View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Doc Sharptail
Joined: 23 Nov 2020 Posts: 1213 Location: Winnipeg Canada
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2021 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doc Sharptail wrote:
Very interesting discussion.
I have (I think) 2 of the lenses discussed here-
The Series 1 Kino, and the Nikkor AI 80-200 f4.
The older f 4.5 version of the Nikkor has better glass I think.
I suspect my Nikkor to be the first variant.
Both are big and heavy lenses that would benefit from a tripod mount-
especially the Series 1.
I have used both with film and noticed the lack of improvement with stopping down.
I can just see myself trying macro shots with the big Series 1 handheld
I still tend to shy away from using zoom lenses.
I do need to be fair to them, and give them a chance on the tripod.
-D.S. _________________
D-810, F2, FTN.
35mm f2 O.C. nikkor
50 f2 H nikkor, 50 f 1.4 AI-s, 135 f3.5 Q,
50 f2 K nikkor 2x, 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 35-105 3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 200mm f4 Micro A/I, partial list.
"Ain't no half-way" -S.R.V.
"Oh Yeah... Alright" -Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4073 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2021 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Doc Sharptail wrote: |
Very interesting discussion.
I have (I think) 2 of the lenses discussed here-
The Series 1 Kino, and the Nikkor AI 80-200 f4.
The older f 4.5 version of the Nikkor has better glass I think.
|
Maybe. I just have two samples of the second computation, but none of the first, so I can't compare ... The later AiS Nikkor 4/80-200mm (which was extremely expensive when new) looks slightly better than the Ai 4.5/80-200mm shown above (infinity as well - the AiS 4/80-200mm is said to be best at closer distances though).
Doc Sharptail wrote: |
I still tend to shy away from using zoom lenses.
I do need to be fair to them, and give them a chance on the tripod.
|
Lenses such as the huge and heavy Zeiss CY 3.5/70-210mm certainly are a pain to use - compared to tiny (and equally excellent) primes such as the Minolta MD 2/85mm.
Mid-range (at f=135mm) both the Zeiss CY 4/80-200mm as well as the Canon nFD 4/80-200mm L are way better than the corresponding CY Sonnar 2.8/135mm or the nFD 2.8/135mm (but heavier and slower of course).
At f=200mm only the very best vintage MF zooms (ie Zeiss 4/80-200mm and Canon nFD 80-200mm L) are comparable to the best 4/200mm lenses such as the Minolta MC/MD 4/200mm (1st computation), Canon nFD 4/200mm IF or Nikkor AiS 4/200mm. The best vintage MF in this range certainly are the Leica Apo 3.4/180mm and the ED Nikkor AiS 2.8/180mm, and they of course have much less CAs than even the Zeiss 4/80-200mm. The Canon FD is comparable in CAs to the ED Nikkor 2.8/180mm, but needs f8 or f11 to get really sharp corners.
Hope that gives an idea about what these good zooms can / cannot, compared to the best conteporary primes.
S
PS later Leica R lenses such as the 2/90 APO or 2.8/180 APO are not included here, as they are much later calculations from the 1990s _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2536
|
Posted: Sat Jul 17, 2021 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
Metal ring is earlier than rubber. And better looking imho. _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4073 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Sat Jul 17, 2021 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
D1N0 wrote: |
Metal ring is earlier than rubber. |
Thanks for the confirmation - I thought so, but wasn't sure.
D1N0 wrote: |
And better looking imho. |
Completely agree _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PBFACTS
Joined: 24 Dec 2008 Posts: 569
|
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2021 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
PBFACTS wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
- the AiS 4/80-200mm is said to be best at closer distances though.
|
NORMAL : The AiS 4/80-200mm was designed as a macro lens (as the vivitar s1 90/190 flat field released two years before) and sold as an all purpose lens without insisting on their macro capability (Perhaps the small sales of the viv s1 decided the nikon marketing to forget the macro capability ??) _________________ OM USER .. I KEEP/USE:
Om2 sp + T32 (grip/filter/zoom) + T8
+ Zuiko 16mm 3.5 / 55mm 1.2 / 65-200 4/ x1.4
+ Sigma 8mm 4.0 / 14mm 3.5 / 18-35 3.5-4.5
+ Tamron 35/105 2.8
+Tokina 150/500 5.6
+ Kiron 105/2.8 macro 1:1
+ Vivitar S1 90/180 falst field macro
+ 2x Doubler HR7
>>I SELL: OM10 + OM4ti
+ i sell: OM Md1 + Md 2 + Grip PowerPack + charger
+ i sell: OM Zuiko 24mm 2.8 / 28mm 3.5 / 50mm 1.8 / 50mm 1.4 / 50mm 3.5 macro / 35-70 3.6 / 35-105 3.5-4.5 / 75-150 4 / 500mm / 2xA
+ i sell: OM Kiron 28/105 3.2-4.5 / 1.5 converter
+ i sell: OM Makinon reflex 5.6/300 + Spector reflex (makinon) 500mm
+ i sell: OM Macro panagor extender 1:1
+ i sell: OM Sigma 16mm 2.8 fisheye (last version) / 21-35 3.5-4.2 ot/ 28-70 2.8 /1000mm mirror
+ i sell: Tamron 28-70 3.5-4.5 / 28-80 sp 3.5-4.2 / 28-135 sp 4-4.5 / /28-200 3.5 / 35-135 3..5-4.5 / 90mm sp macro 1:1 2.8
+ i sell: OM Soligor 2x doubler / x3 converte
+ i sell: Soligor FisheEye x0.15
+ i sell: OM Tokina 28/135 4-4.6 / 70/210 3.5 (= vivitar S1 v2)
+ i sell: OM Vivitar 28-70 3.5-4.8 / 28-90 s1 2.8-3.5 / 35-70 2.8-3.8 / 55/2.8 Macro 1:1 (komine) / 70-150 3.8 ot (kiron) / 75-150 ot 3.8 (tokina + 2x matched)
+ i sell : OM cosina 100-500 5.6/8 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rosario
Joined: 30 Apr 2020 Posts: 1 Location: central FL
|
Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:21 pm Post subject: I just won this one on auction. |
|
|
rosario wrote:
_________________ 35mm to micro 4/3
Tamron |
|
Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2536
|
Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:08 pm Post subject: Re: I just won this one on auction. |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
That looks like one _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|