CoryAmmerman Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 <p>Nice post JDM. I have an early 105/2.5 like yours, but mine had the factory AI kit installed when I got it from KEH (it was listed on the web site as "AI'd" and I expected a hack job). It's fantastically sharp. The only thing I don't like about it is that in some cases, objects just outside the plane of focus take on a weird double-refraction kind of look. See attached photo.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 <p>As for Old Abe, I confess that the Nikkor shot is an old one, and probably was stopped down more, but the Spiratone was wide open, but not so well focused at about 1/25.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 <p>I 'fess up. The "portraits" were a last minute thought as I posted and realized I hadn't tried out the lenses for their common use for portraits. I dug up the Nikkor image from an old file, since I'd already taken off the adapter. Then I took a hurried picture with the Spiratone -- clearly much too hurried-- and posted the result above.</p> <p>Anyhow, here is the Spiratone 105mm f/2.5 lens at f/11 - from the test above by MP its best spot. On tripod with cable release.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 <p>One more thing I meant to mention: The Spiratone has its aperture blades designed to yield round "bokeh' regardless of the aperture setting. The Nikkor aperture blades take on a hexagonal form, except at full aperture, of course.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_lockerbie Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 <p>One lens that does deserve it's reputation. Always interesting to see a comparison like this even though, as you claim, it's not a scientific test. Those scientific tests do bore the nuts off me I must admit.<br> I also have the Sonnar and Gauss versions, but oddly enough have never tried a comparison, something for a rainy day. The only thing is that when I reach for a 105 I usually take the older Sonnar type.<br> I've always wanted the original 105mm for the Nikon rangefinders but they are just too darn expensive these days! Does anyone know if the RF version has the round aperture blades? The simpler hexagonal blades are to cater for the automatic diaphragm operation in the reflex lenses.<br> Keep up the good work JDM, I'm really getting to like that water tower!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 <p>Well, the water tower seems to "grow on you" - or someone. ;)</p> <p>Thanks, everyone.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 <p>Just in case you'd like to see more of the polyspheroid water tower (and who wouldn't?) go to a new folder in my portfolio where I have posted some thumbnail images. :)<br> http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1054103</p> 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