NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Michael Erlewine on November 15, 2017, 21:57:49
-
I have updated my 2014 e-book on lenses titled “Lenses for Close-Up and Macro Photography” for those interested. Included are essays and lenses for what are called the “Exotic Industrials.”
This is a free e-book. Made it myself and it is available and can be shared provided no fee is charged. This update is 239 pages and includes 64 more pages than the original publication.
http://spiritgrooves.net/pdf/e-books/NEW%20LENS%20BOOK%20V5.pdf
-
Thank you Michael, I just downloaded it and will read it on the train today.
-
Thank you, just downloaded and skimmed it, lots of info. I like the PB-4 on the front page, just bought one, will start to learn to use it for more than slide duplication.
-
Michael, thank you for the tour de force update to the already tour de force e-book! I downloaded for my future references.
-
It is just a homemade e-book to keep up with lenses and the kind of thing I do. Hope it is useful.
-
Many thanks for posting your eBook. I really like your real world assessments of the lenses. I will sure enjoy reading on.
-
Thank you!
-
Michael, I would also like to add my thanks. I have downloaded the book and will read it with interest and use it as a guide in future. Very generous of you to gather all of this information and make it so easily available.
Cheers, John
-
Unlike many, I have not just downloaded and praised ... I have read a great deal of the material. (Can't say I've read every word, but a majority.)
That said, here are my comments ...
Praise first :)
Thanks for the time and effort in putting this together: a treasure trove.
The lenses with which I am familiar, I agree with your findings (for the most part).
My experiences lead me to trust your eyes and your reviews on most anything in the future ...
That said, here are some elements which could use improvement/revision ...
Minor criticisms
Your Table of Contents Page numbers (in many cases) don't match your actual page numbers of the topic.
Since the subject is close-up and macro, you don't even get into the reverse-macro options with lenses like the 28mm AI-S, which is a dandy for reverse macro.
Your evaluation of the Sigma 180mm macro was not objective, but only from 'your' static use parameters ... it is excellent for long-reach in the field (of live moving subjects, not flowers).
Cheers.
PS: I would have liked to see a section devoted to the Noct 58 vs. the Otus 55
-
Minor criticisms
Your Table of Contents Page numbers (in many cases) don't match your actual page numbers of the topic.
Since the subject is close-up and macro, you don't even get into the reverse-macro options with lenses like the 28mm AI-S, which is a dandy for reverse macro.
Your evaluation of the Sigma 180mm macro was not objective, but only from 'your' static use parameters ... it is excellent for long-reach in the field (of live moving subjects, not flowers).
Cheers.
PS: I would have liked to see a section devoted to the Noct 58 vs. the Otus 55
I will check on those page numbers. As for the Sigma 180mm (or anything in this article), it is only based on my own experience. No attempt is made to be complete. It is eclectic, based on what I use.
As for the Otus 55 and the Noct Nikkor, not sure what you were after. To me, there is no comparison. It is apples and oranges. I love both of those lenses, but they are poles apart IMO. The Noct is a specialized lens in my work, wonderful because it is fast, but not well corrected and if not used VERY carefully, the result is nothing special. If used right, the Noct can be breathtaking.
The Zeiss Otus 55 is much more of a generally useful lens IMO, one that with a little extension (K1 Ring) can get close enough to be useful for the work I do. I use it all the time. I use the Noct occasionally.
The book itself is, as mentioned, a homemade job. I no longer have a staff of hundreds of people (LOL), so everything is done by me. I don't care to spend a lot of time looking for typos. I would rather be photographing. I just put it out there for those few who can benefit from it. I write an essay a day of Facebook (not about photography), so that keeps me busy. I would also like to illustrate each technique with images, but will have to save that for later this winter or when I feel like it. Thanks for the comments.
-
Great work Michael, congratulations and thanks for sharing! It is a VERY long read and you have accumulated many years of experience in it seemingly, even more so after your 2017 update including some of the most modern camera systems.
Well, as you already mentioned it in your e-book, I plead guilty for having lured you into the other lens universe of the special purpose lenses, but I'm very happyto see that you make the best use of them, the Printing and Apo EL Nikors for instance. Indeed, it is the top of the line still by todays standards and no camera sensor has yet been able to beat them and their resolution.
All those may be found with data and lens images on my site http://macrolenses.de (http://macrolenses.de) as you mentioned it.
[I spare you comments about typos and such, nothing really critical...]
-
Great work Michael, congratulations and thanks for sharing! It is a VERY long read and you have accumulated many years of experience in it seemingly, even more so after your 2017 update including some of the most modern camera systems.
Well, as you already mentioned it in your e-book, I plead guilty for having lured you into the other lens universe of the special purpose lenses, but I'm very happyto see that you make the best use of them, the Printing and Apo EL Nikors for instance. Indeed, it is the top of the line still by todays standards and no camera sensor has yet been able to beat them and their resolution.
All those may be found with data and lens images on my site http://macrolenses.de (http://macrolenses.de) as you mentioned it.
[I spare you comments about typos and such, nothing really critical...]
Thanks Klaus! You have been a great teacher for me. And you did not lure me. I leapt into that breech on my own. You just pointed the way.
-
Very useful indeed! Many thanks.
I am surprised you do not mention the Tamron macro lenses, they can be excellent. The 90mm f/2.8 is my jewel, with a very long focus throw (and it goes to 1:1).
I have noticed a few incorrect labellings but honestly the work is so massive that they don't really matter. For instance, the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D should not be AF-S.
-
Very useful indeed! Many thanks.
I am surprised you do not mention the Tamron macro lenses, they can be excellent. The 90mm f/2.8 is my jewel, with a very long focus throw (and it goes to 1:1).
I have noticed a few incorrect labellings but honestly the work is so massive that they don't really matter. For instance, the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D should not be AF-S.
Thanks, I will fix that. Any others? As for the Tamron. I just never had a copy. Will look into ti. I only write about what I actually have and use. Not able to buy everything out there and I sell them off too if I don't use them.
-
Don't get one because of me. I just happen to enjoy it, but really don't think it will give you anything you don't already have.
-
Thank you Michael, I adore your work!
-
I will check on those page numbers. As for the Sigma 180mm (or anything in this article), it is only based on my own experience. No attempt is made to be complete. It is eclectic, based on what I use.
Understood.
Trouble is, if the strengths of a lens are not mentioned, the reader (who may not have experience with any) might shy away from a lens that would actually be more useful to him than one that is more useful to you.
Another example would be the 28mm. It can achieve levels of magnification almost none of the other lenses can achieve, just by reversing it. Not mentioning these details is a pretty big omission. (Again, not criticism, just suggestion for the next time you feel like running through the work.) It easily sharp enough for field work, too, when reversed, with ultra-smooth bokeh:
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000002217_large.jpg)
The 28mm not only is unique because it is wide, and goes 1:4, but it reverses too, making it exceptionally-useful in the field as one tiny/powerful tool.
As for the Otus 55 and the Noct Nikkor, not sure what you were after. To me, there is no comparison. It is apples and oranges. I love both of those lenses, but they are poles apart IMO. The Noct is a specialized lens in my work, wonderful because it is fast, but not well corrected and if not used VERY carefully, the result is nothing special. If used right, the Noct can be breathtaking.
The Zeiss Otus 55 is much more of a generally useful lens IMO, one that with a little extension (K1 Ring) can get close enough to be useful for the work I do. I use it all the time. I use the Noct occasionally.
Thanks. Is there any occasion where you might choose the Noct. over the Otus? (E.g., is there anything the Noct. can do exemplary that the Otus can't do at the same level?)
If so, please provide an example, if you don't mind.
The book itself is, as mentioned, a homemade job. I no longer have a staff of hundreds of people (LOL), so everything is done by me. I don't care to spend a lot of time looking for typos. I would rather be photographing. I just put it out there for those few who can benefit from it. I write an essay a day of Facebook (not about photography), so that keeps me busy. I would also like to illustrate each technique with images, but will have to save that for later this winter or when I feel like it. Thanks for the comments.
Understood. Would never suggest worrying about typos, but making the Table of Contents match the page numbers, and adding some elements with certain lenses that were omitted, might be worth the effort.
Minor quibbles/suggetions aside, it is a wonderful walk-through ... of scores of lenses ... that most of us have (or covet), so thanks for the tremendous effort of putting it together.
-
I miss longer comments on the Large Format Nikkors and the Schneiders I recommend to you. I remember you commented on these on the forum. I know that huge tiltability means a new field in stacking, but your thoughts are very interesting, if only to me...
-
Cheez, Michael, I understand why hardly anyone of those "arm-chair quartbacks" would never ever even think about taking this enormous effort to write something like you have done themselves.... talk is so darn cheap and there is way too much of that HERE. >:(
I had this myself when I published my macrolenses database. Got some many complaints, "this ain't right and that ain't", but guess what, nothing like this was there before and it has millions of hits now over the years and helped many, many macro shooters.
And it will be the same or better with your ebooks!!
-
Another example would be the 28mm. It can achieve levels of magnification almost none of the other lenses can achieve, just by reversing it. Not mentioning these details is a pretty big omission. (Again, not criticism, just suggestion for the next time you feel like running through the work.) It easily sharp enough for field work, too, when reversed, with ultra-smooth bokeh:
The 28mm not only is unique because it is wide, and goes 1:4, but it reverses too, making it exceptionally-useful in the field as one tiny/powerful tool.
Thanks. Is there any occasion where you might choose the Noct. over the Otus? (E.g., is there anything the Noct. can do exemplary that the Otus can't do at the same level?)
I have the 28mm and will add it as I find time.
As for the Noct over the Otus. The Noct, like the APO-El Nikkor 105mm, has certain draw or "style" that is all its own. It makes it less of a general lens like the Otus 55 and more of a specialty lens, if I want that particular look. And it is fast. Because of its lack of correction, I have to be careful what I use it on. The Zeiss Otus 55mm I can use anytime for anything.
-
About to head off for a fairly boring week of family stuff in Georgia so will be sure to have a copy on my computer for browsing.
Anything that helps to bag a bug is worth reading.
-
I miss longer comments on the Large Format Nikkors and the Schneiders I recommend to you. I remember you commented on these on the forum. I know that huge tiltability means a new field in stacking, but your thoughts are very interesting, if only to me...
I will keep that in mind. However, almost all of the large-format lenses I have are very sharp, not very fast, but otherwise similar in many ways and fairly easy to lose. They each have their own style, but these are more similar IMO than different. The APO-El Nikkor 105mm has a very unique style that sets it apart in mind from the other industrial lenses. The two AM-ED Nikkors that I have (120 and 210) are great lenses and have their own style, but to me it is more utilitarian and less arty in style. All of the LF lenses I have are IMO good. Don't know what more to say.
I use them on various bellows of which I have a bunch, but mostly on the Cambo Actus Mini system, using Tilt to tie the near and the far ends of a subject together through a plane of focus... so that I can stack with less artifacts. I do this all in LiveView and by eye, not by any measurements or diagrams. I tilt or shift a lens until I like what I see in LiveView and take photographs. Simple.
-
Cheez, Michael, I understand why hardly anyone of those "arm-chair quartbacks" would never ever even think about taking this enormous effort to write something like you have done themselves.... talk is so darn cheap and there is way too much of that HERE. >:(
I had this myself when I published my macrolenses database. Got some many complaints, "this ain't right and that ain't", but guess what, nothing like this was there before and it has millions of hits now over the years and helped many, many macro shooters.
And it will be the same or better with your ebooks!!
Might want to check yourself. I have actually written a 500+ page ebook (in small-type, not large type), which is sold on Amazon.
I also have a database ... with 800,000 biological taxa on it ... which took 4 years to complete ... so I very much have a deep respect, empathy, and understanding of what it takes to write a book ... as well as to construct a database.
Not everyone who comments is an "armchair quarterback" ... and not all criticism is said with a lack of appreciation for the work of the author.
Some criticism is earnestly-designed to help the author make his already fine contribution better.
It is impossible for "one" person to see everything; the perspective of others is important.
One-liner praise, without actually reading the material, is only worth so much ...
-
I have the 28mm and will add it as I find time.
As for the Noct over the Otus. The Noct, like the APO-El Nikkor 105mm, has certain draw or "style" that is all its own. It makes it less of a general lens like the Otus 55 and more of a specialty lens, if I want that particular look. And it is fast. Because of its lack of correction, I have to be careful what I use it on. The Zeiss Otus 55mm I can use anytime for anything.
Thanks for the feedback, Michael, it is appreciated.
Check your PM.
-
Thank you very much for your excellent work, Michael !
Some thoughts about it :
I wonder why you repeat some technical information twice (Nikkor 1,4/85 AFD page 73 and 74) or why there is no comment on the page 172 over the Zeiss S-Planar, a pretty good repro 1:1 lens (see coinimaging) ?
I also wonder if the Componon-S 4/80(p185-186) can be an Apo ? There are some lenses from Schneider that are labelled apo-componon but this one not...and for sure the focal lenght is not 120mm.
(I think you replicated by mistake the infos of the Apo Digitar 120mm above...)
And I 've seen some errors like p98 Micro Nikkor 3,5/55 Auto and P-auto (corrected by R.Vink p99)
"There were two versions, one with a compensating diagram (diaphragm) (marked “P”) and one without (no “P” suffix)." It's the contrary : the compensating one is the non-P (just "auto") !
Also p.118, the lens shown is a 1:4/105 Micro Nikkor Ai (or maybe Ais), not the 105P (the belows lens) and it doesn't need an HS4 or HS8 hood, because it has a (long) integrated lenshood...(again corrected by Roland Vink)...
BUT all in all an excellent and complete work !
May I suggest to add some lenses for the next edition, like Apo-Componons, Apo-Rodagons (there is a good 4/105 Apo-Rodagon, pretty light and very good speed for an enlarger lens-other 105's are 1:5,6) and Apo Rodagon "D" (duplicating) 1:4/75 (1:1), 1:4,5/75 (2:1) and 5,6/120 (2:1) ppretty common and cheap but very good...
Again thank you very much for all these informations and testing !
-
Thank you very much for your excellent work, Michael !
Some thoughts about it :
I wonder why you repeat some technical information twice (Nikkor 1,4/85 AFD page 73 and 74) or why there is no comment on the page 172 over the Zeiss S-Planar, a pretty good repro 1:1 lens (see coinimaging) ?
I also wonder if the Componon-S 4/80(p185-186) can be an Apo ? There are some lenses from Schneider that are labelled apo-componon but this one not...and for sure the focal lenght is not 120mm.
(I think you replicated by mistake the infos of the Apo Digitar 120mm above...)
And I 've seen some errors like p98 Micro Nikkor 3,5/55 Auto and P-auto (corrected by R.Vink p99)
"There were two versions, one with a compensating diagram (diaphragm) (marked “P”) and one without (no “P” suffix)." It's the contrary : the compensating one is the non-P (just "auto") !
Also p.118, the lens shown is a 1:4/105 Micro Nikkor Ai (or maybe Ais), not the 105P (the belows lens) and it doesn't need an HS4 or HS8 hood, because it has a (long) integrated lenshood...(again corrected by Roland Vink)...
BUT all in all an excellent and complete work !
May I suggest to add some lenses for the next edition, like Apo-Componons, Apo-Rodagons (there is a good 4/105 Apo-Rodagon, pretty light and very good speed for an enlarger lens-other 105's are 1:5,6) and Apo Rodagon "D" (duplicating) 1:4/75 (1:1), 1:4,5/75 (2:1) and 5,6/120 (2:1) ppretty common and cheap but very good...
Again thank you very much for all these informations and testing !
I will try to correct what you point out as I find time. I have no intent to be complete. These are just lenses I have gotten my hands on. I do know how to be complete, howerver.... having created the largest music database in the world, the All-Music Guide, everything from 10" records on up, millions of data points, biographies, discographies, tracks, samples, etc. and etc. ... abeit with the help (at the time) of 150 full-time staff and 750 free-lance writers. Did the same thing with movies and have one of the two largest movie databases, complete with casts and characters. Also the most complete database on rock n' roll concert posters (donated to the Bentley Historical Library of the University of Michigan and elsewhere), and the largest library of astrology works, now part of the permanent collection at the University of Illinois. So, I am not afraid of tacking huge collections. This is just a rough look at lenses I have used.
-
I noticed toward the end, you compiled a bottom line:
First Tier Lenses
APO El Nikkor 105mm f/5.6
Voigtlander 125mm f/1.4 APO-Lanthar
Nikkor “O” CRT 55mm f/1.2
Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 APO
Zeis135mm f/2.0 APO Sonnar
Second Tier
Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4 APO
Zeiss Otus 28mm f/1.4 APO
Zeiss Milvus 35mm f/1.4 G
Nikkor Printing Nikkor 150mm APO f/2.8
Nikkor Printing Nikkor 105mm APO f/2.8
Nikkor Printing Nikkor 95mm APO f/2.8
Leica Macro Elmarit-R 60mm f/2/8
Leica Macro Elmarit-R 100mm f/2/8
Third Tier
NOCT Nikkor 58mm f/1.2
Nikkor 16mm Fisheye f/3.5
Voigtlander 180mm f/1.4 APO-Lanthar
Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 90mm f/3.5 SL
While reading each individual account is nice, a 'bottom line' is also valuable, which the above tiers represent.
I have been asking about a good 55mm f/1.2 lens, and your placement of the Nikkor 55mm, f/1.2 CRT "O" in your top tier intrigues me. (Mis-named Micro-Nikkor, but no biggie.)
Anyway, a search here shows a whole thread topic (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=3261.0) to this lens.
I already have lenses 2 and 5 in your Top Tier ... and will likely be adding #s 1 and 3 by spring.
Still debating whether to keep the Zeiss 135 Apo ... since I keep reaching passed it to grab the Voigtlander 125 f/2.5 nine times out of 10 ... so in the end I will probably be left to your Top 3 in my stable.
Your #s 4 and 5 will be replaced by my own, which are the 28mm AI-S and the 20mm AI-S, for their close-focus capability. They have this ability properly-oriented (as you exactly describe on p. 103), with the added bonus of reversing for more extreme macro in the field, as reflected in the image up top.
Thanks again.
-
I have been asking about a good 55mm f/1.2 lens, and your placement of the Nikkor 55mm, f/1.2 CRT "O" in your top tier intrigues me. (Mis-named Micro-Nikkor, but no biggie.)
Where did I misname something "Micro-Nikkor," page number please.
Also, what you are doing (as in field work) I did many years ago for decades, but age demands less of that, and also not interested in what I call "field-guide" photos at this time. I did plenty of that. In the last year and one-half I had major health problems that make it difficult for me to hike much. I have not mentioned it a lot, but here I am, just for clarification as to WHY I am not contemplating Mt. Everest these days.
I have no idea what you want to do with technical/bellows systems. Am I reading that right? You want to go into bellows tilt/shift work?
Aside from the CV-125, both of us are waiting for an Otus-level macro lens.
-
Might want to check yourself. I have actually written a 500+ page ebook (in small-type, not large type), which is sold on Amazon.
I also have a database ... with 800,000 biological taxa on it ... which took 4 years to complete ... so I very much have a deep respect, empathy, and understanding of what it takes to write a book ... as well as to construct a database.
Not everyone who comments is an "armchair quarterback" ... and not all criticism is said with a lack of appreciation for the work of the author.
Some criticism is earnestly-designed to help the author make his already fine contribution better.
It is impossible for "one" person to see everything; the perspective of others is important.
One-liner praise, without actually reading the material, is only worth so much ...
Agreed, not everyone is, which I haven't intended to say and of course valuable contributions help!
-
Where did I misname something "Micro-Nikkor," page number please.
P167 as well as P6 (the index page).
-
Agreed, not everyone is, which I haven't intended to say and of course valuable contributions help!
I guess I am not on your list also, having had a lot of fruitful discussions with Michael on the topic of combining Tilting with stacking from my experience in Table top and food work...
-
P167 as well as P6 (the index page).
Yes, thanks.
Again, no biggie ... but it helps to have many interested eyes in play :)
-
John (JKoerner007), I would add that the 12 blades of Nikkor-O 55/1.2 makes smoothly round shape at any aperture setting (evan at f1.4 or f2.0), unlike any 55/50mm f1.2/1.4 usual Nikkors, which is another reason for the pleasing bokeh of this industrial lens.
-
Agreed, not everyone is, which I haven't intended to say and of course valuable contributions help!
Agreed :)
-
Where did I misname something "Micro-Nikkor," page number please.
Also, what you are doing (as in field work) I did many years ago for decades, but age demands less of that, and also not interested in what I call "field-guide" photos at this time. I did plenty of that. In the last year and one-half I had major health problems that make it difficult for me to hike much. I have not mentioned it a lot, but here I am, just for clarification as to WHY I am not contemplating Mt. Everest these days.
I have no idea what you want to do with technical/bellows systems. Am I reading that right? You want to go into bellows tilt/shift work?
Aside from the CV-125, both of us are waiting for an Otus-level macro lens.
Akira beat me to it.
Regarding age, there's a time and a season for everything ... hope you're doing better.
Indeed ...
-
Thanks for all the errata. Much appreciated and I will wait a day or so and re-post the e-book, once the suggestions boil down.
Of course I have learned a lot from many on this forum, but I list the names of those who actually generally do (or did) review lenses, which very much helped me learn, no one more than Bjørn Rørslett, especially in his early web site, before NikonGear.com.
I trust you all have seen that site:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html
-
I trust you all have seen that site:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html
Of course! I don't know how many hours I had spent browsing through the site. :o :o :o
-
Thanks Michael, very thoughtful of you.
-
John (JKoerner007), I would add that the 12 blades of Nikkor-O 55/1.2 makes smoothly round shape at any aperture setting (evan at f1.4 or f2.0), unlike any 55/50mm f1.2/1.4 usual Nikkors, which is another reason for the pleasing bokeh of this industrial lens.
Thanks for the tip!
-
I've made the changes (I believe) that have been reported and re-posted the amended e-book, for those interested.
http://spiritgrooves.net/pdf/e-books/NEW%20LENS%20BOOK%20V5.pdf
-
Michael, thanks for quick revision! I downloaded the V4!
Here's the link for the latest revision:
http://spiritgrooves.net/pdf/e-books/NEW%20LENS%20BOOK%20V4.pdf
-
Thanks for the V4.1 version Michael! That was quick!!
-
Thanks for the V4.1 version Michael! That was quick!!
4.1?!
-
naturfotograf was where it all started. We all did profit from Bjørn!!!
-
4.1?!
updated version 4 = Version 4.1
-
updated version 4 = Version 4.1
Yes, I know, but I can find V4.0 only...
-
Yes, I know, but I can find V4.0 only...
There is no V4.1.... only V4.0
-
Yes, I know, but I can find V4.0 only...
Sorry, my German engineering/projectmanagement background had kicked in. Did not want to
cause confusion ... ;D
-
There is no V4.1.... only V4.0
Thank you, Michael, for the confirmation.
Sorry, my German engineering/projectmanagement background had kicked in. Did not want to
cause confusion ... ;D
No worries, Klaus!
-
Thank you so much for this reference. There is information about many lenses I drool over and a few I never heard of.
Dave Hartman
---
An observation regarding the 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P. It's a few notes not a correction or any such. This was my first "real lens" back in 1970. I bought it with a Nikkormat FTn.
The 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P was designed with 1:1 in mind though the lens did not achieve that alone. It was sold with the matched 27.5mm Nikon M2 tube. The M2 provided auto aperture but had no meter linkage so a con would be the lens and tube had to be used with stop-down metering.
In some ways I consider a lens like the 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P's lack of 1:1 in itself an advantage. There is no loss of focal length when focusing to 1:1 or like the AF 70-180/4.5-5.6D ED Micro-Nikkor at 1:0.75. The AF 70-180/4.5-5.6D ED is a real 180mm lens at infinity but more like a versatile 105mm at 0.75x.
The M2 tubes are probably mostly separated from their original lenses and the lenses are sold without though they were paired in the box when originally sold. Later, I'm not sure when there was a 27.5mm PK-3 tube that I think was sold separately. Maybe the PK-3 tube was designed for the K-type 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor. When I bought a 55/3.5 AI Micro-Nikkor the PK-13 tube was sold separately.
I loved the 55/3.5 though it was slow for an only lens. My previous camera were all Kodak "box" cameras like the Kodak Instamatic 100 that didn't focus at all and was only good to about 1.5m (5') which was very restrictive for me. I started two Nikon systems: one in 1970 and then another in 1978. I sold out of Nikon just before Nikon started advertising multi-coated lenses probably in the summer of 1976. I stared my new Nikon system with a Nikon F2As and a 55/3.5 AI Micro-Nikkor. My first AF lens was an AF 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor.
That's my 2 cents on the 55mm f3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P
Dave Hartman
-
Michael, thank you for the free book and for sharing your knowledge and experience here for our benefit!
-
Version 5 adds another 20 pages or so:
http://spiritgrooves.net/pdf/e-books/NEW%20LENS%20BOOK%20V5.pdf
-
Thanks and kudos for the update, Michael. Downloaded the new version as a read for less busy times :D
-
Thanks and kudos for the update, Michael. Downloaded the new version as a read for less busy times :D
I'm sure you don't need to read it since a lot of the information I learned from you. LOL.
-
It's seen through your eyes. Always a potential of seeing something in new light as it were.
-
Michael, thank you for the energetic update! Downloaded the v.5.0 for further references!
-
Version 5 adds another 20 pages or so:
http://spiritgrooves.net/pdf/e-books/NEW%20LENS%20BOOK%20V5.pdf
Here's a remark for your next v.6 update, just in case you plan to have a version 6...
I noticed that most of the data for Apo-Lanthar 90mm f:3.5 are from the 125 f:2.5 Apo-Lanthar instead:
Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 SL-II APO-Lanthar
Focal Length: 125mm Widest Aperture: f/2.5 Narrowest Aperture: 22
Aperture Blades: 9 Filter Size: 58mm
Hood: Include, small hood.
Close Focus Distance: 19.68 inches (50 centimeters), 12.6 inches (32 centimeters)
Reproduction Ratio: 1:3.5/1:1.8
Focus Throw: 270º
Weight: 11.29 ounces (320 grams)
What's marked in red is for the 125mm
Should read:
Voigtlaender 90mm f/3.5 SL-II APO-Lanthar
Focal Length: 90mm Widest Aperture: f/3.5 Narrowest Aperture: 22
Aperture Blades: 9 Filter Size: 52mm / 39 mm (on small hood)
Hood: Include, small hood.
Close Focus Distance: 19.68 inches (50 centimeters), 12.6 inches (32 centimeters) with close-up lens (included, 39 mm)
Reproduction Ratio: 1:3.5/1:1.8
Focus Throw: 260º
Weight: 11.29 ounces (320 grams)
The errors have been carried over from version 4. Not a big deal, but worthy noticing...
Ciao from Massimo
-
Here's a remark for your next v.6 update, just in case you plan to have a version 6...
I noticed that most of the data for Apo-Lanthar 90mm f:3.5 are from the 125 f:2.5 Apo-Lanthar instead:
Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 SL-II APO-Lanthar
Focal Length: 125mm Widest Aperture: f/2.5 Narrowest Aperture: 22
Aperture Blades: 9 Filter Size: 58mm
Hood: Include, small hood.
Close Focus Distance: 19.68 inches (50 centimeters), 12.6 inches (32 centimeters)
Reproduction Ratio: 1:3.5/1:1.8
Focus Throw: 270º
Weight: 11.29 ounces (320 grams)
What's marked in red is for the 125mm
Should read:
Voigtlaender 90mm f/3.5 SL-II APO-Lanthar
Focal Length: 90mm Widest Aperture: f/3.5 Narrowest Aperture: 22
Aperture Blades: 9 Filter Size: 52mm / 39 mm (on small hood)
Hood: Include, small hood.
Close Focus Distance: 19.68 inches (50 centimeters), 12.6 inches (32 centimeters)
Reproduction Ratio: 1:3.5/1:1.8
Focus Throw: 260º
Weight: 11.29 ounces (320 grams)
The errors have been carried over from version 4. Not a big deal, but worthy noticing...
Ciao from Massimo
Appreciated. I will fix that as I find time.