NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: RonVol on March 25, 2016, 21:49:44
-
American Portrait Photographer Annie Leibovitz with a Nikon F.
Not sure what the Nikkor is.
-
Don McCullin
-
Don McCullin
Nice one.
That's a classic shot of Don.
-
Ron, the former Prime Minister of Australia, Malcolm Fraser, was a keen Nikon devotee right up to his recent death. (He had even ordered in the new 300mm PF lens only days before he died.)
The following image shows Fraser trying out a Nikon lens in Japan.
-
A 600/5.6 Nikkor-P in the AU focusing adapter. Just the right tool for a PM in pinstriped suit.... :)
He even was using the quick-focusing handle on the AU.
-
Ron, the former Prime Minister of Australia, Malcolm Fraser, was a keen Nikon devotee right up to his recent death. (He had even ordered in the new 300mm PF lens only days before he died.)
The following image shows Fraser trying out a Nikon lens in Japan.
Hugh, that's an awesome find...............thanks heaps :)
-
A 600/5.6 Nikkor-P in the AU focusing adapter. Just the right tool for a PM in pinstriped suit.... :)
He even was using the quick-focusing handle on the AU.
And he has even an human bipod... :)
-
Igor Kostin and his Nikons/Nikkors in Ukraine, 1986.
Igor Fedorovich Kostin (27 December 1936 – 9 June 2015) was one of the five photographers in the world to take pictures of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster near Pripyat in Ukraine, on 26 April 1986.
He was working for Novosti Press Agency (APN) as a photographer in Kiev, Ukraine, when he represented Novosti to cover the nuclear accident in Chernobyl. Kostin′s aerial view of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant was widely published around the world, showing the extent of the devastation and triggering fear throughout the world of radioactivity-contamination the accident caused................all at a time when the Soviet media was working to censor information regarding the accident, releasing limited information regarding the accident on 28 April 1986, until the Soviet Union′s collapse in 1991. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Kostin
-
This is the above shot, un-edited.
The yellow-green tint around some of the highlights & shadows is the film's reaction to the high levels of radiation.
-
This is the first photograph ever taken of the accident, and the only photo that survives from the morning of the accident. Igor Kostin was a photographer from Kiev who became world famous for his images of the the clean-up operation. The image is very noisy because the radiation was destroying the film in his camera. Of all the shots he took on that flight, this is the only one that wasn't ruined. - http://gorillafeed.com/its-the-29th-anniversary-of-the-chernobyl-nuclear-disaster-today-heres-what-happened/
-
Remarkable photographs, thank you for posting. The telephoto he is holding upright is the 400 f5.6 IFED Nikkor. Fantastic lens at 1.2 kg, which Nikon have yet to emulate in any new incarnation. Their new 300 f4 PF falls 100mm short in FL and the 200-500 is much less compact. Albeit both are VR and AF-S. A fresnel 400 would be one superb instrument ...... Do you read me Fives, Nikon?
Igor Kostin and his Nikons/Nikkors in Ukraine, 1986.
. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Kostin
-
Remarkable photographs, thank you for posting. The telephoto he is holding upright is the 400 f5.6 IFED Nikkor. Fantastic lens at 1.2 kg, which Nikon have yet to emulate in any new incarnation. Their new 300 f4 PF falls 100mm short in FL and the 200-500 is much less compact. Albeit both are VR and AF-S. A fresnel 400 would be one superb instrument ...... Do you read me Fives, Nikon?
You're welcome and thanks for identifying the tele Nikkor.
I'm sorry but I don't understand your question - "Do you read me Fives, Nikon?"
-
I see that Igor Kostin died in his 79th year. Many of the helicopter pilots were not so lucky and died of radiation sickness as a result of their exposure to the radiation in the early days after the disaster. Others died in the ensuing years from radiation induced cancers.
-
Igor Kostine died in a car accident.
-
Thanks - not that any form of death is nice. At least he escaped radiation sickness (a horrible demise) or cancer (not so nice either).
-
This late, brave photographer bequeathed an priceless legacy to future civilizations. We only hope they learn from these photographs. Although I have read about the disaster, I only learnt of the significance and origins of these photos from this posting. I will now include them in lectures to ecology / earth system science students when we cover the really ugly aspects of the Anthropocene. Thank you for posting
You're welcome and thanks for identifying the tele Nikkor.
I'm sorry but I don't understand your question - "Do you read me Fives, Nikon?"
Borrowing from procedure when using radio communication (military, emergency services etc) where 1 through 5 is a proxy for strength and/or legibility of the transmission. 5 is loud and clearly understandable; one translation "Do you read me Loud and Clear, Nikon?" My apologies for using inappropriate expressions in jest :-) Basically, their marketing and R&D departments have gone to sleep (?)....
On a different and more pertinent topic, there are too many excellent products discontinued by Nikon that would still be successful. Each of us can list their own missing favourites. Besides a lighter, portable 400 prime telephoto, the Micro-Nikkors with a proper aperture ring; the Micro-Nikkor 70-180 Zoom; close up lenses (filter mounted). I learnt yesterday from a high profile camera shop that a Used 6T (62mm) can sell for 300 pounds. I will get the Kenko set!!
-
Blame EU regulations for the demise of the 3T/4T/5T/6T. Unhealthy glass. As if the photographer would eat his close-up attachments. I certainly will refrain from devouring any of my many samples of these excellent auxiliary lenses.
Neither the AF 200/4 ED nor the AF 70-180/4.5-5.6 Micro-Nikkor became very popular and only sold in modest numbers. Nikon has kept the 200/4 ED current though, so the Mothership is hardly to blame in this regard.
The 55/2.8 and 105/2.8 Micro-Nikkors are still listed by Nikon as being in production. They are manual focus and have aperture rings. The 45/2.8 and 85/2.8 tilt-shift lenses are manual focus, have aperture rings ,and are designated Micro-Nikkor.
I agree Nikon could take better care of their legacy to the benefit of photographers not enamoured by AFS and plastics technology, but as shown above, the situation is not totally hopeless. Besides, there are hundreds of thousands of these older lenses in circulation and all are easy to get hold of on a second-hand market.
-
Yes, Igor Kostine's legacy will live on. Somehow the radiation damage to the negative that his image was printed from heightens the impact of the dreadful situation.
*****************
Nikon's 5T and 6T do pop up on Ebay - they are not cheap there either, but quite a lot less than 300 quid. Even the 3T and 4T can still be found on occassion.
Canon still build their 250D (4 diopters) and their 500D (2 diopters) close up lenses in 52mm, 58mm, 72mm, and 77mm sizes. Like the 5T and 6T, they are also a good quality product but they are not inexpensive either - as you will see if you brouse through the Ebay listings.
Are the Kenko offerings single or double element lenses? If single, it may still be worth hunting down the Nikon or Canon offerings, which are designed and built to a higher specification than the single element offerings.
This late, brave photographer bequeathed an priceless legacy to future civilizations. .......................................
........................................
........................................
I learnt yesterday from a high profile camera shop that a Used 6T (62mm) can sell for 300 pounds. I will get the Kenko set!!
-
Huynh Thanh My (alias - HUYNH CONG LA)
Born: June 1, 1937, in Long An, Vietnam.
Died: October 10, 1965, near Can Tho, Vietnam.
Although he was only 5'3 and weighed just 55kg, Huynh Thanh My was one of the toughest photographers of the Vietnam War. He had a Bachelor of Arts Degree and for several years he carried heavy network-news equipment around the battlefield for CBS, until he was lured to AP in 1963 to work as a staff photographer.
In May, 1965, he was wounded by machine gun fire (see photos no. 01 & 02 below) but returned to the front lines as soon as he was released from the hospital (see photo no. 03 below). While covering a fight between the Viet Cong and SVN Rangers in the Mekong Delta later that year, Huynh Thanh My was wounded in the chest and arm. As he waited to be evacuated by helicopter, the enemy overran the makeshift aid station and killed the wounded (see image below of front-page article). Nearly the entire Saigon Press Corps marched in Huynh Thanh My's funeral procession to the Mac Dinh Chi cemetary.
Huynh left behind his 19-year-old widow and seven-month-old daughter. His younger brother, Huynh Cong Ut was hired by the AP in 1965 and covered the rest of the war, winning a Pulitzer Prize in 1973. Better known as Nick Ut, he now lives in Los Angeles.
-
Powerful images Ron, thank you for sharing.
-
Very touching. Thank you for sharing.
-
Canon still build their 250D (4 diopters) and their 500D (2 diopters) close up lenses in 52mm, 58mm, 72mm, and 77mm sizes. Like the 5T and 6T, they are also a good quality product but they are not inexpensive either - as you will see if you brouse through the Ebay listings.
The Canon 250D has never been available larger than 58mm, unfortunately.
-
Keith, you are quite correct - thanks for this clarification.
The Canon 250D has never been available larger than 58mm, unfortunately.
-
Italian photographer Ugo Mulas holding a rarely seen *NIKKOR* F and UD-Nikkor 20mm f/3.5.
Photo by Gianni Berengo Gardin.
-
These photos and stories are really fantastic!
And the pictures of Huynh Thanh My really show what abuse these Nikons can take...
Thank you for posting this thread! :)
-
Kyoichi Sawada, a Pulitzer Prize awarded photographer, was mostly know to use Leica. But he was also using Nikon for longer lenses.
The black Nikon F in this image appears to be attached with Nikkor Auto 135/3.5.
-
Taizo Ichinose is another famous Japanese war photographer. He used F2 as his main body and Nikomat (Japanese domestic version of Nikkormat).
He had used F which had been shot (he survived by that time).
-
Taizo Ichinose is another famous Japanese war photographer. He used F2 as his main body and Nikomat (Japanese domestic version of Nikkormat).
He had used F which had been shot (he survived by that time).
Great photos Akira, thanks for sharing.
-
Everybody's favourite scientist/journalist Carl Sagan with an F2, not sure what the Nikkor is.
From his 13-part TV series 'Cosmos - A Personal Voyage', 1980.
In this particular episode he's talking about travelling at the speed of light and how it effects time, e.g. 'time dilation'.
-
Great photos Akira, thanks for sharing.
You are welcome, Ron. The story of Huynh Thanh My you shared is well worth reading. Thank you for sharing and wish you a Happy New Year!
Carl Sagan might be using Ai 135/2.8? Stopped fully down?!
-
American Portrait Photographer Annie Leibovitz with a Nikon F.
Not sure what the Nikkor is.
My guess will be an 85/2.0 AI Nikkor. The focus ring was smaller than most 52mm attachment sized Nikkors. I had one and disliked the design. I replaced it with an AIS version.
Dave Hartman
-
Hugh's photo of then prime minister Malcolm Fraser reminded me of the "passionate" responses his presence would draw back in the day. Here is a photographer working for the "Australian" newspaper at an anti-Fraser demo in March 1979. Camera is an F2Ax, I would guess the lens to be a 28. I shot this with an F2AS & 35 f2 AI...as a wannabe photojournalist I had all the gear but no idea! ::)
-
Hugh's photo of then prime minister Malcolm Fraser reminded me of the "passionate" responses his presence would draw back in the day. Here is a photographer working for the "Australian" newspaper at an anti-Fraser demo in March 1979. Camera is an F2Ax, I would guess the lens to be a 28. I shot this with an F2AS & 35 f2 AI...as a wannabe photojournalist I had all the gear but no idea! ::)
Nice to see another Aussie on here :) :)
Thanks for posting the photo.
Did you end up becoming a journo?
-
Hello Ron,
No, not a journo. Someone back then convinced me back then that my day job had more of a future, so I stuck with fixing computers!
Hans
-
Photographer for the AP, Nick Ut with two F3 workhorses.
By the look of that AF Zoom 80-200mm f/2.8, looks like the shot is from around the late 1980s - early 1990s.
Seems that Nick preferred to still be using the F3 rather than the F4?
Looks like Nick has converted to Canon as most of the shots you see of him these days is of him using Canon's gear.
-
Photographer for the AP, Nick Ut with two F3 workhorses.
By the look of that AF Zoom 80-200mm f/2.8, looks like the shot is from around the late 1980s - early 1990s.
Seems that Nick preferred to still be using the F3 rather than the F4?
Looks like Nick has converted to Canon as most of the shots you see of him these days is of him using Canon's gear.
No wonder that he continued to use F3 which outlived F4.
When Canon released either New F-1 or EOS-1, they offered a big campaign to the professional photographers: Canon offered them to replace their complete body/lens kits (mostly Nikon, of course) with Canon's equivalents in order to expand their user base to the photojournalists and sports photographers.
-
WARNING - anti Nikon rant ahead!
I must admit that Canon has really been doing the right thing ever since they changed their lens mount in the late 80s..
In the meantime; Nikon has stuck with the F mount and now we have the ridiculous situation of so many changes made to the mount that many of those changes are no longer backwards compatible. So-much for the much acclaimed redundancy that Nikon has always heaped on their customers.
No wonder so many pros have gone over to Canon.
With Nikon's silly 'Ambassador Program', it seems that the only pros using the gear are the ones being paid by Nikon to do so!
Of course, I know this is not really true but it sure does seem that way.
End of rant :P
-
You are right, after they changed to the EF mount in 1987, they have done everything right,,, ;)
-
Frankly I have to agree that Canon could see the future better than Nikon by switching their mount from the pure mechanical FD to the pure electric FE, which make the users attach EF and EF-S lenses easier on the M models and even on the Sony E mount cameras!
With the introduction of E and AF-P lenses, Nikon's (in)compatibility scheme has become even more complicated. :o :o
-
thats a small price to pay because I can use almost ALL F-mount lenses made on modern Nikon cameras :o :o :o
-
thats a small price to pay because I can use almost ALL F-mount lenses made on modern Nikon cameras :o :o :o
While that maybe true for lenses; think about the cameras of the past.
You can't mount one of Nikon's modern lenses on many of the now redundant cameras and have even basic functionality.
-
WARNING - anti Nikon rant ahead!
I must admit that Canon has really been doing the right thing ever since they changed their lens mount in the late 80s..
In the meantime; Nikon has stuck with the F mount and now we have the ridiculous situation of so many changes made to the mount that many of those changes are no longer backwards compatible. So-much for the much acclaimed redundancy that Nikon has always heaped on their customers.
No wonder so many pros have gone over to Canon.
With Nikon's silly 'Ambassador Program', it seems that the only pros using the gear are the ones being paid by Nikon to do so!
Of course, I know this is not really true but it sure does seem that way.
End of rant :P
Guess I completely disagree (in a friendly way) with you
As a then Canon user with several FL lenses (the Canon lens mount prior to the FD) I for one did not think the 'upgrade' to the EF mount was such a progress
I up till then was a two system user. Had my Canon with short FL lenses set from the early 70's, got a Nikon set to complement it with additional focal lengths when i started my professional photography studies in the early 80's
(Nikon really was the pros choice in those days, not so much because of 'superior' equipment, but of a better service/dealer network, better repair options and, very important for a budding photographer, wider availability of 2nd hand gear and 3rd party accesorries)
While I could still use my FL lenses with FD mount camera's, with the switch to the EF mount they became next to worthless (and in the late 70 early 80's one didn't switch systems or bought the next new thing as easy as seems the rule nowadays)
I held on to some of my Canon FL lenses, but after that made a more serious commitment to ( and investment in) my Nikon gear, especially as I could even use my manual lenses in AF mode on my F801 and later model film SLR's
I still can use my late 70's Ai lenses without any problems on both my FE and F2AS, as well as , without any need for a special adapter, on D7100, D3, D800 and DF, and even got a couple of pre Ai lenses I can still use on my Df, with fully functional TTL light metering.
While I can still use my AF D lenses on the above mentioned old film bodies, and even some of my AFS lenses on my later model film SLR's like F90X and F100, with functioning (multi mode) lightmetering and AF
Sure Nikon has not always made life easy ( the slow slow AF of the F4 they held on to for too long, the noisy low MP DX sensors prior to the D3)
From my experience, it was in the F4 days that many Nikon users, in particular sports shooters and photojournalists, switched over to Canon, not as much as because of 'problems' with backward lens compatibilty (as said, if you were a FL/DF user that was was much more of an issue) but because of the faster AF of the EOS1 and in particular EOS1N, and the lavish premiums Canon lured pros with if they switched (pretty much like Sony does nowadays)
But many photographers shooting other subjects (wedding, portrait etc) never made that 'mandatory' upgrade, and when Nikon introduced the F90X and F5 (and F100) saw the AF 'issue' solved.
But Canon has had its share of 'oops' moments as well ( the ultra fast, but also ultra unreliable AF of the 1D3, and later 7D, the for a long time compared to post D3 Nikon sensors inferior DR and chromatic noise, the mickey mouse built quality of their EOS 300+ series)
So in the end, both brands have had their strong and weak moments, and still do.
And of course when making statements about 'pro's' switching brands (and as a grumpy old man my observation is that many asssume themselves such far too easily, just based on a website with a pricelist and some equipment bought with their credit card), one should keep in mind that nowadays there's a constant wandering of GAS motivated shooters who 'upgrade' and switch (back, see Nikon D750 and D810) whenever any brand comes up with the best next thing
-
Ron said: After they changed the mount,,,,
-
With Nikon's silly 'Ambassador Program', it seems that the only pros using the gear are the ones being paid by Nikon to do so!
Well, Canon has their own ambassadors as well, and they didn't notice anything wrong with any of their cameras or lenses, they were all perfect even when the dynamic range was 3 stops behind Nikons ...
With digital sensors improving so rapidly, there is not so much point in using an older camera; if you want the best image quality, you need to use a modern camera. With film, things were different as each camera gave the same image quality as the film material used was a choice independent of the choice of camera body.
With this in mind, I am not sure why it is so important to use e.g. a D100 with a modern E lens. You can get much better results by using a newer camera that is also compatible with the new (and old) lenses.
It's much more common that one wants to use an older lens with a new camera than the other way around, as older lenses sometimes have special characteristics.
Of course, perfect compatibility would be nice. But I think it is best to think in terms of probabilities and real-world scenarios.
-
I don't think anything has really changed. Nikon cameras have always been compatible with any lens released prior to or concurrently with the body's introduction (with the exception of lenses like the 6mm fisheye that require manual mirror lockup, and subject to issues such as viewfinder overhangs limiting the movement of shift lenses). The only "major" exception to that is the obvious issue of AI modification (or in the case of certain bodies, you can instead choose camera modification) needed to make this true for lenses prior to 1977. It just seems annoyingly stupid at the moment with AF-P being a mere firmware update away from any camera that Nikon chooses to fix for it, and E diaphragms being something Nikon should have introduced along with AF-I/AF-S focusing support with the F4 instead of sitting on it for the better part of two decades--not to mention something they should surely update the F6 for so that at least one film camera can handle it.
You could say that, the E fiasco apart, that Nikon really planned things very well, with a lens mount back in 1959 that was simple enough and big enough in diameter to take any technological change thrown at it, and an autofocus switchover in the late 1980s that did not break prior or subsequent compatibility. If only they'd just taken the E leap right when they took the autofocus leap.....I don't think anybody would be complaining now if that were the case.
WARNING - anti Nikon rant ahead!
I must admit that Canon has really been doing the right thing ever since they changed their lens mount in the late 80s..
In the meantime; Nikon has stuck with the F mount and now we have the ridiculous situation of so many changes made to the mount that many of those changes are no longer backwards compatible. So-much for the much acclaimed redundancy that Nikon has always heaped on their customers.
No wonder so many pros have gone over to Canon.
With Nikon's silly 'Ambassador Program', it seems that the only pros using the gear are the ones being paid by Nikon to do so!
Of course, I know this is not really true but it sure does seem that way.
End of rant :P
-
While that maybe true for lenses; think about the cameras of the past.
You can't mount one of Nikon's modern lenses on many of the now redundant cameras and have even basic functionality.
While this is true I don't see a need to use a modern E type Nikkor lens on my F5 or F100. What is important to me is my Nikkor lenses back to those I bought in 1978 are compatible with my Nikon D800 that I bought in 2014. That's 36 years of lens to camera compatibility. I also own a 50/1.4 Nikkor-S and 135/3.5 Nikkor-Q with factory AI kits that were made in about 1969 and 1971 and these are also compatible with my Nikon D800. That's 45 and 43 years of lens to camera compatibility. Nikkor lenses made all the way back to 1959 can be adapted to my D800. That's 55 years of compatibility.
Going the other way I can use all of my Nikkor lenses excepting my latest three G type lenses on my Nikon F2As. That's 22~27 years of compatibility and perhaps a few more.
I'll note here that I haven't processed a single roll of film since I bought my first dSLR back in 2005. I'd like to shoot an occasional roll of 400 ISO B&W film in my Nikon F3 and make a few prints but my darkroom lacks sewer line so that hasn't happened. I will probably never shoot another roll of color film although I have a full color darkroom with two 4x5" enlargers.
Dave Hartman
-
The basic facet of Nikon--that all lenses of the past are compatible with their current bodies (well, at least the full-frame ones and the one DX one with AI)--is a good one, but that also leaves us without a single film body that supports E lenses. I, for one, would like that capability. How about an F100E or F6E? That's all they need to do, put the E circuit on an otherwise unaltered body. It's not too awkward with the 300 because that gets used on maximum aperture a lot anyway but for anything you might want to stop down, it's a non-starter. With Canon, by contrast, you can take any of their film bodies and use any EF lens and it will work at any setting, the only limitation being the restriction of IS to cameras with multiple sensors for it.
-
There is a simple work-around, so you can indeed use say the 300 PF on an F2 with the lens at f/8 or any other aperature ... (I have tried).
Agree a dedicated 'E' version of the latest film-based camera model(s) would make the use of 'E' lenses simpler, though.
-
You can't see it, but trust me my D7200 w/ 16-80mm f/2.3-4 DX lens is in my right hand. Taken yesterday as I was about to up in this T-28B Trojan for some fun.
-
Ive got a real soft spot for press cameras that have done the hard yards.
Found this little gem on eBay a while back, and couldn't resist it.
For me this represents the beginning of Nikon growing into the 35mm press camera of choice around the world. (Its a crying shame they squandered that legacy....)
A black SP bought new by a Toledo Blade (Ohio) newspaper photographer Herral Long. Herral apparently used and treasured it until his death a few years ago.
Cheers, Lyndon
-
A fine camera, made more attractive by the wear and tear.