ian_swarbrick

It looks like the Rokinon 16mm cine lens for Nikon might not have electronic contacts. Then I won`t need to decouple the lens from the body. But I`m double-checking with BandH first

Because the aperture does not reliably enough return to the same position in each of the hundred+ shots of a time lapse on my D5100. Some makes are better than others. For example my Panasonic GH4 manages it without flicker. But it`s not been my experience with the D5100.

Thanks for the replies.

To summarize I suppose there are two issues making this a little difficult for time lapse: 1) as you say, lenses with electronic information will cause my D5100 to insist on f22 on the barrel but 2) even if the lens doesn`t have electronic information, like my e-series 50mm, I still have to uncouple the lens from the body to prevent the lens opening to openmost aperture for ease of viewing. Yes, I can wedge bits of paper here and there but it`s not a very flexible solution. I may go shopping after all...

Hi Ben

Yes, none of my Nikon film bodies ever had this problem. But I`ve never owned anything newer than the D5100 in the NIkon line, hence the question.

All of my Nikon lenses are from film days and so full frame. It seems a shame not to use them for time lapse because of this limitation on my D5100. I`d look into buying a second-hand D610, or similar as long as it didn`t throw this spanner in the works.

My D5100 tells me to "lock lens aperture ring at minimum aperture" when the lens is not at minimum aperture. All well and good, but to fix the lens at one (more open) aperture for time lapse (the fixing avoids aperture flicker caused by slight irregularities on opening and closing multiple times) I have to uncouple the lens from the body. This brings the risk of the lens crashing to the floor in a moment of carelessness.

Which leads me to my question: which Nikon camera bodies DON`T behave this way ie require that the lens be at f22/32? Any of the full frame bodies?

I also have some Rokinon/Samyang cine lenses which I`d prefer not to risk being victims to gravity.

Thanks

Ian

I`ve read that shooting time lapse in live view locks the aperture. Is that correct?

I can`t use the D5100`s internal intervalometer when in live view (greyed out) but I can fire it with an external intervalometer when in live view.

It`s obviously more draining on the battery but it`d be worth it to me.

Perhaps I have a lemon Richard but my copy is soft.

I think I may buy the 55-200mm and jam the aperture at about f8 with a piece of plastic. I don`t use the camera for anything but time lapse anyway.

I`m looking for a short tele (60-200, zoom or prime) to fit my D5100, so aps-c, for time lapse work. My Canon cameras have the neat lens twist trick where you hold down the depth of field preview lever while untwisting the lens. It locks the set aperture , which eliminates aperture flicker in time lapse. The few modern (af) Nikon lenses I have owned have all stopped down to a useless f22 when untwisting.

Are there any lenses for Nikon aps-c in the range I mentioned which don`t have this behaviour? (I`d consider third party lenses).

My old 28-105mm (film) works but is very soft.

I don`t want to work at open aperture btw.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Ian

<p>I`ve jut bought a Kipon tilt adaptor from Adorama, nikon to micro four-thirds. It didn`t come with any instructions but it`s use seemed straightforward - choose your angle of tilt and then screw the middle silver ring towards the outer tilting part to tighten it.<br /> This worked until I affixed the lens to my GH4. Turning the silver ring in said fashion then unscrewed both middle and outer parts from the inner part (that attached to the camera body). Now, after removing the stranded inner ring from the camera body, I can screw the inner ring back onto the rest of the adaptor but I cannot tighten the outer ring to keep the lens fixed in one place. Instead the middle and front elements unscrew themselves from the inner element - again. Is it defective or is there a technique for tightening the unit which I`m missing? Thanks</p>

<p>Thank you for your reply Bob.</p>

<p>I should have been more specific - it is the N version I have. For landscape photography I was never impressed with it though. I later compared it to the Sigma 90mm macro. The latter blew it out of the water, but alas no tilt-shift for my liked mountain-flower combination.</p>

<p>I forgot to add - right now I have the whole unit on a Canon 6D, a Nikon D5100 and eventually maybe a Panasonic GH4.</p>

<p>I have the Zörk multi-focus system: http://www.zoerk.com/pages/p_mfs.htm<br>

and with a Rodagon 105mm enlarging lens which has a m39 mount. The system itself has nice workable tilt but the lens is horrible outdoors. Prone to flare, rubbish resolution and contrast.<br>

I also own some large format lenses above the necessary 80mm to reach infinity - Nikkor 90mm f8, Fujinons 240mm f9 and 400mm f8. I no longer do LF work, but rather than sell these lenses I wonder whether they could be made to fit the Zörk system with its m39 mount?<br>

Might any other lens types work, like here: <a title="http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/systems/c_14/p_2.html" href="http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/systems/c_14/p_2.html">http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/systems/c_14/p_2.html </a>?<br>

Thanks<br>

Ian</p>

If you`re good enough you`ll get away with it. Nay, more than that. If you`re good enough, some or indeed many people will want to hear about the thoughts and motivations of the person behind the camera leading up to and at the time of the photograph. I could never have cared less whether Galen Rowell wrote to magnify his own ego or whether it was primarily a genuine need to educate others. I`m grateful that he did in either case. I learnt a lot, and was at the same time fascinated.

It might be overkill for your needs, all depending on your budget, but the non plus ultra of slide/digital presentation software, in mainland Europe at least, is made by an Austrian company, Stumpfl, namely their Platinum software. http://stumpfl.com/common/index.php?load=products.php&language=english&select=Products&auth=&session=1171185127&cat=sc&folder=103

Expensive but a totally versatile system for any purpose

For the first 3 answers - thanks

 

Daniel - no

 

Andre - uh?

It`s clicked.

1,3,5,7,9,11.

Duh..

but perhaps a useful warning to others who might do the same though..

I have just shot my first 3 rolls of 120 film on a Badger m2 camera

with shen hao roll film back. I wound the film on until no. 1

appeared in the window marked for 612 format. And so on .... through

to no 6.

The result? - the first half of each roll completely unexposed, the

second half all with overlapping (and therefore doubly exposed)

photos. Can anyone with experience with this back tell me what

markings to stop at in the window? Thanks for urgently needed help.

An ultimate test for an autofocus system might be birds in flight. I

am only familiar with how 35mm still cameras perform in this respect.

Can anyone provide thoughts on, in particular, how the 3 chip miniDV

cameras compare in AF accuracy/speed?

This may be such a basic question that I am almost embarrassed to ask

and perhaps shows that there`s somehing important I haven`t yet

grasped,but I`ve read in a Photoshop tutorial book: "If you scan a

file for output to a digital printer, you ought to scan at the same

dpi as the resolution of the printer you intend to use." I guess

this to be 300dpi in many cases.

If this statement is to be taken literally, why are scans of several

thousand dpi resolution necessary? And why then can`t one get a

perfectly sharp scan at only 300dpi for any size of print?

Never had such fast replies-thank you!

 

You mentioned 6 x 18" paper, Justin. Could you mention 1 or 2 brand names I could follow up?

I wish to sell prints of my Fuji 617 slides. Assuming I can find a

suitable way to digitalise these, I want to output to my Canon S9000

printer. Is there a readily-available quality paper in 3:1 format

that will allow this? Thanks for help

Ian Swarbrick

I hear good reports about the Canon XM2, but that the autofocus is

nonetheless a bit sluggish. Has anyone experience with this camera in

demanding autofocus situations-in particular the following of birds

in flight?

I have a lot of medium format slides which I have cut to 34.8 x 34.8mm

superslide format to fit 35mm projectors. In other words the longer

dimension of a 35mm slide times two. I`m looking for a suitable film

scanner that will scan this dimension of picture. Ideally I would

stick to normal 35mm scanners rather than go to the expense of a

medium format scanner. I`ve never used a 35mm film scanner before, so

don`t know if this possible. Any ideas folks?

Many of the nature documentaries I see on TV these days contain

sequences of fast-moving clouds,people, opening flower buds etc.

Presumably the camera is set up for hours and then somehow the

sequence is compressed. This is something I would love to emulate. It

presents nature artificially ,sure, but with great atmospheric

effect. Does anybody know how it`s done?

I wish to shoot video and then project it with a video beamer. As the

resolution and overall quality of video beamers is still not great,

is it worth the extra cost of a 3 chip camcorder over a 1 chip one,

or does the lower resolution of the video beamer negate any benefit

of a better camcorder?