lindsay_robb

I know that many times small scratches on lenses do not affect

quality, so I'm not sure about coating problems.

 

If a 16mm has a smattering of marks/scratches but just on the

coating, will this affect the quality significantly? I realise that

it will affect flare and such, but any other problems? Significant

softening at all?

 

Any thoughts? And no, I can't test the lens I'm afraid.

 

Thanks!

Thanks for the tip. I have contacted Nikon (through a photo company though) and they said they aren't available. Which makes me think that the AF filters for sale on ebay and at Adorama are not the same as the AIS ones.

Does anyone if there is any place online on the planet where I can

get a set of the back filters to fit the Nikon 16mm f2.8 AIS lens?

 

Thanks!

Thanks for everyone's responses.

 

Thanks for your table Dave. I do Customer Support at a the country's largest camera store, so I do know about photography actually. When I said I was trying to decide between the two lenses it wasn't because I didn't know how they should be used. I'm just new to Nikon and wanted some opinions from people who have owned them.

 

I think I've ruled out the 200mm micro. I have access to a crapload of used equipment at bargain basement prices through work, so I think I may just buy both, try them out and then return one. And hope I don't like them both!! ACK!

 

Thanks!

Actually I have the 50mm 1.8 and spent the last week playing with a 1.4. I took it back because I didn't like the small depth of field I was getting at the smallest aperture. This is something I hadn't noticed before I bought the lens.

 

This is why I may be able to stretch my finances to the 105mm micro if there was a good reason.

 

Another question I have now: Is there a manual Nikon AIS 200mm F4.0 that is NOT a micro lens? I have found a couple of very cheap, good condition ones online but they do not say 'Micro' or even Macro. Did or does Nikon make a non-Micro version?

Trying to decide between the two manual micros. I have always done

still life macro but might consider trying some insect stuff if I had

the lens for it. Trying to decide if the extra money for the 105mm

is justified.

 

Any opinions on the QUALITY comparison between the two macros?

 

And an aside question, how does the quality of the 55mm macro compare

to the 50mm F1.8 when used as a regular lens, i.e. infinity?

 

Thanks for any help!

I've just recently switched all my camera gear to a FE2. I had already been given a 50mm F1.8 and thought I might change it for something brighter.

 

The 50mm F1.2 is simply just soft. If you want it for portraits then maybe you would like this effect.

 

I toyed with a 50mm F1.4 for a week. The extra weight and the fact that my closest focusing point using the hyperfocal scale at the smallest aperture was WAY bigger than the F1.8 made me trade it back and keep my F1.8. But this is because I use my gear for mainly travel and landscape.

 

My advice is that it depends on what you want it for. I have heard of people that love the 105mm for its sharpness. But also people that bought one and then had to keep a filter on it all the time because it was too sharp for portraits!

 

Why not find a shop that sells secondhand lenses with an easy returns policy if you simply don't like the lens?

Hi! Thanks for all the suggestions! This is exactly the kind of forum I wanted!

 

After HOURS of research I finally settled on an FE2. I got a beautiful one for about 70 sterling. I was almost going to bite the bullet and go for an FM3A but decided it wasn't worth the extra 120 quid. Now I can spend some of the money I saved from my EOS kit sale on a micro lens.

 

Thanks everyone!

Off the track, but just a point here. Actually Glen, I work in a camera store and have access to warehouse prices. Most people do not realise where all their cash goes for a camera.

 

The camera stores usually only make at the most, 10% profit. Then out of that they have to pay wages, taxes, utility bills, property tax, etc etc

 

The camera manufacturers on the other hand make at LEAST 100% on almost every camera they sell. And while they also have to pay wages etc., these are expenses in east asia and much cheaper than in the west.

 

So on an FM3A you might pay ?500 in the UK. The shop would make approx. ?50 profit and Nikon would have made approx. ?225 profit.

 

Just a bit of info in case anyone was interested. I know that most people in the shop that are always pushing for a lower price do not believe me when I tell them I can't do a lower price or else we would lose money. They always give me that "yeah, tell me another one" look!

Yes, I realise that Richard. I didn't say I wanted a camera that would rewind the film for me. That's stupid.

 

I said I didn't want to advance the film myself.

 

I am excited about trying this preview trick tomorrow and it may solve all my problems!

WOW! Crap! I left my camera at work and can't try it!

 

Thanks for that tip!! I will try it tomorrow.

Thanks for all the suggestions!

 

I don't really see why having manual focus but autowind is so unusual. If it was that weird of a request then why do Nikon do separate winders for almost all their manual focus cameras?

 

To answer someone's question, I am getting rid of the EOS gear for two reasons really. I don't like how expensive the lenses are since I almost always focus manually. I am switching to Nikon prime lenses because they can beat Canon prime lenses hands down. The Nikon manual focus lenses are some of the best lenses ever made. I don't like the size of the EOS cameras or the plasticky feel and I don't want the weight of upgrading to a better EOS body.

 

Hmm. I think that's about it! :)

 

By the way, I manually focus most of the time because I do a lot of macro photography.

 

Anyway, at least everyone seems to agree that I can't have everything I want!

 

Thanks for all the help!

I have decided to replace my EOS kit with a manual Nikon kit. I am a

bit new to Nikon but have now figured out the different lens mounts.

 

I have been given an F-301 and 2 AIS lenses but I have to change the

camera body, as I have need of depth of field preview. My perfect

camera would I think be exactly like the F-301 but with this depth of

field preview! I like the aperture priority and I even like the

program option (I don't use it much but I like the option). I might

be willing to give up the program mode. And I like that the camera

winds the film on. I'm not keen on having to wind it on myself but I

guess I would get into the habit quickly. I don't really want to make

the camera bigger/bulkier by adding a winder. Oh, and I would need

very occassional flash, so a hot shoe would be nice (I have noticed

that F2A's do not use flash easily).

 

So...any suggestions? Someone has suggested an FE2, which I have

played with a bit but it does not have program mode and I would have

to manually wind on. Someone else suggested an FM2 but this doesn't

even appear to have aperture priority. I think the FE2 is winning at

the moment but I would like to know if there might possibly be

a 'perfect' match out there for what I am looking for?

Thanks BW. That does make me feel a bit better. The link does not work btw because it needs a password. But thanks for trying!

I have previously been an EOS and Pentax 645 user and have never

needed an external flash on my cameras. However, I will be going to

Barcelona soon and trying to take indoor shots. I don't really like

my EOS and the flash sync speed on the 645 is 1/60, too slow to hand

hold.

 

Recently, I picked up a Nikon F-301, 50mm F1.8 and an 135mm F2.8 (E

series) for absolutely nothing. I have taken a couple of test shots

with B&W film and the exposure seems spot on and the lenses pretty

crisp. Also, a friend seemed convinced that the camera and lenses

were really good quality.

 

I have two questions then...

 

Firstly, can anyone assure me of the quality of these lenses? I do

not have the time or money to seek out others before I leave. And I

need to convince myself that I won't be losing massive amounts of

quality by leaving the MF at home (besides film size obviously).

 

Secondly, the only thing I could find online about a dedicated flash

for the camera was that the sync speed was 1/125 and the SB-15 was

the recommended flash. I have seen a couple of these on ebay for

pretty cheap but they won't be in time for my trip. I want something

very small and very cheap. Could I use any other Nikon flash and

still be dedicated? What about a cheap Jessops Nikon flash?

 

When I find a dedicated flash, is the idea that I simply set the

shutter speed at 1/125, adjust the aperture to the camera's meter and

the camera and flash do the rest?

Hmm. Well, everyone here seems to agree that there is no problem with the Pentax 645 manual camera body not having mirror lock up. Maybe these people have never tried any macros with the camera? Just a guess.

 

Because I have owned the camera for over a year now and there is definitely a noticable *slap* of the mirror. You can even feel it in your hands! This was a problem when i started using it for macros. My tripod is already pretty heavy but I find I have to weight it down as much as possible.

 

I will admit that I never considered it a problem when doing regular travel and landscape photography but Pentax certainly can't say it doesn't have significant mirror slap!

Here's an interesting website for those, like myself, who swear that there is still a noticable quality difference between digital and film:

 

http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.1.html

 

Essentially he is saying that to get the same tonal and colour qualities of good film (Velvia) you would need a 16MP camera to equal 35mm film and a 48MP camera to equal 645.

 

I work in a camera store and have tried all manner of digital cameras and lenses, including the new 20D. Even bought a D60 and used it for a couple of months myself. I thought I was absolutely losing my mind because when I looked at the prints they just didn't have the same detail. And I'm no shrinking violet when it comes to digital manipulation either, so that wasn't the problem.

 

So I sold the D60, bought a medium format film scanner and now my 645 and my G5 (digital for those touristy shots is great!) go everywhere.

 

I think one of the biggest contributors to everyone believing that digital is just as good as film, has to do with the fact that many younger (18-40 years) people have never owned a GOOD film camera and lenses and/or never seen a good B&W print from a darkroom by someone who really knows what they are doing. Or never had a look at the kind of chromogenic print that can be achieved from a slide.

 

It does worry me that I get so many people in the shop who come in and say they are a "serious photographer" who does some professional work. They often come in asking for a telezoom lens and when I question them about whether they need a fast lens and mention f-stops, I get a blank stare until they get up the nerve to ask me what I'm talking about.

 

I agree that there are many instances and conditions when digital is much more convenient than film. But film will not disappear. Just like large format did not disappear. And lots of people still choose to paint even though a camera would be faster.

Well, I don't know about the US but the date from Epson for the UK is 25 November. Usually the UK release dates are later or similar to the US.

 

And according to the Epson website, the scanner does have ICE.

I really wasn't offended or anything about everyone's previous responses. It was just that every head that was mentioned was WAY out of my budget when I looked it up.

 

The second set of responses was very helpful and has put things into perspective. After some consultation of fellow photographers, all of them picked up my Gitzo head and disagreed that it was heavy or bulky. So for the time being I will keep the head and put up with the weight.

 

Thanks for everyone's comments and help!

Thanks everyone for your answers but I have been looking up some of these heads and I have some MAJOR problems with all of them.

 

Problem 1 - PRICE!!

 

Problem 2 - SIZE & WEIGHT!!

 

I need something costing less than say 100 pounds (much less would be preferred). I really don't care if my head can take 17 pounds. I will only be putting about 5 pounds worth of camera on it ever. It's just too big and too heavy.

 

I may look like a fool walking around with an expensive tripod and a cheap head on it but it's a risk I am willing to take! :)

 

So any more suggestions in a cheaper price range?

 

Oh, and I know that Manfrotto make a video sliding plate but I thought the 454 was specifically for micro focusing and copying?

I have very recently become the incredibly happy owner of a Gitzo

G1327 tripod, G1377M head and a Gitzo bag for next to nothing (hee

hee!).

 

I love the tripod but the head is just WAY too much! I use a little

Velbon right now with pan and tilt but I get so annoyed with the head

that I have been wanting to go with a ball head for a while. Whilst

the G1377M looks great, it weighs more than the tripod!

 

I want something smaller (shorter) and lighter but something that can

take a light weight 645 medium format.

 

About 70% of my photography is still life macro and I would like to

get a Manfrotto sliding plate eventually, so the head would have to

be compatible with this accessory. I also do some architectural and

landscape.

 

Previously, the only head I had considered was the Uniloc 30, mainly

due to budget contraints. When I mentioned this to the person I

purchased the Gitzo from they gave me a very typical 'photo snobbery'

look and snort. Does anyone have experience with this head and is

there really anything wrong with it?

 

The other heads I have looked at online today are the Manfrotto 484,

486, a used 168, and the new 322 with grip. I know that all of these

could take my equipment but I don't want to overdo it.

 

HELP!

 

PS. Anyone in Europe want to buy a G1377M head?

This is a 5M point & shoot shape camera. 3x optical, 4x digital

 

takes SD cards, maximum 512MB. 1.5 inch screen.

 

it has a dial on top, like an SLR, rather than having to use the menu.

 

aperture and shutter priority. lithium battery.

 

it seems like a great camera. Anyone had any experience with this

camera yet?

Stefan

 

i asked and they say the spec is white or at least light in colour.

 

thank you for all your responses and wish me luck!

Depends on what you want the photos for.

 

If you are a professional photographer, then your kit sounds great, although I'd be tempted to agree with Jos about the 70-200 lens. As a pro you will be willing to put the extra time and effort into using a longer lens.

 

If you are just a really keen amateur who gets occassional photos published, like myself, then think about leaving the long lens at home or trying out a 28-200mm superzoom. They are fantastic for travel.

 

That's my 2 cents.

Wow! Everyone's answers have been great! Thanks!

 

I actually like getting as close as possible, so I was looking for something less than 1:1. I also read about how reversing a lens can distort at the edges, so I'm a bit concerned about that now.

 

I already have a No.2 extension tube but it just doesn't get close enough for me (I think it was 120mm frame width). Reversing the 45mm lens would give me a frame width of only 30mm.

 

I am looking for something more portable than the 120mm macro lens so I will have to have a think on this.

 

Thanks to everyone!