joel_blacher

It is definitely binding to something. When it is free, the DOF preview works and when it is bound, the aperture won't stop down. I guess I'll give B&W a holler. What would you think about powdered graphite as a possible lube...maybe It's wiser to just leave it alone and send it back?

I ordered a used PN-11 from B&H and it arrived with a problem with

the aperture control tab. It moves back and forth but it at times it

moves freely and others it binds and takes a little force to move. Is

there a way to lubricate this part easily or should I just send it on

back to B&H?

I certainly appreciate all of the input. I'll go with the Gitzo as planned. I do agree that the focusing rail is almost necessary to do serious macro work unless you don't mind endless micro-postion adjustments of your tripod legs. I use a PG-2 stage and a spiratone rail.

I am going to purchase another tripod specifically for macro work. I

am leaning toward the Gitzo Explorer, but recently have begun to

consider the Benbo and Uni-loc series. Would anyone have an opinion

based upon working knowledge of this equipment? The cameras are

Nikons, the smallest will be an FE-2 and the largest, an F5. The

biggest lenses on this rig will be Nikkor a 300mm/f4 w/ tubes and

Sigma 180mm HSM.

What head would you recommend for this? I currently have a Bogen

488rc2, 3030, 3025, 3009, and a 3162QR. Would you use one of these

or is there another I should consider.

I have some of the the pro Sigmas (105macro, 180macroHSM, 70-200HSM, 100-300HSM) and they seem to be as well built as the Nikkors that I have (I use them in the field in all types of conditions), the HSM's focus very fast, and optically they are wonderful (I shoot wildlife, macro, and landscapes). I have many Nikkors to compare to, so this isn't based upon one or two lenses. I do shoot with a Tokina 400/5.6 also, and I do think that it is a very nice lens too. I can't comment on other Tokinas, but I have heard good things about them. For wildlife I think the faster focus would be of benefit to you. For portraits, that obviously won't matter most of the time. I don't think you would be disappointed with either choice.

Does anyone know if the old right angle finder (not the DR-3 or DR-4)

will fit the newer bodies (F5, N90s, N80) or the F3 or FE-2? This is

the one that just says "NIKON" and "Japan" on it.

Well, I decided to purchase the Sigma 180mm imported, from Delta International (I read good things about them at Rsellerratings and on Photo.net). Thank you for all of your valuable insight!

Thanks for the info. Arnab. The only third party lenses I have are the Sigma 105macro, 70-200HSM and the 100-300HSM (they are top performers optically and have held up in some hideous field conditions for me). Its good to hear that the 180 is on par. The auction dealer tells me that it is an "import w/ a Sigma worldwide warranty." Would you be wary of this for any reason?

Thank you all for your replies! You have made many interesting points (which was what I was hoping for). I have a micro60mm and a Sigma 105mm macro, so this new lens will be primarily for the shy critters. I shoot from a tripod w/ a cable 99.9% of the time, so speed isn't a concern for me. I have the 300/f4 and hadn't considered using tubes with it. Is that a good combo for anyone? How about the 180EDIF with tubes. I know Shaw uses(used?) the AIS version. I could buy this lens and a set of Kenko AF-D tubes for about $50 more than the Sigma 180. One more thing; if the Sigma is an import, would that put anyone off?

I am trying to decide whether to buy a Nikkor 70-180mm macro or a

Sigma 180mm macro. I have a real affinity for the Sigma, but I am

wondering just how good the Nikkor is and whether I'd rather have

true 1:1 or the flexibility of the zoom? I guess the Nikkor 200mm

micro is possible too, but it is very steep in price. I know you

can't tell me what I want, I'm just curious about all of your

different thoughts on the subject, so I can make a decison. I have

plenty of other lenses, so versatility isn't an issue...just macro

performance.

The Tamron is an outstanding lens to be certain, and I would also take a serious look at the Sigma EX 105/2.8. It is easily as good as the Tamron and Nikkor in terms of image quality, and it it well built. I've shot with all three and I think have come to prefer the Sigma's images overall (it may conceivably be purely compositional and coincidental). Honestly though, if I took the shots from all three and you tried to pick out which came from which lens, I would be surprised if many if any could do it.

Hi again, I can't post a pic, but the converter is in very nice cond. The gasket seems to be in good shape as well. It is a black band of rubber that is concave in the side facing the element and convex on the outside. It doesn't appear to be mishapen or oxidized. When I mate the TC to the lens (either lens), the parts go together, but with a "rubbery" resisitance and the gasket gets pushed out of position (toward the front lens element). Again, without the gasket, there is a solid fit and communication between the bodies and the lens. I have the Kenko 1.4 and a tc-200 as well and they fit and I notice that that these TC's do not have gaskets. I very much appreciate all of your responses thus far. Just to reiterate, this is a TC-14b.

Thanks for your responses everyone. The lenses are Nikkors, the 80-200 is the non-D/one-touch, and the gasket just seems to make the fit too tight to connect w/o forcing. I will look at it again and see if I can make any other determinations.

I recently purchased a tc-14b teleconverter for use on a 300/f4AF

lens and an 80-200/2.8AF. There is a rubber gasket around the

element that connects to the lens. This seems to be preventing me

from making the attachment. When I remove the gasket, I can connect

the two and the connection seems solid. Does that gasket need to be

in place for proper operation? Is there some trick that I'm not

aware of to putting these combos together? I tried both lenses and

the tightness exists for both. I haven't tried to force them

together. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks so much in advance.

I think you will find (as has been discussed here and elsewhere over and over again), both of these systems consist of high performance, professional quality gear. None of this stuff is going to disappoint you, so as the wise have suggested, learn the art and pick what suits you best. Hold the bodies, look though the veiwfinders, try the lenses for feel, and flip some switches. Most of the prominent nature photographers seem to prefer Nikon. The sports people seem to like Canon. There are many exceptions in both camps. As far as these extensive systems go; what are you really going to use in reality? If you usually shoot on a tripod, VR/IS may not be a factor for you. If you shoot macro and lanscapes, you may want interchangable viewfinders. Do you plan on using tilt.shift lenses? How many do you think you'll really need? More than two? Go with Canon. Shoot wildlife and landscapes in changing light? The F5's RBG metering and dynamic autofocus may be what you need. If you want the convenience of not carrying a battery pack around, use the Canons or try the F-100. Consider for field work that the interface will introduce a "weakness" to the environment compared to a one piece body (the trade for lighter weight and flexibility). One comment on a previous post: to say that the F5 is not sealed against the elements goes against everything I've ever heard or read from anyone, amateur or professional. Even people who don't like the camera itself say that the only thing they do like is that is is built like a tank and is impervious to weather.

So, there's my opinion for what it is worth. Hope someone finds it helpful somewhere.

Hi,

I just bought am 18-35mm on Ebay and face the possibility that the

sellar, although he included the HB-23 hood in the description and

the picture, may be a deadbeat and isn't sending it (he won't answer

my emails and it wasn't in the box with the lens).

Anyway, I tried B&H and Adorama and they are out of stock. I am

leaving for Glacier Nat'l Park in two weeks and I was wondering if a

generic rubber hood w/ a 77mm thread would work w/out vinetting at

the wider focal length settings? Any thoughts about this? Thank you

all.

Hi,

I just purchased a tc-200 ai teleconverter and I'm not sure if I

made a good decision. The camera bodies are:

FG-20, FE2, F2, F3, N80, N90s.

My lenses are an assortment of MF (NAI, AI, AIS) and AF (D & non-D).I

shoot almost exlusively in manual mode with spot metering

(occasionally aperture priority).

Did I need a tc-201 or is the tc-200 adaquate if I'm not using shutter

priority or automatic exposure?

I have read the nikonlinks website stuff, along with the other

posts from the archives from this site, which usually set me straight,

but I have to admit that I'm feeling pretty stupid at this point...cuz

I'm not gettin' it.

Can anyone break it down for me? Thanks so much.

I have 7 Nikon bodies including the FG-20, FE-2, F2, F3, F5, N80, and N90s. The statement that the N90s is good for a paperweight but not photography is insipid (to be kind). It is the only body that I can use for high mag. macro without a mirror lock-up that won't blur from camera shake, and it is built like a tank. The program mode is useless, the AF is loud (but fast), and some people have had trouble w/ the rubber coating (I have not), but the camera is top notch. You can also get one for $300-400 used. That's a pro camera body for under $500! My opinion anyway.

Hello,

I am looking to add a body to my meager

"collection," which currently includes an F2, FG-20,

and N80. I shoot wildlife, scenics, and macro almost

exclusively. I keep 2 loaded with color and 1 B&W and

I'd like to expand my options. I can't afford an F5,

so for now I've been looking at various information

sources (excellent websites and books) to choose a

high quality MF body. I'd like mirror lock-up and a

flash synch suitable for macro fill flash in daylight

along with rugged build and accurate metering. I

realize that I may not be able to have all of these,

but that'd be ultimate. The various FA's, FM's, and

F3's look like viable candidates along with the FG

(which is short on features but seems like an

excellent camera). What I'd be interested in is your

collective opinion based upon experience, and

addtionally, any other models you feel that I should

look into. These cameras are all available used for

reasonable prices, so what do you think?.

Thanks so much in advance,

-Joel