Lens baby

Anyone using these on the D3?

 

No, it is not a joke.

 

Nikon Pro magazine (08/07, page 50) recommends this!

 

Is this plastic tube (version 3) really worth $279?!

I don't have exact answers to your questions, but I do have the 2.0 version ($150). That price seemed about right, but the new version seems a little steep for a lens with a narrow range of uses. I know it has more to it, as far as how it's made.

 

Some people love these things, but I often forget that it's in my bag. I just don't see the world in "special effect mode" much.

I have a 2.0 that I use on my EOS-1D Mark III from time to time. I have played with the Version 3 but could not justify the price. I got the 2.0 for $100 with tax so I couldn't pass it up.

If Leica sold it, it'd be $1,279...

>If Leica sold it, it'd be $1,279...

 

:)

 

That price is *only* available when they are in a good mood. On regular days, it may be a little higher.

Vivek,

 

How did you get a NikonPro magazine? Are you an NPS member?

Eric: I'm with you on that. I had a 15mm Sigma fisheye for my old Canon set-up - it rarely got as much use as I thought it would. These days, practical lenses first.

I got the 3G at the '06 Photoexpo+ at the Javitz Center. There was a package deal with the

macro kit and the wide/tele kit. Think it was $350 for everything but not quite sure.

 

I used it for awhile with my D200 and created some interesting images. Then i got busy

with paid work and have had less time to do the fun things. But i recently put it in my

D300 bag and intend to use it when the moment arises.

 

If you're going to get a lensbaby, get the 3G with it's locking ability. Each version before it

lacked this important feature limiting it's use. Now you can point your focus and lock it,

enabling slower shutter speeds/longer exposures.

What I would like to see is a lens baby IV that used a premium level lens with a large coverage circle and good sharpness at the edges. It would yield some of the flexability that can only currently be had with a monorail camera. Of course, it would probably cost a bunch but it would make for a very useful lens.

Personally, I like the effect of true optical spherical aberration, compared with digital attempts to reproduce this look.

 

But I'm not sure I like it $279 worth!

 

At that price I'd be tempted to rig up something using a high quality closeup diopter and a bellows attachment. The way the rig could be adapted to critical macrophotography as well.

Vivek,

 

Have you ever tried the Lensbaby for UV? :)

Funny you should mention that, Akira. I'm thinking of using Flitz to polish off the coating from my Spiratone Portragon to see what effect it has on UV. I can already see some possibilities since the lens has a rather primitive optical design (one element) and appears to be single coated.

I have both an original LB and the 3G which I use on my D200. I really didn't like the

original because you can't go back and get the exact same image composition if you

didn't get the exposure correct. With the 3G you can because you can lock in the focus,

composition, etc. I think people tend to over bend when they first try a LB whereas gentle

bending tends to yield nicer images IMHO. I just finished an online course on Lensbabies

at PPSOP with Kathleen Clemons and it was excellent, really opening my eyes to the

possibilities. A LB really can add a new look to images once you get the feel for what it

can do. I'm not as skilled a photographer as many here at photo.net but I have attached

an example photo taken with a LB 3G on my D200.<div></div>

Thanks everyone for your responses. I guess, I have to buy a D3 before the G3 (lensbaby)!

<p>

I'll make do with my el cheapo bicycle tube with an F mount and a 28mm lens.:)

<p>

<left><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6764796-lg.jpg"></left>

<p>

Greetings to everyone!