Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Themes, Portfolio Series, PaW, or PaM / Re: [Theme] Got pets???
« Last post by Lars Hansen on Today at 14:35:16 »
Perseus popped his mouse today and is quite content with himself! 

 .. and ready for a good long rest  :)  Nice shot.

If it was a mouse he ate then he is young I assume? Do you have other species apart from common boa?
   
2
Themes, Portfolio Series, PaW, or PaM / Re: [Theme] Got pets???
« Last post by Andrew on Today at 14:20:55 »
He is 12 or 13 years old, napping a lot!
3
Themes, Portfolio Series, PaW, or PaM / Re: [Theme] Got pets???
« Last post by Mike G on Today at 14:03:43 »
But there's always time for a nap. I like the picture a lot!
4
Nature, Flora, Fauna & Landscapes / Re: [Theme]bridge
« Last post by Fons Baerken on Today at 13:23:58 »
5
Other / Re: Fun with IR
« Last post by Fons Baerken on Today at 13:21:26 »



6
Your Weekly Blog / Re: April 2017
« Last post by Fons Baerken on Today at 13:16:55 »
April 30



a slow Victor

Df, 55mm f/1.2S, not ai-modified only fits the Df
7
Lens Talk / Re: Nikon or Nikkor?
« Last post by Bjørn Rørslett on Today at 13:16:24 »
And who is to decide what constitutes a "better lens" ? There are plenty of examples of acclaimed 'inferior' lenses actually being very good for some purposes.

Canon users talk about "L" lenses as these always are pinnacles of optical performance, but the truth is not that simple and many "L" items aren't that impressive at all. We used to think likewise of the golden 'ED' ring and ED designation on lenses made by Nikon, but those times are long gone.
8
Your Weekly Blog / Re: April 2017
« Last post by Fons Baerken on Today at 13:14:21 »
John is showing a slow selfie ;D
9
Lens Talk / Re: Nikon or Nikkor?
« Last post by David H. Hartman on Today at 12:59:20 »
Whatever the reasoning behind the dual names, it appears it did not last long.

A decade? I don't remember. Today any piece of junk seems worthy of degrading the Nikkor name in favor of sales and profit.

I can't remember if I posted this above or not but I tried and sort of repaired a 50/1.8 Canon FD lens for a nephew. It was a piece of plastic junk and from what I've seen of the Nikon Series-E lenses they were much better made.

A public relations customer who I printed for who turn in a lot of film with really bad image quality. She blamed her self. On day while printing I say the plane of focus was not parallel to the camera. I stopped by and check the lens and an element or group was clunking around inside. I took it to Gayson's Camera, Glendale, CA where she bought it and they shipped it to Canon. Canon repaired or replaced it free. There was no sign of impact or abuse. She asked me to test it when it came back. I found the image quality excellent. The build quality sucked! Same 50/1.8 Canon FD as my nephew's.

I wish these companies had more respect for their name. I wish Nikon still reserved the Nikkor name for their better lenses.

Dave
10
Lens Talk / Re: Nikon or Nikkor?
« Last post by David H. Hartman on Today at 12:41:37 »
Nikkor - The Thousand and One Nights
Tale 5...

Rendition characteristics and lens performance

So how is the rendition of the AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 lens?
As I have said before, evaluations are always subjective, so please consider my comments as my personal opinions, for reference.

As mentioned above, this lens has the features of [asymmetric] design, and in particular distortion is extremely low. The image is flat to the periphery, and astigmatism is very small.

The lens also has characteristics of spherical aberration and coma. Basically close-range aberration variation is small, but at portrait distances the correction for aberration seems to be slightly insufficient. The insufficiency as far as spherical aberration in particular is what makes defocus background appeared beautiful. The aberration balance has been calculated carefully for use in portraits. When the aperture is open contrast is good, and delineation is soft.

--Haruo Sato


The underlining above is mine. Stopping down to f/5.6 apparently cures the insufficient correction of spherical aberration. I found maximum center sharpness with three 105/2.5(s), N.C, AI and AIS to be f/5.6. The third paragraph explained my findings.

---

105mm f2.5 later    
4.8 (several samples)    

(large rear element [late non-AI with black front]), performance declines at wide stops near minimum focus (both conditions together), otherwise this lens is excellent even wide open

--David Ruether


This also fits my findings though it doesn't explain them as Tale 5 does. I did my test on Tech Pan at 2 meters and focused with a 6x finder on my F2.

I'd be interested if others find a similar trade off of image sharpness at 2 meters or portrait distance at wide apertures, say f/4.0 and wider.

Dave Hartman
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10