We rely on revenue from ads to pay the bills. Please support our efforts by allowing the ads to show on the Nikon Cafe. Alternatively, consider becoming a site subscriber for $10 per year to remove all ads.
My new toy... Just arrived this afternoon! A wonderful addition to my film cameras: The mighty F2 Titanium (yes, without the word "Titan" on it, thank you God!) 100% new and unused in its original box!
I think I am in love :biggrin: ... I only wish digitals were never here... :rolleyes:
Lack of interest in the Nikon 180/2.8 ?!? You must be joking... :eek:
Most of us adore this lens.
I said before and I say again that this would be the LAST Nikon piece that I would ever sell. An absolutely fantastic lens!
From what I read in this thread, one thing is clear to me (although I hate that it's true): Sample variation in Nikon lenses is here and -we like it or not- it is not very rare!
Some times we have to accept that unfortunately our sample is not as good as it should be and send it...
Our little country is crying for the 64 human victims of the wildfires... for the thousands of people that lost everything they had... for the countless forests that are now only ashes... for the tens of villages that do not exist any more...
Please pray with us... :frown:
Yeah, Phil, I don't disagree with you, goodies are always welcome and I would be happier with a wider dynamic range and a live histogram of course...
But from my experience, most people's pictures (mine included) would be much more improved from better PP and printing instead, not to mention...
Actually, you are already doing quite well Stuart! That's very nice!
I usually shoot at 2.8 to 4 when there are highlights in the background to avoid CA. It can be very wide and apparent and it usually is awkward to remove it.
I don't care about high ISO performance. At all. I don't do reportage or sports either.
I need to spend $6800 -which will be much more in Europe- to replace my D2X+17-55mm combo with a D3+24-70mm one.
Now, if i could find a decent reason why should I do this...:confused:
Do you have any idea how much the IQ of the Beast and the other "older" lenses will decrease on the full frame sensor? I think that the new lenses will be a must for FF. Just remember the example of the wide primes' (14, 18, 24) IQ with the D2Xs... would you ever try them on the D3?
Multiple lines and shapes in the blur, emphasized edges, doughnut rings, all these are bad bokeh characteristics. Although I understand that some people actually like them some times. So, yeah, bokeh is subjective (to a limit).
I never owned the 85/1.8 but I do enjoy my 85/1.4 :smile:
I bought the 1.4 mainly because I knew that for every 85/1.8 picture I would always wonder if the 85/1.4 would have done better! Silly eh? :eek:
It works though.
It is not THAT hard of course, but it is more time cosuming than AF anyway. (Unless you are doing macro, landscape etc)
It is like adding, multiplying, dividing etc. We all can do it, but show me one that would not prefer to use a calculator :biggrin:
I have done it too, back in the late 80's for the first time, with a Hasselblad T* 80mm Planar. I was thinking the same thing: "If this lens is so good for the 6X6 slide, just think how good its sweet spot would be for the 135..."
A couple friends of mine have done it too during the 90's...
What is it all about 45P ?
Well, it is so... CUTE !!!
...and so small, and so well made...
What else do you need from a lens anyway?!? :confused:
"Boke-aji" Robert? :confused: Would you please explain the "aji" part?
Was it me? I am not sure, although I wouldn't call it a gimmick.
My opinion was (and still is) that too many people use this feature only for tests and rarely to actually improve a picture.
I used to own a 135 DC many years ago and I was mostly doing the same :wink:
Thanks Doug for this...
This is a well known issue with D2X(s) and Matrix metering. It is just supposed to be like this. Most people (me too) dial -.7 or more and also prefer the center weight metering instead of Matrix (which btw is trying to do its best, but best is not the same for all of us in every situation...
Probably. But don't forget that half a century ago, all large/medium format users used to say the same for the 135 film: That it would be the format for the masses and the amateurs only :biggrin:
Anyway, I don't care what it's gonna be Nikon, 1.5X 1.33X 1.10X or FF, just stick to one of them...
"Full frame sensor" is a comparison of apples to oranges in the first place.
Why should a sensor have the same size with 135 film? Just because it is convenient for focal lengths and we are used to it?
If the IQ is equal or better with the 135 film (another apples to oranges comparison though)...
I understand your enthusiasm Dude... it's such a great lens!
btw... don't tell anyone, but 17-55 is my most used lens too :redface: (although I still am a primes person :rolleyes: and although I will never stop hating its £@^&% huge hood :Devil: )