. So is the 50/1.4 AF-S and the 50/1.4 AF, not to mention the Sigma 50/1.4. Difference between f/1.4 and f/1.2 is close to nothing. AF-S won't feel anywhere near as good as the 50/1.2 AI-S, though.

:)
 
Lenses should be MF if you've got a split screen or if you're doing macro, and of course if you're using liveview.

There are exceptions, but they are rare and few. Bright sunligh, f/11 and the hyperfocal distance, that's a-okay. But you could do that with an AF lens too, so there's no point.

I love MF. But for anything that isn't very close or on the screen, get a split screen.
 
Hyperfocal distance is annoying, many of the distances for the focal length and apertures I wish to use aren't even marked on the lens. This pretty much means that unless I want to shoot at f/22 I need to work on the very limit of the lens too close to the danger that is focusing at infinity. It's even more of a nightmare when you need to consider the minimum focusing distance (which you probably will with landscapes anyway!).
 
I think the point of having a 50/1.2 lens is that it might actually be quite sharp and defined at f/1.4.

Also: finally, sunshine today! :) :) :)
 
Last edited:
353_2184_AF-S-NIKKOR-24mm-f1.4G_ED.jpg


353_2182_AF-S-NIKKOR-16-35mmf4G_ED_VR.jpg



Do want 24mm.
 
Do not want to part with $2200. I'm sure it's spectacular, though.

Also in the news (and from me of all people!), the Canon T2i.
tldr: 18mp for $900. I think Nikon has been caught with its pants down.
 
Last edited:
epp_b said:
I think the point of having a 50/1.2 lens is that it might actually be quite sharp and defined at f/1.4.
Click to expand...
Not quite, but it's definitely fully on the job at 2.0. :)

My point behind asking about the 50mm f/1.2 is to find a fast fifty that is sharp enough for my pixel-peeping needs as well as affordable. There's not too much to find about that lens out there (except from the man whose name shall never be spelled or spoken), but those who have or had it say that it's up to the Zeiss 50mm ZF in sharpness. And since, with a bit of luck, I can get the Nikkor 1.2 used in mint condition for around 300 Euros (which is about the same I'd pay for the usual suspects), I'm very tempted. I need a 50mm anyway, so why not ditch the lazy AF stuff and go for the real gems? I know that f/1.2 is not of any real world use, but it surely won't hurt either.
 
Last edited:
epp_b said:
Do not want to part with $2200. I'm sure it's spectacular, though.

Also in the news (and from me of all people!), the Canon T2i.
tldr: 18mp for $900. I think Nikon has been caught with its pants down.
Click to expand...

The previous model (whatever it might be called in your neck of the woods) looks pretty tempting to me at $630. Still has 15MP, 720p video (all I'll ever need) and the fps isn't much different. Haven't checked all the specs yet, though.
 
I had a major cleanup in my room at my parent's house lately and I have found lots of old stuff

P2074245.jpg


In there is my broken Pentax ME Super with a 28mm f2,8, and a Kiron 80-200mm f4, there is also a super wide converter there and a Vivitar 2x teleconverter. That really old retractable camera is a Kodak of some sort. The Leica I think is a III a. My dad said it was bought by my grandfather in Berlin in 1936, the year it was new. Back then then it's price was about the same as a month's pay.

P2074252.jpg


P2074251.jpg


P2074249.jpg


P2074250.jpg
 
You go get yourself some film and stick it into that Leica. Use your dSLR as a light meter.
 
epp_b said:
tldr: 18mp for $900. I think Nikon has been caught with its pants down.
Click to expand...

Nikon pricing can only be seen as "interesting". Canon have (in my opinion) always had a better range of lenses, specifically the f/4 zooms that give you great performance for the money. There has been a vast gap in the Nikon range for years now that could have been nicely filled by some well priced fixed aperture zooms. What do they do? Make an f/4 zoom that's $500 more and quite a bit heavier than what their competitors' offering.

It just doesn't make sense.
 
epp_b said:
Also in the news (and from me of all people!), the Canon T2i.
tldr: 18mp for $900. I think Nikon has been caught with its pants down.
Click to expand...

I hate the T2i for the simple fact that it means the T1i/500D now has a snowball's chance in hell of getting a firmware upgrade that adds manual video controls. <_<
 
chaos386 said:
I hate the T2i for the simple fact that it means the T1i/500D now has a snowball's chance in hell of getting a firmware upgrade that adds manual video controls. <_<
Click to expand...

I am in the same situation (500D owner), but we can always hope for a late firmware update.:mrgreen:
 
Dr_Q said:
Nikon pricing can only be seen as "interesting". Canon have (in my opinion) always had a better range of lenses, specifically the f/4 zooms that give you great performance for the money. There has been a vast gap in the Nikon range for years now that could have been nicely filled by some well priced fixed aperture zooms. What do they do? Make an f/4 zoom that's $500 more and quite a bit heavier than what their competitors' offering.

It just doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Oh, but it does make sense. The 17-40L is old, non-VR, missing the advanced coatings, and does not perform quite as well as more modern designs, especially on full-frame. The 16-35 Nikkor is $1400CAD MSRP, while at launch the 17-40L was 120,000 Yen - and you'll find that converts to just over $1400CAD.

As far as heavy, 17 elements in 12 groups is a lot of glass. I'll bet it performs very, very well.
 
You have a point, launch prices really aren't much to go on, I'm sure this will settle down to a more competitive price. Of course my rants have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I spent a while sourcing a nice used 17-35 2.8 recently :whistle:.
 
There are a lot of things I don't like about the a850. But my god that viewfinder is nice, it's a piece of sunshine. It's almost as good as the VF in my old OM-2. It makes stuff like the D700 and the 5D/2 look like.. crap.

Did I mention I like the VF?
 
Just found and immediately bought a used Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI for 329 Euros from a dealer. Will report back with pictures...
 
50/1.2 on full-frame ... DOF measured in microns ... head asplodes

Can't wait to see some samples :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top