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 12-16-2018   #161
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Is the manual Nikkor 80-200/2.8 better built than the AF versions of this lens? Which version would you get?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #162
Saul
fighting inertia
 
Saul's Avatar
 
Saul is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Baltimore MD
Posts: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Peter, I usually carry with me 20 SD cards, just in case I need them. Most are 2GB and 4GB with a few 8GB and 16GB cards.
Have you found that to be wasteful?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #163
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,120
I would skip the build thing. Holding big camera and zoom and trying to zoom and manually focus isn't pleasing experience.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #164
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saul View Post
Have you found that to be wasteful?
No. I have options. They were inexpensive too. Why not?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #165
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
I would skip the build thing. Holding big camera and zoom and trying to zoom and manually focus isn't pleasing experience.
So cutting down on weight and getting AF as a bonus would actually be a better deal in the end. You are right.
There are many (very clean) AF lenses for sale for around $300 plus $45 shipping from Japan.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #166
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Is the manual Nikkor 80-200/2.8 better built than the AF versions of this lens? Which version would you get?
I cannot give an opinion on this as I have not used one. Or even seen one. They seem a bit hard to find. The build quality on the AF version is so good that I think most people just use one of those in MF mode. The first version AF lens kind of looks and feels like an MF lens anyway.

You might find it easier and as useful to buy something like this linked below - an AF lens with the AF unserviceable cheaply and use that as an MF lens. (They are robust but sometimes any lens can fail). I only mention it as an option as I do not think you would be disappointed and think it would be easier to find one of these. it is an option. In fact..........................

https://www.ebay.com/itm/AS-IS-Nikon...8jD:rk:13:pf:0

Or, would you consider a slower 80-200mm? The 80-200mm AIS f4 is very highly regarded and these are cheap to buy due solely to the large number available over the years. I do own one of these and can say it lives up to my expectations. It is also much lighter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #167
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
The lens has some mold, Peter. Else, this is a good idea! Thanks.
I always wanted to use a 80-200/2.8, but I stuck to max aperture 4.0 and 4.5 in my old zooms. Now, I want to enjoy the faster zooms.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #168
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
The lens has some mold, Peter. Else, this is a good idea! Thanks.
I always wanted to use a 80-200/2.8, but I stuck to max aperture 4.0 and 4.5 in my old zooms. Now, I want to enjoy the faster zooms.
I can understand your desire for faster zooms Raid. Good luck. Sorry I had not read the ad carefully and did not realize there was some fungus. This is common in Japan unfortunately because of the climate but often it is so minor it does not matter in practice. Though I like to get perfect lenses if I can. Fog in a lens can be worse than fungus as sometimes fog etches the glass and cannot be rectified whereas fungus at least can be cleaned almost always. I often buy from Japan as I find the sellers seem honest more often than not and when they identify issues with a lens when I get them I frequently find it is not as bad as described in their ad. They also tend to discount prices a lot for fairly minor issues.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #169
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
I have had only excellent buying experiences from Japan dealers over the past years, Peter.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #170
ornate_wrasse
Moderator
 
ornate_wrasse's Avatar
 
ornate_wrasse is online now
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
So cutting down on weight and getting AF as a bonus would actually be a better deal in the end. You are right.
There are many (very clean) AF lenses for sale for around $300
I totally concur. There are many other lighter lenses that may perform as well or better than the 80-200.

I would like to suggest the 70-300mm lens, such as this one at B&H (currently on backorder):

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...om_NIKKOR.html

I own this lens and have used it for a number of years. It is light enough to carry around all day, has VR and in addition has a wider focal range than the 80-200. The link at B&H suggests than it can be purchased for $349.

I should add that I have purchased refurbished lenses before and have not had any bad experiences with them.
__________________
Images

www.pbase.com/ornate_wrasse

Leica M9, Leica M6, Leica M3 - 21mm 3.4 Super Angulon, 28mm 2.8 Elmarit, 35mm Summicron, Nikkor SC 50mm 1.4, Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm 1.5, CV 75mm 2.5, Nikkor 8.5cm 2.0

Mamiya 6 - 50mm f4, 75mm f3.5, 150mm f4.5

Fuji X-Pro1 - 16-55mm f/2.8, 27mm f/2.8
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #171
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Thank you for the tip. The 70-300 lens has 4.5-5.6 max aperture, but since it is leigh weight and has a fast AF, maybe this compensates.
What does this imply:

Telephoto zoom is designed for FX-format Nikon F-mount DSLRs, however is also compatible with DX models where it will provide a 105-450mm equivalent focal length range.

Is this lens a 70-300 zoom on the D700?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #172
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Thank you for the tip. The 70-300 lens has 4.5-5.6 max aperture, but since it is leigh weight and has a fast AF, maybe this compensates.
What does this imply:

Telephoto zoom is designed for FX-format Nikon F-mount DSLRs, however is also compatible with DX models where it will provide a 105-450mm equivalent focal length range.

Is this lens a 70-300 zoom on the D700?
Yes, they are just pointing out what the effective focal length would be on a crop body (APS-c) or on the D700 in DX crop mode. On Nikon's "FX" lens/bodies are full frame and "DX" are what they call APS-C sized sensors and lenses that only cover that sensor size.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #173
Archiver
Registered User
 
Archiver is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,194
raid bought a DSLR
what is happening to the worlddd
__________________
~Loving Every Image Captured Always~
Archiver on flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #174
ornate_wrasse
Moderator
 
ornate_wrasse's Avatar
 
ornate_wrasse is online now
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn View Post
Yes, they are just pointing out what the effective focal length would be on a crop body (APS-c) or on the D700 in DX crop mode. On Nikon's "FX" lens/bodies are full frame and "DX" are what they call APS-C sized sensors and lenses that only cover that sensor size.
Shawn's response is correct, in other words, the lens has an effective focal length of 70-300 on the D700.

If I used the lens on my D300, a crop sensor camera, the effective focal length would be 105-450.
__________________
Images

www.pbase.com/ornate_wrasse

Leica M9, Leica M6, Leica M3 - 21mm 3.4 Super Angulon, 28mm 2.8 Elmarit, 35mm Summicron, Nikkor SC 50mm 1.4, Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm 1.5, CV 75mm 2.5, Nikkor 8.5cm 2.0

Mamiya 6 - 50mm f4, 75mm f3.5, 150mm f4.5

Fuji X-Pro1 - 16-55mm f/2.8, 27mm f/2.8
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #175
NickTrop
Registered User
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
NickTrop is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,043
Here is what I'd recommend:

Ultra Wide Zoom
1. Tokina 17-35 f4 Pro ATX. If you want an ultrawide this is a middle of the pack lens not a world beater. What sets it apart is its price. A competent performer built Tokina tough that's plenty sharp at f8 (where you shoot these things anyway) that's 1/2 the price (or more) of other .

2. Nikon 50 f1.4 AF-D
I love this lens. It's everything a nifty-fifty should be. Good samples under $200 used. DxO rates it slightly higher than the new G series. I believe that 50's should be as fast as you can get them.

Alternate: the venerable and cheap 50 1.8 AF-D

Alternate: Tamron 45mm f1.8 VC. Don't own but supposedly super shahp across the frame and all apertures and has vibration reduction for a 2-stop advantage. Also reasonably priced used. Better than the Sigma "Art" lens imo and way cheaper.

3. 70-210 AF-D. Make sure it's the "D" one. This is a good performer, plenty sharp and reasonable on the used market. Great old school build quality. (I recently somehow stole one for $35 on the aution site but that was a fluke. Expect to pay $80-100ish) This lens is known for blazingly fast auto-focus but only the "D" version. It is my telezoom forever.

Alternate: Nikon 80-200 AI-s. This is a manual focus breakthrough zoom and I must say its image quality is impressive. Incredible build quality.

4. 85mm f1.8 G. Fantastic ultra-sharp (even wide open as verified by MTF charts) short-tele for portraits. An instant classic near flawless lens that's reasonably priced.

Alternate 85mm f1.8 D. I didn't buy this because used prices make the newer "G" a better buy. Also a Nikon classic. (Don't own)

5. 35mm f2.0 AF-D. I love this lens. Reasonable on the used market. I will get dissed on review sites. But it's small, light, and renders beautifully. A Nikon classic.

6. An AI'd 200 f4 Q (or Q.C.) Cheap as chips 4 element telephoto with a built-in hood you can use as a baseball bat. Another lens I love. The newer AI-s 5 element version is supposedly better, sharper. But this lens is so simple it convinced me that low element count lenses are where it's at. Character to spare and a dimensional quality. It just renders beautifully. Magic.

7. Any 135 f2.8 by any manufacturer. Mine is an Imado (huh?) This is for portratis. I wouldn't usually get this focal length but they're so plentiful and so cheap, why not? Mine was $27. It's beautifully made and if it was a Nikkor it would be $150 used. You buy these for the bokeh and use them for portraits so sharpness doesn't matter. This focal lenght shot close to subject will produce great bokeh and portraits. No need for an inflated price Nikon for this one. All lenses from the 135/2.8 era are built to last. Get a cheap one -- JC Penney, "Imado" -- whatever.

8. 20-80mm 3.3-5.6. Dirt cheap Nikon kit lens. They made 1.7 million of them. I paid $30 for mine on the auction site. Built like crap. The gray version I own looks endearingly cheap. However, this lens is unique. It's a simple low element design (6 element, 6 group) design includes a resin aspherical hybrid element. It is sharp enough. But I still say that low element count lenses simply render images better. Great light walking around lens. Prices on these were inflated for a while because Ken Rockwell raved about it on his site but prices returned to normal.

I would also HIGHLY recomend the Yongnuo 685 speedlight ($100) for Nikon and the 622n transceiver ($40) paring. I never messed with OTC flash. It is a revelation. I put the flash on the little plastic stand that comes with the flash, set is somewhere in the room, point it usually to the ceiling. I'm in the TTL camp. It is liberating being able to shoot at any aperture or shutter speed and have perfect light. Keeping the flash off camera opens creative possiblities. Keeping the little transceiver in the hotshoe keeps the camera from being bulky and awkward and blinding the subject. OTC enables candid photos with a flash. Often they doen't even know a flash fired. (A lot of photographers like Godox but I've been happy with this Yonghuo pairing...)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2018   #176
Archiver
Registered User
 
Archiver is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,194
@NickTrop preaching the gospel of the secondhand full frame DSLR, hahaha!
__________________
~Loving Every Image Captured Always~
Archiver on flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #177
colker
-
 
colker is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: rio de janeiro
Posts: 763
I wonder if there are more replies on the thread than recent shots on the newly aquired D700.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #178
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
I have not yet received my CF card in the mail, or I would have tried out the D700 by now.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #179
NickTrop
Registered User
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
NickTrop is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archiver View Post
@NickTrop preaching the gospel of the secondhand full frame DSLR, hahaha!
Yes. You can't beat full-frame. Period. Dynamic range, low noise levels, but most important to me is the image plane size so your photos don't look like they were take with a cell phone and have a better dimensional quality like 35mm film. Even if smaller sensors catch-up in other technical areas, ain't nothing you can do about the size of the imaging plane. I don't care how "retro rangefinder-like" the form factors of others are. And DSLRs have been around long enough for an ample supply of good ones on the used market at reasonable prices thanks to the rapid upgrade cycle. Camera companies need to keep selling cameras so they introduce things like "mirrorless" variations, folks more than happy to ditch their perfectly good cameras for stuff that's new and shiny and does the same thing.

And going Nikon is a great choice. Really, the only sensible choice as they have mass produced great lenses primes, zooms in any imaginable focal length for decades along with 3rd-party manufacturers in the same mount. Backwards compatibility from Ai to present day. Where can you get a perfectly good full-frame lens for $30-40? I have 12 F-mount lenses. Mostly Nikkor but paid less than $100 for 1/2 of them and half of those less than $50.

I would have gone D600 or D610 if I was Raid to future proof your camera but the D700 is also a heckuva camera that go for 2-300 on eBay.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #180
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
I can always add another DSLR one day if the D700 dies, Nick. The newer Nikon DSLR cameras can still be bought at low prices when used.
My large collection of Canon FD lenses does not help me here. Not even a Canon DSLR would have been useful with the FD lenses.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #181
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Thank you for the long suggestions list, Nick.
==================================

1. Tokina 17-35 f4 Pro ATX.

2. Nikon 50 f1.4 AF-D. Alternate: the venerable and cheap 50 1.8 AF-D. Alternate: Tamron 45mm f1.8 VC.

3. 70-210 AF-D. Alternate: Nikon 80-200 AI-s.

4. 85mm f1.8 G. Alternate 85mm f1.8 D.

5. 35mm f2.0 AF-D.

6. An AI'd 200 f4 Q (or Q.C.)

Cheap as chips 4 element telephoto with a built-in hood you can use as a baseball bat. Another lens I love. The newer AI-s 5 element version is supposedly better, sharper. But this lens is so simple it convinced me that low element count lenses are where it's at. Character to spare and a dimensional quality. It just renders beautifully. Magic.

7. Any 135 f2.8 by any manufacturer. .

8. 20-80mm 3.3-5.6.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #182
wjlapier
Registered User
 
wjlapier's Avatar
 
wjlapier is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,677
If you want 80-200 but lighter weight then the 70-200 f/4 AF is the lens. I used it some with a D5300 and found it to be fast to AF and plenty sharp.

Back when I shot Nikon I tried several different 80-200's and found the AFS version the sharpest as well as the fastest to AF. Even sharper than the 1st version 70-200 AFS. Actually, right up there with the 200/2 and 300/2.8 AFS in terms of sharpness.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #183
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,380
We are a helpful bunch here. But I fear we are making Raid's decision harder by giving so much advice. And I am one of the worst offenders.

The truth is that Nikon has made so many competent and in some cases superb lenses over the years that there is a surfeit of choice. Almost all Nikkors perform well on any full frame camera (though there are a few exceptions - one or two lenses that were regarded as not very good back in their time) and some - particularly the top end lenses perform brilliantly. Are they better than Canon equipment which Raid has some experience at least with FD lenses. Well Canon and Nikon owners have argued about this for decades. But they are certainly as good and the good thing with Nikon is almost 100% backward compatibility between its top end cameras and Nikkors (so long as you are willing to have non AI lenses converted of course. Which is a minor task in the overall scheme of things. And of course willing to forego AF where necessary.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #184
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
It is a good overview of several Nikkor lenses, and the feedback is very much appreciated by me, Peter. I will take it one step at a time with the D700. I will first figure out which of my Nikkor lenses are Ai'd or Ai. Then I am awaiting 2 CF cards.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #185
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,321
Last night I was looking through some old files from my Nikon D50 and D70s from days ago when I was auditioning digital (ended up sticking w/ film). The shots were excellent, and these were small sensor cameras capable of beautiful bokeh w/ the right lens. So a D700 would certainly be a great camera, full frame or not.

At one time or another I have owned just about every Nikon lens made, and my favorites were the 80 200 2.8 AF zoom (excellent lens, but you WILL spook people when you point this bazooka at them on the street), the old model 28 200 G ED (sharp, and great walkabout lens), and the old H 50 2 manual focus lens (if your camera can meter w/ it, it's a sensational lens). Never cared for the 85 1.8 in MF or AF, but the 85 1.4 might be better.

Keep in mind that you can use Leica R manual focus lenses w/ a $20 Chinese adapter in stop down metering mode on Nikon cameras. Nikon glass is good, but.........
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #186
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Hi Steve. I had no idea about being able to use an adapter with the D700 and Leica R lenses! I would love to use a Summicron 50/2 on my D700. You may have brought up an idea that will be costly to me. I love Leica glass, and 50mm lenses are my favorites.

I checked at ebay; a Summicron R costs from $350-(much higher)
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #187
wjlapier
Registered User
 
wjlapier's Avatar
 
wjlapier is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Hi Steve. I had no idea about being able to use an adapter with the D700 and Leica R lenses! I would love to use a Summicron 50/2 on my D700. You may have brought up an idea that will be costly to me. I love Leica glass, and 50mm lenses are my favorites.

I checked at ebay; a Summicron R costs from $350-(much higher)
The other money pit I fell into back in those days. Leica 50 'cron and 28 Elmarit II. And Minolta 58/1.2 I converted to Nikon--don't attempt it--the mirror hits the rear lens housing.

I'd start with your favorite FL and find a nice AF version.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #188
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
35mm and 50mm are my two favorite focal lengths, but the DSLR may be especially useful with a medium zoom 80-200 and short zoom 35-70.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #189
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M. View Post
but the 85 1.4 might be better.

Keep in mind that you can use Leica R manual focus lenses w/ a $20 Chinese adapter in stop down metering mode on Nikon cameras. Nikon glass is good, but........
Can't say anything about the 85 1.8 but the 85 1.4D is a fantastic lens.

Is it an adapter to use Leica R on Nikon or a replacement mount? There is only 0.5mm difference in flange length between the two, an adapter probably wouldn't allow infinity focus. There are lens mount replacements available though.

http://www.leitax.com/leica-lens-for-nikon-cameras.html

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #190
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
This is getting complicated, Shawn. I better keep it easy and basic and use Nikkor AF lenses if possible, in addition to my manual Nikkor lenses that are AI or AI'd.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #191
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
How would you compare the 35-70/2.8 AF with the 35-70/2.8 AF D?
Is the "D" better?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #192
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
How would you compare the 35-70/2.8 AF with the 35-70/2.8 AF D?
Is the "D" better?
Optically they are the same lens. Nikon added D circuitry to better communicate subject-to-camera-distance information to the camera, where it is used to help determine ambient and flash exposure. I think that is about it. Though with some lenses when the D upgrade was made by Nikon the opportunity was also taken to make other tweaks too. Either optical tweaks in a few cases (eg. working wholly from memory I think the 28mm f2.8 got an optical upgrade as the optics needed it) or as noted in other posts, mechanical ones (e.g AF gearing ratio for the 70-210mm AF 4- 5.6.). I do not believe either improvement was regarded as necessary with the 35-70mm f2.8 insofar as I know. People sometimes tend to prefer D lenses when buying, I guess because they are the newer of the two models but this is not usually a major issue though it may mean a slightly higher price .

BTW Raid the D700 also works fine with later G lenses which do not have their own aperture ring and are also focused electronically by silent wave motor rather than by mechanical drive (these are very quiet and quick to focus). A good G lens to buy (and cheap) if you should go down this path sometime in the future, is the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 G which is about half the price of the equivalent f1.4 G and very good indeed. But it has to be said that the earlier equivalents are excellent too - these improvements in actual performance are all incremental in nature even though new technology is being used to achieve it. https://www.thephoblographer.com/201...n-50mm-f1-8-g/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #193
Archiver
Registered User
 
Archiver is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,194
I'm not sure which is more surprising - that raid has bought a DSLR, or that such an avid photographer as raid, who has owned all manner of cameras, has never bought a DSLR until now!
__________________
~Loving Every Image Captured Always~
Archiver on flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #194
wjlapier
Registered User
 
wjlapier's Avatar
 
wjlapier is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn View Post
Can't say anything about the 85 1.8 but the 85 1.4D is a fantastic lens.

Is it an adapter to use Leica R on Nikon or a replacement mount? There is only 0.5mm difference in flange length between the two, an adapter probably wouldn't allow infinity focus. There are lens mount replacements available though.

http://www.leitax.com/leica-lens-for-nikon-cameras.html

Shawn
I replaced the Leica R lens mounts with Leitax. The Minolta I had to basically re-manufacture the mount. Never was able to achieve infinity. Closest focus to ~20ft before the mirror hit the rear of the lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2018   #195
Contarama
Registered User
 
Contarama is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,235
Beware the infamous bloom on the 35-70/2.8

I've had one before. Nice glass. It's a push/pull design and as such tends to collect internal dust. I prefer the primes.
__________________
Art is the ability to make something...even if it is a big mess...
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-18-2018   #196
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Contarama View Post
Beware the infamous bloom on the 35-70/2.8

I've had one before. Nice glass. It's a push/pull design and as such tends to collect internal dust. I prefer the primes.
You are speaking on something that was on my mind yesterday as I checked out many such zooms for sale. Unless you pay $400+ the offered zooms have internal dust or/and haze or/and fog and/or fungus.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-18-2018   #197
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjlapier View Post
I replaced the Leica R lens mounts with Leitax. The Minolta I had to basically re-manufacture the mount. Never was able to achieve infinity. Closest focus to ~20ft before the mirror hit the rear of the lens.
Would there be such a problem with the R Summicron on a D700 too?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-18-2018   #198
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archiver View Post
I'm not sure which is more surprising - that raid has bought a DSLR, or that such an avid photographer as raid, who has owned all manner of cameras, has never bought a DSLR until now!
I have been very much opposed to using AF lenses that felt as if they are made out of plastic. I was also opposed to the digital RF until I gave up on scanning negatives from film cameras. In the end, we want to post online some images. I am still using film cameras. Today, I had with me in the camera bag a M8 with Hexanon 50/2.4 for a 66mm lens that is extremely sharp, plus a 35m 1.4 Lux on the M9 and then a 16mm Hologon on the M3. This is all I need. The whole idea of using RF cameras was/is to go with smaller lenses and to enjoy RF focusing, and this is why I set aside my film SLR cameras. Why should a DSLR tempt me? I was just curious about it, so I bought a used and older model DSLR.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-18-2018   #199
Contarama
Registered User
 
Contarama is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
You are speaking on something that was on my mind yesterday as I checked out many such zooms for sale. Unless you pay $400+ the offered zooms have internal dust or/and haze or/and fog and/or fungus.
And/or separation. The other two lenses of the three dragons...same deal and they are more expensive than the middle dragon.

A 35, 50, & 85 set of afd primes are less money, faster, and better results.

I would say your safest and best bet for now professor is to use what you have that is compatible and see where it lands for you. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.
__________________
Art is the ability to make something...even if it is a big mess...
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-18-2018   #200
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,371
Hi Peter,
All I need is the green light in the viewer to tell me the focus is OK, or I can estimate the distance anyways. My eyesight is still excellent (somehow!) and I do not have any issues with focusing. I stopped using any flashes once I switched to RF cameras, and now I don't like using any flash anymore. I view images taken with a flash as "artificial" and not naturally lit. I prefer photos taken in open shade. I live in Florida after all. We have over 300 sunny days per year.

The 35-70/2.8 tempts me as a travel lens. Else, I favor prime lenses. Opting for a Nikon camera has opened up a world of lens options, but this is also confusing!

Raid

Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
Optically they are the same lens. Nikon added D circuitry to better communicate subject-to-camera-distance information to the camera, where it is used to help determine ambient and flash exposure. I think that is about it. Though with some lenses when the D upgrade was made by Nikon the opportunity was also taken to make other tweaks too. Either optical tweaks in a few cases (eg. working wholly from memory I think the 28mm f2.8 got an optical upgrade as the optics needed it) or as noted in other posts, mechanical ones (e.g AF gearing ratio for the 70-210mm AF 4- 5.6.). I do not believe either improvement was regarded as necessary with the 35-70mm f2.8 insofar as I know. People sometimes tend to prefer D lenses when buying, I guess because they are the newer of the two models but this is not usually a major issue though it may mean a slightly higher price .

BTW Raid the D700 also works fine with later G lenses which do not have their own aperture ring and are also focused electronically by silent wave motor rather than by mechanical drive (these are very quiet and quick to focus). A good G lens to buy (and cheap) if you should go down this path sometime in the future, is the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 G which is about half the price of the equivalent f1.4 G and very good indeed. But it has to be said that the earlier equivalents are excellent too - these improvements in actual performance are all incremental in nature even though new technology is being used to achieve it. https://www.thephoblographer.com/201...n-50mm-f1-8-g/
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  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 10:09.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.