gaeger
Joined: 16 Jan 2010
Posts: 722
Location: Brier, Wash.
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:27 am Post subject: Nikon vs. Minolta "normal" f1.4 lenses |
 |
|
gaeger wrote:
Hi there: I went down to the Tacoma cemetery today to clean up my grandparents' graves (and my great-grandparents' and my great-great grandparents'), and I took along my Nikon F2 and Minolta SRT202 with classic f1.4 lenses, Walgreens ISO 200 negative film. I tried to keep exposures roughly the same, but the cameras had different ideas about how much light there was! All frames had an unsharp mask applied in scanning. Two of the six frames, first and last, had saturation boosted; the others are just as the scanner presented them.
Not a scientific test -- slow shutter speeds and no tripod -- but fun. And it goes to show that in the real world, you can't tell the difference between lenses, even when there was quite a separation in original price and perceived quality.
_________________
"Here's to the wonder" -- Alan Boyle
Nikkor/Nikon 20, 24, 28, 35, 50, 55, 85, 105, 135, 180, 200, 300, 10-20, 18-35, 18-55, 28-50, 28-70, 24-85, 35-200, 50-300, 75-150, 80-200, 70-210, 70-300, 200-500
Minolta Rokkor 24, 28, 35, 45, 50, 58, 100, 135, 50-135, 300
My most interesting images | Full photostream
Last edited by gaeger on Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:01 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
