Nikon collection

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>Also, the 50mm f/1.2 has a cult like following. I have never used it, but keep that one too!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Too late - he already sold that one (while keeping the mediocre AF 50/1.8). Letting go of the 28-105 is also a mistake IMHO - it's not the greatest lens by any stretch, but quite versatile.<br>

<br /> Picking from Bjorn's (not so serious) best lens list certainly is one way of creating a collection - but it doesn't mean that the lenses acquired or kept because of it fit one's shooting style and habit.</p>

 

[chip_chipowski]

<blockquote>

<p>Picking from Bjorn's (not so serious) best lens list certainly is one way of creating a collection - but it doesn't mean that the lenses acquired or kept because of it fit one's shooting style and habit.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I suspect he would frown upon such a "tell me which ones are good" approach ;)</p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>HI Wouter, yes you are right about the 50mm 1.8, I did an hour test comparing with the 60mm 2.8 and game over for the 50mm. Fortunatelly I could sell that also here fast, and do not get too much, but it helpes me to buy the 50mm 1.8G as you requested. As for the 35mm I will keep it also, the 55mm micro is also very handy for macro, a guy here offered 60 bucks for it, but I think it's not too much money to get rid off a piece of history. <br>

After receive the 50mm 1.8G I will compare with the 60mm 2.8 and if it's not too much of difference I will sell the 60mm too.<br>

As for the 28mm that I have, I saw at Bjorn's site that he talks wonderfull about it, the only problem with this one is that it's to manual, manual focus, manual exposure, etc. But I have to stop beeing so lazy and work on what I have. I think it's only a problem of getting used to. <br>

1) AF NIKKOR 50MM 1:8D SOLD<br>

2) AF NIKKOR 28-105MM 1:3.5-4.5D THIS ONE I WILL KEEP IT FOR A WHILE, ITS VERY HANDY. <br>

4) AF MICRO NIKKOR 60MM 1:2.8 EXPLAINED ABOVE. <br>

6) NIKON AF NIKKOR 70-300MM 1:4-5.6G SELL<br>

8) NIKKOR 50MM 1:1.2 SOLD<br>

<br />9) MICRO NIKKOR-P AUTO 1:3.5 55MM KEEP IT <br>

10) ZOOM NIKKOR 100-300MM 1:5.6 SELL<br>

<br />11) ROKINON MIRROR LENS 500MM 1:6.3 DX SELL<br>

<br />12) NIKKOR 28MM F3.5THIS ONE I WILL KEEP IT ALSO FOR TRYING TO GETTING USED TO. </p>

<p> </p>

[chip_chipowski]

<p>murillo - I think you said you have a D600 so you can use the 28mm with auto-exposure. Simply go to your menu and find the entry for non-CPU lens data. Enter the focal length and maximum aperture. Now you have auto-exposure! If you are in "A" mode, you simply use the aperture ring to set aperture and the camera will automatically set a shutter speed. Unfortunately, you're still going to have to use manual focus. Good news: the manual focus rings on these Nikkors are a joy to use!</p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>Chip! I owe you one my friend! Thank you so much.</p>

<p>Problably I will end with this kit:<br>

1 - 17-35 mm f/2.8 ED-IF Nikkor<br />2 - 105 mm f/2.5 Nikkor<br />3 - 35 mm f/1.4 Nikkor<br />4 - AF NIKKOR 50MM 1:8G<br />5 - MICRO NIKKOR-P AUTO 1:3.5 55MM<br />6 - NIKKOR 28MM F3.5<br />And possibly the 28-105. </p>

<p> </p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>The manual focus 105, 35, and 55 should require the same procedure Chip describes for the 28/3.5. Or is that 28/3.5 the PC (tilt/shift) version: <a href="http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/ai2835pc.jpg">http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/ai2835pc.jp</a>g that doesn't have an automatic diaphragm and would need stop-down metering (AFAIK)?</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Or is the 28/3.5 a non-Ai lens - in which case, it should not be mounted on the D600 at all; there's the risk of damaging the Ai-follower tab.</p>

[chip_chipowski]

<p>Ah - Dieter makes a good point. The 28mm f/3.5 H was pre-Ai. OP's version may have been converted though.</p>

<p>murillo: you should post a photo of the lens if you need help determining whether it is non-Ai. You can take a look at the list of 28s on this helpful site: http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#28</p>

<p>Click on the various versions, and there should be photos for most of them. By the way, I can't vouch for the H version, which has different optics than mine :)</p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>Today I made some pics using 10 lenses, I did not tried to do a beautiful photo, just to do it without too much adjustment and tries.<br>

The link is shared to all of you at dropbox:<br>

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/unz6s0pzsb76gdc/AAC7kQLKg4tYwHQ0EZxTo-VCa?dl=0<br>

My conclusion is that the 60mm, the 50mm, the 35mm and the 28-105 still render the easier way too me. I'm not a professional photographer, I'm a hobbist, so to me, manual focus, manual exposure, etc, is not my way to go. Eventhough, I will keep the 35mm 1.4 because it's a different kind of animal as I noticed. The 105mm is also good, but to me a 85mm 1.2 with autofocus is much better. <br>

The 17-35mm is a great one, but as someone said, I think mr Wouter, it's too heavy, so maybe a sigma fisheye or a good 24mm prime one could do a better job. <br>

Does anybody advice any wide angle prime? or a good fisheye from sigma? </p>

 

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>The 17-35mm is a great one, ... , it's too heavy</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's not that heavy - if you get two primes within that range, then you carry the same amount of weight (if not more). Of course, if you don't need the f/2.8, there's always the AF-S 18-35/3.5-4.5 - it weighs about half what the 17-35 does. Of course, selling the 17-35 gets you a decent amount of money - but unless you aren't into wide-angles, I am certain you will regret selling it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>so maybe a sigma fisheye or a good 24mm prime</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sorry, but you are jumping all over the place. A fisheye is nice to have on occasion, but not easy to use and one can get tired of the effect rather quickly. Certainly not a substitute for a UWA prime or zoom. Sigma has a good 15mm f/2.8 fisheye, and there is the venerable Nikon 16/2.8 that costs a good deal more. <br>

<br /> In the last couple of years, Nikon has updated their FX primes lenses - there's now a whole bunch of f/1.8 AF-S primes: 20, 24, 28, 35, 50, and 85. They are all fine, with the 85 and particularly the 50 real bargains. Compared to these, the old AF/AF-D f/2.8 lenses: 20, 24, and 28 have only the advantages of being smaller and cheaper; optically, there's no comparison (especially when used wide open or close to it).</p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>Thx Dieter for your comments. Yes, 17-35 it's heavy, but man, what a piece of glass!</p>

[heimbrandt]

<p>I hope you are happy with your decisions. <em>I</em> would have kept the following:<br>

1) AF-S NIKKOR 17-35MM 1:2.8<br />3) AF MICRO NIKKOR 60MM 1:2.8<br />4) NIKKOR-P C AUTO A:2.5 105MM<br>

I would have gotten the 70-300 VR, which, paired with the 17-35 makes a travel friendly two lens setup. Another route would have been to keep only the 17-35 and get a 28-300 VR as a main lens and only bring the 17-35 for the wider shots. If you never use the the telephoto lenses, the 17-35 and the 24-120/4VR might be an interesting combination to consider. Who knows, perhaps the 24-120/4VR might be the only lens on your camera after a while.</p>

 

[studio460]

<p>I always recommend not selling old gear, if financially feasible. I originally regretted buying expensive DX-only glass back when I was just a crop-frame shooter, but now I'm glad I didn't sell. I've since gained a renewed interest in the newer Nikon DX bodies for their lightweight design and compact size. Also, I'm now outfitting a new APS-C digital cine system, so all of my DX lenses now work for that as well. If you ever develop an interest in filmmaking, old manual-focus Nikkors make great cine glass.</p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>If you are serious about decluttering, these are the ones to keep:</p>

<p>3) AF-S NIKKOR 17-35MM 1:2.8<br />4) AF MICRO NIKKOR 60MM 1:2.8<br />6) NIKON AF NIKKOR 70-300MM 1:4-5.6G<br /> <br /> Happy spring cleaning. Be thankful there are still buyers for old things. I am trying to do mine - not fast enough.</p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>HI folks and Mary!<br />This thread is getting me crazy! kidding... I love all your opinions. 
<br />As I mentioned, I sold the 50mm f1.2 and recently my 50mm f1.8. With the money I bought the Mr. Wouter recommendation, the 50mm 1.8G for $177, and also a AF 20mm f2.8 from Japan for $300 and I still have $150! 
<br />Last night I took some photos testing the 105mm f2.5 and the 60mm f2.8, but the 105mm is getting me confused, I can not use the metering like the 35mm f1.4, I did all the non-cpu kind of thing t the d600 but it did not worked. 
<br />My 17-35mm f2.8 was almost dead when I was at Florence, Italy, I dropped it to the floor and the uv filter broke, the lens are still intact but the auto focus is damaged. I noticed at my photos that I usually take at 17-20mm range, so the 20mm will suit me and avoid me to go with this heavy lense on a trip. I will keep it until I die. Thi 17-35 is just amazing, specially with a PL bw filter.<br />Other ones I will pass soon, and sorry for telling this folks, as all of you are experts and professionals and not a humble amateur like me. 
<br />So finally, I will keep: 
<br />20mm f2.8 AF 
35mm f1.4
50mm f1.8g
60mm f2.8 macro
17-35mm f2.8
28-105mm f3.5

<br />All the others I will try to sell or put on the basement and forget, I'm still 41, maybe when I'm 60 I will have other job for them. 
<br />
Thanks for all your enlightfull advices. God bless you all. 
<br />Sorry my poor english. 
<br />This is avideo that I made on my last trip, using some nikon lensen and the unforgetable D300S, I feel sad when I remember that I sold this beatiful animal, what a great DX camera, D300S. It fells a lot better and easier than the D600, IMHO. 
<br />

[Mary Doo]

<blockquote>

<p>This is avideo that I made on my last trip, using some nikon lensen and the unforgetable D300S, I feel sad when I remember that I sold this beatiful animal, what a great DX camera, D300S. It fells a lot better and easier than the D600, IMHO. 


</blockquote>

<p>Very nice video Murillo. Nostalgic for me, as I joined a cruise to the Mediterranean Sea with Dr. Charles Stanley's group (about 15 years ago), tracing Apostle Paul's missionary journeys. It was one of the unforgettable tours. When I went up to the Acropolis to shoot the panorama of Greece one early morning, I was pleasantly surprised to see Dr. Stanley already there, in a beige photographer's vest. Later I learned he was an avid photographer. Among countless ancient remnants, the excavations of Ephesus were the most remarkable to me. Turkish coastal areas were enjoyable. Santorini was serene... I shot negative film then. - Changed over to slide film after becoming a more serious photographer upon joining a photo club and learned more about photography and gear. If I remember correctly, I used the D70 with Nikon 24-120mm and 70-300mm. Can't remember if there was a wide-angle.</p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>Hi Mary! Thank you for your beautiful report. This trip must have been an wonderfull one. Where can 'i see your photos on that particular one? This year I will go again to another cruise at Royal Caribbean, starts on Barcelona and go to France and Italy, but when it´s finished I will go for my first time to London! So I just start to make my lens bag lighter and more efficient. You shoot negative? Huau! This is a must! I have a nice Leica M3 with a Ernst Leitz 50mm 2.8 lens and the Leica meter, it´s a piece of art! </p>

[Mary Doo]

<blockquote>

<p>Thank you for your beautiful report. This trip must have been an wonderfull one. Where can 'i see your photos on that particular one?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Haha, now I have NO idea where they are. I did put up some shots on a website and now, 15 years and several computers and many external drives afterwards with house-moving in between, I don't see them around anymore. Actually I would like to find the negatives sometime - they are most likely in some box in the basement. And I did have the better shots in a 4x6 album somewhere (in those "old" days when I kept albums ;-). Now, with so many other slide and digital images I need to organize as well, don't think this photo project is high priority. </p>

<p>By the way, I no longer shoot film. Digital is more convenient and much more practical. Just to be sure before giving up film, I carried both film and digital cameras to two photo trips (China and Vietnam). It was cumbersome, as I had to carry many film cartridges in a transparent bag and had to ask not to have them x-rayed at the airport. Then only to find that I hardly ever took the film camera out of the bag. That's when I knew I no longer wished to shoot film. I am not too sentimental with equipment and media.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This year I will go again to another cruise at Royal Caribbean, starts on Barcelona and go to France and Italy, but when it´s finished I will go for my first time to London!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's great. Have a happy time!</p>

 

[murillomoreira]

<p>Thx Mary!<br>

Today I awoke from the madness I was of selling my 105mm 2.5! What a great glass! Just a couple of hours and I totally felt in love with this lens. The sharpness, character, colour, bokeh, detail is in other hemisphere, this is one I will keep until I die. Sorry for taking so long to percieve what was abviously told by inumerous folks here. One more lesson for the day, <strong>the 105mm f2.5 is the one!</strong></p>

[Mary Doo]

<blockquote>

<p>I totally felt in love with this lens. The sharpness, character, colour, bokeh, detail is in other hemisphere, this is one I will keep until I die... <strong>the 105mm f2.5 is the one!</strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Glad you found the love of you life! ;-) Don't just keep it forever, make some great shots with it!</p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>I still have a question about this lovely 105. The mounter aperture ring is not communicating with the D600, when I manually change the aperture, nothing happens with the exposure. I did the non-cpu config 105mm f2.5, but does not work. I noticed that the D600 aperture ring does stays out of the way, so I need to rotate the lens and also the little tinny D600 ring to make it work. What did I miss? I will post some photos here. With the 35mm f1.4 is working great, the D600 ring moves with the lens correctly.</p><div></div>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>What did I miss?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The fact that your 105 is non-Ai and shouldn't be mounted on the D600 at all. I assume, your 28 and the 55 Micro are also non-Ai - and they shouldn't be mounted either. </p>

<p>You were asked above already to provide images of those lenses so we can determine if they are non-Ai or have been Ai'ed. Your D600 can't use non-Ai lenses, and mounting them risks damaging the Ai-follower tab (that bit above the camera bayonet that engaged the Ai-ridge on the lens and rotates when the aperture ring is moved).</p>

<p> </p>

[murillomoreira]

<p>Sad to hear that Dieter, yes you are right about the images, I will take them and post. Thank you for your help my friend. One more to sell.</p>

 

[murillomoreira]

<p>Here it is Dieter.<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/18199404&size=lg<br>

Cheers</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Yep, the 28, 55, and 105 are non-Ai. The 35 is Ai and the 100-300 AiS.<br>

<br /> That 28mm copy is from their first series, produces between 1960 and 1967. The 55 from 1969 - 1971. And the 105 from 1973-1975. And the 35 from 1977-1981.<br>

<br /> Non-Ai lenses can be AI'ed - only you can decide if it is worth the cost to have it done, or the effort to do it yourself.</p>