allancobb Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 Pensacola Beach, using a 1947 Zeiss Ikonta C 521/2 (6x9), 105mm f/4.5 Novar-Anastigmat, 400TMY-2, HC-110B 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranssu1 Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 From Laajasalo, Helsinki. Yashica FX-3, Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f1.7, Fomapan 200, Ilfotec DD-X. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcelRomviel Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 Canon P 50 mm f2.8 Retropan 320 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_drawbridge Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 A wet weekend, but in desperation I managed to shoot a length of FP4 between showers, using a Nikon FE2 and a Sigma 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 lens. I arrived home to find the creek had overflowed and flooded the drive... Not a great weekend, and very unseasonal. The film was developed in PMK Pyro and scanned on an Epson V700 using Silverfast SE software. Lilies December Rain Fantail 69's 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted December 3, 2018 Author Share Posted December 3, 2018 That 28-200 really delivers high quality images. Many years back when these lenses first became available, some users judged these lenses at wide open aperture and extremes of focal length which made for less than optimal performance. Of course this is true of many shorter range zooms as well, but as optical engineering improved zooms overall (even superzooms) got much better. One of the things I like about your posts, Rick, is your images go far beyond the typical test shots that lens reviewers usually do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_drawbridge Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 (edited) Mike Gammill said:That 28-200 really delivers high quality images Thanks, Mike, I do tend to push these lenses to the limit... If you compare the pic of the bird, taken at 200mm and the one of the wet decking taken at 28mm, you can see the lens is pretty good at both focal lengths. I've not had much experience with zoom lenses in this range of focal lengths, but I tried this Sigma against the equivalent Tamron, and decided that I'd settle on the Sigma. The biggest drawback, apart from the relatively small maximum apertures, is the barrel/pincushion distortions at various focal length. While this can be remedied to a large degree with PP it crops the image, and the stretch/contraction has an effect on the apparent sharpness. Still, they're very handy lenses, and at the price I guess one can't expect optical perfection. Edited December 3, 2018 by rick_drawbridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now