Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 10-08-2009   #81
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,283
Chris will be along any moment to comment about the ugly bokeh of the 50/1.8.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55 and adapted Zuikos
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-08-2009   #82
pggunn
gregor
 
pggunn's Avatar
 
pggunn is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North Carolina
Age: 59
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trius View Post
Chris will be along any moment to comment about the ugly bokeh of the 50/1.8.
Ha, you're probably right! I've read some of his posts on that topic, but I guess I'd rather have ugly bokeh than no bokeh at all!

Besides, that's kind of the way I see the world these days. I need to have my prescription filled!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #83
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,430
That 50/1.8 sure has awful ugly bokeh.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #85
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,263
One thing I've noticed about my Zuiko 50mm 1.4 early version, and I'm sure Chris or possibly Roland can elaborate here, is the marked difference between how it sees the world at f1.4 compared to f2! It's like two different lenses ... extremely soft wide open but stop it down to f2 and bingo ... quite sharp! Oddly this behaviour seems far less apparent when shooting at close to it's minimum focusing capability!

Was this a major design short coming in the early lens or was it something they always factored into it's design ... what did they do wth subsequent versions to overcome this?
__________________
---------------------------
flickr

Last edited by Keith : 10-09-2009 at 04:59.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #86
ruby.monkey
Registered User
 
ruby.monkey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Garden of England
Age: 46
Posts: 3,975
Curses. Now I have to break out both silver- and black-nose 50mm f/1.4s to find out. And I'd been looking forward to test-driving my new 100mm f/2.8. Damn you, Keith!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #87
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,283
Thanks, Chris for surprising us.

I have put the 50/1.4 (600xxx range) away for awhile in favour of the 50/1.8 miJ. In addition to being Chris-contrarian, I felt I wanted to reaquaint myself with it, plus enjoy the smaller size.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55 and adapted Zuikos
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #88
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruby.monkey View Post
Curses. Now I have to break out both silver- and black-nose 50mm f/1.4s to find out. And I'd been looking forward to test-driving my new 100mm f/2.8. Damn you, Keith!

LOL ... I don't mind it's softness at 1.4 because it really is superb at f2 ... I rate it as one of the best 50mm lenses I own for black and white shooting.

When I want real speed and bokeh to make my head spin ... I pick up my 50mm 1.2!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #89
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
 
shadowfox's Avatar
 
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS View Post
So, how much are you willing to drop on a 135 f3.5?
I assume you're asking me.

Not too much, Frank, certainly not worth the shipping cost to Texas from Canada.

That's why I still haven't had it to this day, I'm too cheap to spring for one outright I'll keep looking for local kits for sale.
__________________
Have a good light,
Will


  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #90
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
 
shadowfox's Avatar
 
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by coelacanth View Post
Great image, shadowfox. Here is another "modern japanesey" stuff from a Kissaten in SF. It's also from 85/2 (version 2).

Nice, Sug.

I often wonder why people say that this lens is not sharp, I've never had any problems getting pictures at f/2 that are sometimes too sharp (pores look great on a guy's portrait, but don't even bring that up to a lady )
__________________
Have a good light,
Will


  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #91
philosomatographer
Registered User
 
philosomatographer's Avatar
 
philosomatographer is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 222
Don't forget the amazing, amazing Macro glass in this system.

I have been shooting an OM-1n for about a year now as my exclusive small-format system, and recently was the kind recipient of a mint OM-2n, both of which are wonderful cameras: Jewel-like in their beauty, but purpose-made tools.

20/3.5 @ 15x magnification @ f/16 = strong diffraction at this aperture, but what the heck (OM-2n, natural light):


90mm f/2.0 @ f/11 (OM-1n, natural light):


Both on FP4, scanned silver-gelatin prints. In my opinion, the 90/2.0 s the be-all-end-all of 35mm SLR lenses to date. Not because it's the best (sharpest, most flare-free, etc) lens ever, but because of the "character" of the lens. Leica "glow"? Bah!

Church of Maitani, eh?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #92
oscroft
Registered User
 
oscroft's Avatar
 
oscroft is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Liverpool (UK) & Bangkok (Thailand)
Age: 58
Posts: 2,353
Quote:
I think last count I was up to three OM bodies and eleven lenses
Hmm, I did a count recently, and it's 5 bodies (OM1n, 3xOM2n, OM4T), and 13 lenses - and they all get used.
__________________
Alan

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #93
ColinW
* Click *
 
ColinW's Avatar
 
ColinW is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the Matrix
Posts: 155
Quote:
I rate it as one of the best 50mm lenses I own for black and white shooting.
I'll second that Keith.

Quote:
That 50/1.8 sure has awful ugly bokeh
Chris, I know your feelings on this (you may have mentioned it before ), but let's be honest, is there such a thing as a bad Zuiko? Whoops, maybe should have started a new thread with that one!
__________________
"Take snapshot into the light, snapshot into the light, I'm shooting into the light" - Peter Gabriel
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #94
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by pggunn View Post
Hi Chris. Sorry about that. Didn't mean to hurt your eyes. Next time I'll use the 50/1.4 or stop down.

Take care.
Gregor,

When I posted that post about the 1.8 having ugly bokeh I wasn't paying attention. I didn't notice that earlier you had put one of your pics up from that lens. So, that wasn't directed at you. LOL I saw Trius's post saying I'd be around soon to complain about the 50/1.8 bokeh so I obliged him by complaining
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #95
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
 
coelacanth's Avatar
 
coelacanth is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfox View Post
Nice, Sug.

I often wonder why people say that this lens is not sharp, I've never had any problems getting pictures at f/2 that are sometimes too sharp (pores look great on a guy's portrait, but don't even bring that up to a lady )
Hey thanks Will.

Yeah, I've never had problem with my 85/2. The beauty of this lens is that it shows softness if you shoot soft things while it beautifully renders sold stuff from wide open as well.

To prove point, here is another 85/2 wide open shot from my friends' wedding last week.

__________________
- Sug

b/w guy.

flickr | RFF Gallery | @SuguruN | Instagram | Portfolio

  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #96
pggunn
gregor
 
pggunn's Avatar
 
pggunn is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North Carolina
Age: 59
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
Gregor,

When I posted that post about the 1.8 having ugly bokeh I wasn't paying attention. I didn't notice that earlier you had put one of your pics up from that lens. So, that wasn't directed at you. LOL I saw Trius's post saying I'd be around soon to complain about the 50/1.8 bokeh so I obliged him by complaining

No problems! I do have a sense of humor, and like I said before, that's not what I consider a great picture by any means - just demonstrating that at least the camera works very well even though the photographer might not always!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2009   #97
pggunn
gregor
 
pggunn's Avatar
 
pggunn is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North Carolina
Age: 59
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
One thing I've noticed about my Zuiko 50mm 1.4 early version, and I'm sure Chris or possibly Roland can elaborate here, is the marked difference between how it sees the world at f1.4 compared to f2! It's like two different lenses ... extremely soft wide open but stop it down to f2 and bingo ... quite sharp! Oddly this behaviour seems far less apparent when shooting at close to it's minimum focusing capability!

Was this a major design short coming in the early lens or was it something they always factored into it's design ... what did they do wth subsequent versions to overcome this?
Hi Keith,

Very interesting. I'll be shooting the 50/1.4 this weekend and will make a point of comparing wide open with one stop down.

Just got a later version in the mail yesterday, serial number 1148833. It looks like it's never been used!

Enjoy your weekend.

Greg
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2009   #98
Renzsu
Registered User
 
Renzsu's Avatar
 
Renzsu is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 651
Hi guys, I was just given an Oly OM-2 with a bunch of lenses and accessories. My aunt saw me shooting with my Hasselblad and M6 and mentioned that she still had a bunch of old camera gear in a drawer at home that I could have if I wanted... who am I to say no right?
There was too much to bring home in my backpack, so I just brought the OM-2 and 50 1.8 with me, but there were 3 more zooms, one Zuiko, one Vivitar and one who's name I already forgot. Also a 28 3.5 and I think a 90 2.0 macro. Also there was a bunch of filters (each lens already had filters on it, wow ), a bellow system, an enlarger for slide copying and some other things. Once I get all the stuff sorted I'll shoot a picture of it.

The OM-2 has some battery residue in the battery compartment, I got a tip that I can clean that with q-tips and clear vinegar, so I'll give that a shot before I put some new batteries in it.
__________________
site | Flickr |
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2009   #99
philosomatographer
Registered User
 
philosomatographer's Avatar
 
philosomatographer is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzsu View Post
...and I think a 90 2.0 macro....
Wow, if you received a gift 90/2.0, you are one very very lucky guy.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2009   #100
Renzsu
Registered User
 
Renzsu's Avatar
 
Renzsu is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 651
Quote:
Originally Posted by philosomatographer View Post
Wow, if you received a gift 90/2.0, you are one very very lucky guy.
Hmm yeah I just realized.. I looked it up on some online shops and
Well I'm not 100% sure, next weekend I'm going to try to pick everything up, all I know is that one of the lenses was a 90/f2.0 and I'm pretty sure it had macro on it..
I'm going to have some fun with this camera, that's I DO know
__________________
site | Flickr |
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2009   #101
ColinW
* Click *
 
ColinW's Avatar
 
ColinW is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the Matrix
Posts: 155
Renzsu,

If it's the 90/f2 it's macro. Enjoy.

http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwe...oup/90mmf2.htm

You don't happen to have a copy of your lottery numbers for this week do you?
__________________
"Take snapshot into the light, snapshot into the light, I'm shooting into the light" - Peter Gabriel
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2009   #102
oscroft
Registered User
 
oscroft's Avatar
 
oscroft is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Liverpool (UK) & Bangkok (Thailand)
Age: 58
Posts: 2,353
Wow, yes, a 90/2 is a real gem of an acquisition.

Apparently, as well as being superb at macro distances, it's also a very good all-round short tele.

You clearly are going to be enjoying yourself with that lot
__________________
Alan

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2009   #103
philosomatographer
Registered User
 
philosomatographer's Avatar
 
philosomatographer is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 222
Just FYI, I started a thread over at APUG on my long-term impressions of the 90/2.0 Macro, with plenty of examples (and others have also contributed), you may want to have a look:

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/6...pressions.html

The 90/2.0 is no mere lens, it's one of those rare examples (like most Leica M lenses) that seems to define the lens maker's art. It is simply exquisite, which is why a second-hand example of this 1980s lens costs more than a new modern ~100mm Macro with electronic image stabilisation and focus that goes to 1:1 (the 90/2.0 only magnifies to 1:2). And having both in hand, I must say that the Zuiko 90/2.0 is built far better (feels more expensive, more solid, more jewel-like) than a $3000 Schneider Super-Angulon XL 90mm f/5.6, the only other lens I own which I would classify as "exquisite" or [insert similar over-the-top hyperbole here].
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2009   #104
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by philosomatographer View Post
Just FYI, I started a thread over at APUG on my long-term impressions of the 90/2.0 Macro, with plenty of examples (and others have also contributed), you may want to have a look:

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/6...pressions.html

The 90/2.0 is no mere lens, it's one of those rare examples (like most Leica M lenses) that seems to define the lens maker's art. It is simply exquisite, which is why a second-hand example of this 1980s lens costs more than a new modern ~100mm Macro with electronic image stabilisation and focus that goes to 1:1 (the 90/2.0 only magnifies to 1:2). And having both in hand, I must say that the Zuiko 90/2.0 is built far better (feels more expensive, more solid, more jewel-like) than a $3000 Schneider Super-Angulon XL 90mm f/5.6, the only other lens I own which I would classify as "exquisite" or [insert similar over-the-top hyperbole here].

Quote:
I consider myself quite lucky to have purchased my 90/2.0 for an affordable price on eBay, due to it having a small chip in one of the glass elements. Such a mark will, of course, never visibly affect the image, so I am happy, and got it for at least $500 cheaper than the going rate for mint copies.

Ok ... shock me!

What is the going price for one of these wonder lenses ... I need to know now!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2009   #105
philosomatographer
Registered User
 
philosomatographer's Avatar
 
philosomatographer is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
What is the going price for one of these wonder lenses ... I need to know now!
Rarity, more than price, make them difficult to acquire. They seem to go from about $800 to $1100 in the second-hand market. Not big money for a lens in absolute terms, but not cheap for a 1980s Macro as part of an obsolete system either.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2009   #106
Renzsu
Registered User
 
Renzsu's Avatar
 
Renzsu is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 651
Ugh I'm really hoping it's the 90 f/2.0 Macro now, imagine if it's a different lens haha. But, the lenses there seemed to be in great condition, filters mounted and stored in their original containers. But, I'll shut up now until I can show you guys a picture of the stuff (hopefully next weekend or so).
__________________
site | Flickr |
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-13-2009   #107
jesse1dog
Light Catcher
 
jesse1dog's Avatar
 
jesse1dog is online now
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Afon Fathew
Age: 79
Posts: 1,466
90 f/2.0 Macro on eBay yesterday and didn't sell at 675. The seller sold a similar one for 605 about a week ago. All very temping ....

jesse
__________________
John Cordingley

'A photograph shows a slice of life that is already history; just a piece of a jig-saw that you will never see completed!'

Lumix LF1 LX7 and some others not in use!.

My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-17-2009   #108
Darkhorse
pointed and shot
 
Darkhorse's Avatar
 
Darkhorse is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Orange, CA
Posts: 739
Hi everyone. It's been nearly 2 months since I've really done any photography. I was going strong and things just sort of sputtered out. I processed my first roll in a while from my OM1 with some Arista Premium 400 pushed to 1600. I think I need a new reel though, the negs didn't come out looking so good all covered with emulsion in certain areas because the reel just loved to buckle.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-19-2009   #109
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,093
Anyone out there have any experience with the 300/4.5?

Thanks.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2009   #110
plummerl
Registered User
 
plummerl's Avatar
 
plummerl is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 897
The 300/4.5 is a very nice piece of glass. I use it quite frequently. For sizing, the camera on the left has the 300 mounted:

__________________
larry
My RFF Gallery
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2009   #111
Chris101
Lazy Lytro Shooter
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,123
What is the third lens in the top row?
__________________
101-365
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2009   #112
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
 
PatrickT's Avatar
 
PatrickT is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Age: 31
Posts: 799
Wow, that's a lot of good looking OM equipment! That lens on the bottom right looks like a monster...what is it?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2009   #113
plummerl
Registered User
 
plummerl's Avatar
 
plummerl is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris101 View Post
What is the third lens in the top row?
That would be my beloved Zuiko 18mm!
__________________
larry
My RFF Gallery
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2009   #114
plummerl
Registered User
 
plummerl's Avatar
 
plummerl is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 897
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickT View Post
Wow, that's a lot of good looking OM equipment! That lens on the bottom right looks like a monster...what is it?
This would be my extremely beloved 100mm F2!
Just to finish off the others, upper left is the 16mm, next to it is the 21mm/F2, followed by the 18mm and a 50mm/F1.8 MIJ. Bottom row is the 300mm/F4.5, 35/F2 and the 28mm/F2.
__________________
larry
My RFF Gallery
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2009   #115
Igor.Burshteyn
Registered User
 
Igor.Burshteyn is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Age: 43
Posts: 350
guys, you are driving auction prices up on epray
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 46740011.jpg (19.2 KB, 100 views)
File Type: jpg 46740014.jpg (22.6 KB, 91 views)
File Type: jpg 46740020.jpg (43.6 KB, 58 views)
__________________
My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2009   #116
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,283
Yes, the 300/4.5 is a great lens. I have made sharp
shots handheld at low speeds where I didn't expect success. Partly dumb luck, but it's also well-balanced.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55 and adapted Zuikos
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2009   #117
morback
Martin N. Hinze
 
morback's Avatar
 
morback is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: İstanbul
Posts: 512
You made me pickup my OM2 and compare it to the Zeiss Ikon ZM! They're about the same size/weight with 50/1.8 F-Zuiko and the C-Sonnar 50/1.5 attached...

If only I could focus SLR cameras properly...Olympus' microprisms help a lot though I have to say. Such a delicious camera, compact, quiet, accurate, just about a perfect SLR. A lot of thought and craft went into that camera.

Even though I'm supposed to have the bad 50/1.8 (no "made in japan" on the lens) it's stellar. Beautiful rendition and 3D effect...
__________________
Martin.

My Flickr
The Great Picnic
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2009   #118
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,283
Martin: "Bad"???? Even the softer F.Zuiko silver nose has it's charms. It has a colour/contrast balance that is wonderful for certain subjects ... viz, skintones on Kodachrome, Reala, etc.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55 and adapted Zuikos
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2009   #119
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by morback View Post
...If only I could focus SLR cameras properly...Olympus' microprisms help a lot though I have to say....
You might take a look at a 1-14 screen or if you want a brighter view a 2-13. The 13 is like the 14 but has a straight split level where as the 13 is a 45 degree slant. You will need to adjust your meter for the 2-13 if you are using an OM-1/2 from what I remember reading. The 14 is like the Nikon P Screen with is my all time favorite.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2009   #120
Spyderman
Ondrej P.
 
Spyderman's Avatar
 
Spyderman is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
Age: 32
Posts: 1,367
Bill, 1-13 is the standard focussing screen with horizontal split circle. Then there is 1-1 with only microprism and I believe it's 1-14 with the split circle at 45.

There is one more screen with microprism only for long/slow lenses where the microprism doesn't darken until about f/8.

Looking at Larry's collection I'm glad I have the common 100/2.8 and not the f/2 version. I'm sure it must be great re. IQ, but the size...
__________________
Ondrej [on-the-ray]
My Flickr

  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:53.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.