Lenses

[BTM_Pix]

34 minutes ago, mercer said:

Did they make a 200mm non-ai?

Yeah, they did a 200mm f4.

They also did a 180mm f2.8 if you want to trade reach (and price) for speed.

 

[BTM_Pix]

42 minutes ago, mercer said:

@kye is correct, I also have the 105mm 2.5 from the same vintage.

Oh well, I often forget what lenses I've got squirrelled away so I struggle to remember the full extent of other fetishist's collections 😉

 

[noone]

This site has not been updated for years but it is still useful regards Nikon lenses. 

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html

[mercer]

8 hours ago, JordanWright said:

I have been on a bit of a wide angle kick recently, my sigma 18-35 is almost exclusively staying on the wide end of the range.

i want to get a small and light prime for when I wanna be a little more nimble. Recently purchased the Zeiss Ze 25 F2 which is a phenomenal lens but not wide enough for the perspective I’m liking at the moment. Looking for something closer to the 16-21mm range, preferably manual focus but I can live without. Open to recommendations? 

I was going to suggest the Samyang 16mm as well. I briefly used my friend's and it has a nice mix of a vintage/modern look in its rendering.

Also the Tokina 11-16mm has always been a popular wide option if you don't mind a zoom.

Otherwise, Voigtlander has the 20mm 3.5, if speed isn't an issue. It will also closely match your Zeiss and Voigtlander also makes the highly regarded 40mm f/2 and 58mm 1.4 if you ever want to build out a set.

https://dustinabbott.net/2016/04/voigtlander-color-skopar-20mm-f3-5-sl-ii-review/

 

[mercer]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

Oh well, I often forget what lenses I've got squirrelled away so I struggle to remember the full extent of other fetishist's collections 😉

 

I have to watch myself here, I have the non-ai lenses, a couple 50mm f/2, a series e 50mm 1.8, and two ai-s lenses... the 35mm 1.4 and the 85mm f/2. I bought the 85mm to go with my Kowa 16D, but I haven't tested the set up yet. Oh yeah, I also have the non-ai 45mm 2.8 that I have yet to test, but that's kind of a weird lens.

Before I started using these non-ai lenses, I was thinking about buying new ai-s lenses or as new as I can get based on their discontinue date.

But now I'm not so sure. I'm considering keeping the non-ai lenses and picking up a couple of the AF-D lenses. How are the focus rings on the D lenses compared to the ai-s? I assume they aren't as good, but are they horrible? I've been eyeballing the 20-35mm 2.8 after seeing some great frames on Flickr. My dream lens is the 28mm 1.4 D but the price is just a bit perverse for my humble needs. 

[mercer]

4 hours ago, noone said:

I love the old MF Tokina 60-120 2.8 I got last year for cheap on Ebay.

The only thing about is the minimum focus distance but that is solved with a helicoid adapter.

It looks and feels as if it was a day old (probably been sitting in its case for the last thirty years or so).   

Zoom function (push pull) is a little stiff to get moving but easy after that though since i pretty much use it at 120 nothing really.      I just need portrait victims to use it still as it is a bit slow for me to use and peoples attention span has greatly reduced over the years.

A lovely young model has just moved here so maybe i will see if I can hire her to use all my portrait type lenses in one sitting but this would be the first I use maybe.

I love Tokina lenses. I have the 24-40mm 2.8 that I've always loved. I should bring that out the next time.

I could really use a long zoom. @BTM_Pix has recommended the Nikon Series E 75-150mm that's intriguing.

[noone]

10 minutes ago, mercer said:

I love Tokina lenses. I have the 24-40mm 2.8 that I've always loved. I should bring that out the next time.

I could really use a long zoom. @BTM_Pix has recommended the Nikon Series E 75-150mm that's intriguing.

I have just sent the young model a PM and am really hopeful of shooting her with the Tokina 60-120 2.8 and my old 300 2.8 and Sigma 150 2.8 APO macro and Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 in one session.   MAYBE the old Canon FD 85 1.2 L but not sure since the focus throw is very loose and I am not sure what she charges yet (or if she will want to).

This old Tokina was made as a portrait lens which was probably a bit unusual for a zoom at the time all those years ago (adverts from then say portraits and also sports but it is a bit short for most sports). 

  I posted about it in the lens forum but have hardly used it since then due to lack of victims.

[BTM_Pix]

12 minutes ago, mercer said:

How are the focus rings on the D lenses compared to the ai-s? I assume they aren't as good, but are they horrible? I've been eyeballing the 20-35mm 2.8 after seeing some great frames on Flickr. My dream lens is the 28mm 1.4 D but the price is just a bit perverse for my humble needs. 

Some of the cheap ones aren't great but the 20-35mm f2.8 was a premium lens in its day and according to this review it is smooth.

http://cschu.redirectme.net/mirrored/bythom/www.bythom.com/2035lens.htm

8 minutes ago, mercer said:

I could really use a long zoom. @BTM_Pix has recommended the Nikon Series E 75-150mm that's intriguing.

For the £40-50 I see them selling for they definitely are worth a go.

With it being push/pull, some examples of it can be a bit too loose so you have to be careful with them when trying to focus in the mid range that you don't alter the focal length.

I have a fondness for it because it was my first "long" Nikkor lens back in the mists of time when I was a kid and it was a brand new product !

[mercer]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

Some of the cheap ones aren't great but the 20-35mm f2.8 was a premium lens in its day and according to this review it is smooth.

Thanks for the link. I may keep an eye open for one. I had one of the cheaper 28-70mm 3.5-4.5 D zooms and it was pretty okay optically, but I didn't love the focus ring. It did have 9 blades, so that helped with my overall impression of the lens.

I feel like the AF-D lenses have a slightly more modern rendering than the ai-s lenses and although I've been dying to get a copy of the 35mm f/2 D, I read you can only change the lens to MF on the camera body and since I don't own a Nikon camera, I don't want to get stuck.

I have the Nikon BMPCC speedbooster for my Micro, so I am trying to keep most of my lenses usable for both cameras. Of course, I'm contemplating another camera purchase, solely for B&W and I may go native mount with that camera.

Anyway, any new shots with your FP/7artisans 28mm 1.4?

[mercer]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

With it being push/pull, some examples of it can be a bit too loose so you have to be careful with them when trying to focus in the mid range that you don't alter the focal length.

I think the push/pull aspect of the lens is what's keeping me from buying one. On the other hand, one of my first lenses was the Series E 36-72mm and I kinda liked the ability to zoom and focus at the same time... but that was a long time ago and my priorities have changed I guess. 

[mercer]

1 hour ago, noone said:

I have just sent the young model a PM and am really hopeful of shooting her with the Tokina 60-120 2.8 and my old 300 2.8 and Sigma 150 2.8 APO macro and Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 in one session.   MAYBE the old Canon FD 85 1.2 L but not sure since the focus throw is very loose and I am not sure what she charges yet (or if she will want to).

This old Tokina was made as a portrait lens which was probably a bit unusual for a zoom at the time all those years ago (adverts from then say portraits and also sports but it is a bit short for most sports). 

  I posted about it in the lens forum but have hardly used it since then due to lack of victims.

Haha... 'lack of victims."

Have you hired a lot of models in the past? For my upcoming short films, mostly horror/thriller I was thinking about going the model route, instead of an actress, since some of the female roles don't have any lines of dialogue. 

[noone]

15 minutes ago, mercer said:

Haha... 'lack of victims."

Have you hired a lot of models in the past? For my upcoming short films, mostly horror/thriller I was thinking about going the model route, instead of an actress, since some of the female roles don't have any lines of dialogue. 

No, first time trying.     It is simply that most of the lenses are manual focus and people just do not have the patience they used to.     Imagine how todays instagram/phone people would go  back when they used to bolt you in place while they took long exposures with large format gear and sheet film !

 

[BTM_Pix]

29 minutes ago, mercer said:

Anyway, any new shots with your FP/7artisans 28mm 1.4?

No, I've fired a similar number of shots in the past 10 months as the Swiss navy have.

[kye]

8 hours ago, noone said:

I think it would cost too much to make and buy and be too complex for an ultra wide- short telephoto and maybe not a huge market for such (yet).    

 Mind you, the Fuji and Sony lenses should not need to be THAT much bigger or more expensive if they made them FF. 

My ultra wide angle needs are met by my all time favourite lens (Canon 17mm tilt shift).    I could never afford to replace it if I lost it or broke it.    

My trinity is a bit more flexible (Canon 17 TS,  Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 and third varies with situation for now though if i ever get one would be something like a Sigma 105 1.4).

I guess primes and 2x zooms are some of the best lenses available.

I have been using my ancient Canon EF 20-35 2.8 L a little bit lately (I normally prefer primes).

I'm not convinced - the 24-70/2.8 will be as good a lens that Canon / Nikon / Sony etc can make, but they all managed to extend the zoom range by lowering the aperture by a stop.

I cannot believe that the same trade-off isn't possible at a slightly lower focal length.

[JordanWright]

6 hours ago, mercer said:

I was going to suggest the Samyang 16mm as well. I briefly used my friend's and it has a nice mix of a vintage/modern look in its rendering.

Also the Tokina 11-16mm has always been a popular wide option if you don't mind a zoom.

Otherwise, Voigtlander has the 20mm 3.5, if speed isn't an issue. It will also closely match your Zeiss and Voigtlander also makes the highly regarded 40mm f/2 and 58mm 1.4 if you ever want to build out a set.

https://dustinabbott.net/2016/04/voigtlander-color-skopar-20mm-f3-5-sl-ii-review/

 

Going to look into the 11-16, seen a few on eBay super cheap - almost worth a punt for the price alone!

Yeah ive been looking for a few of the Voigts EF lenses for a while, they seem to be absolute murder to get in the UK, I suppose when people buy them they don't sell them? 

[mercer]

7 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

Going to look into the 11-16, seen a few on eBay super cheap - almost worth a punt for the price alone!

Yeah ive been looking for a few of the Voigts EF lenses for a while, they seem to be absolute murder to get in the UK, I suppose when people buy them they don't sell them? 

I spent a couple weeks going through the lens section on the red user forum and the 11-16mm seemed to be a pretty popular wide option when the Zeiss ZF/ZE lenses were very popular with the Red crowd. Whatever that means, I guess.

There's also the older Sigma options... the 10-20mm or the 20mm 1.8.

The Voigtlanders are hard to come by on this side of the Atlantic as well. And when they are for sale, the seller usually wants almost what they go for new. 

[noone]

3 hours ago, kye said:

I'm not convinced - the 24-70/2.8 will be as good a lens that Canon / Nikon / Sony etc can make, but they all managed to extend the zoom range by lowering the aperture by a stop.

I cannot believe that the same trade-off isn't possible at a slightly lower focal length.

Yeah, that those two APSC lenses exist says to me it SHOULD be possible since many APSC lenses do cover FF at least in part.     

The flip side would be that they ARE only equivalent to 24mm on FF and therefore not really ultra wide angle and i suspect it is making it from ultra wide to telephoto that might be the issue (ease to build for the price they would charge and the market need).   Maybe the different elements needed and the corrections required would just make it a headache and maybe not compatible?

Same thing with small sensor super zoom cameras, the lenses start at very small focal lengths but not really ultra wide (I think there were a couple of compact cameras that had zooms starting at around 19/20mm equivalent at most).

[JordanWright]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

I spent a couple weeks going through the lens section on the red user forum and the 11-16mm seemed to be a pretty popular wide option when the Zeiss ZF/ZE lenses were very popular with the Red crowd. Whatever that means, I guess.

There's also the older Sigma options... the 10-20mm or the 20mm 1.8.

The Voigtlanders are hard to come by on this side of the Atlantic as well. And when they are for sale, the seller usually wants almost what they go for new. 

Retail price would be a catch, haven't seen a Voigt 28mm in years... 

Also looking at the 11-20 that looks like its a nifty walk around lens for S35 although its a bit pricer than the 11-16. 

On a side note its great to see the lens topic getting some love!

[mercer]

1 hour ago, JordanWright said:

Retail price would be a catch, haven't seen a Voigt 28mm in years... 

Also looking at the 11-20 that looks like its a nifty walk around lens for S35 although its a bit pricer than the 11-16. 

On a side note its great to see the lens topic getting some love!

At a half a pound heavier and half an inch longer, than the 11-16mm, you can gain a stop with the Tokina 14-20mm f/2.

[mercer]

@JordanWright but I guess with some of these zooms you're just getting close to your Sigma. To keep it simple, you could look at the Canon 20mm 2.8, or the Tokina 17mm 3.5. I had the older RMC version and I quite liked it.  I never used the newer version, but I assume they're similar. If I was in your position, I'd probably go with the Canon. But I'm a huge fan of the 28mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.4, so I may be a bit bias.