conrad_smith

<p>The F2 is my all-time favorite Nikon body (I've used it since 1972 and still do with Tri-X & Velvia), but the Df is a close second. It's been my primary camera under all light conditions since it was introduced. Never any problems, easy to use with MF lenses, great for backpacking. Better ergonomics than D-700 or D7100, which I also own. Handheld image by moonlight (1/15 second, 24mm F/1.4, ISO 50,000) holds detail well in a 16" x 24" print and looks less grainy that similar enlargement from Tri-X at ISO 800 developed in Acufine.</p>

<p>The early versions of the rangefinder Nikon 50/1.4 were soft wide open but very sharp a few stops down. I once made a 40" by 60" enlargement from a Panatomic-X negative shot in 1961 with the 50/1.4 (on an SP, not an S2) at F/11. It held up even at close viewing distance -- nobody would believe the original negative could be less than 4" x 5". I regret selling that SP and its three lenses (the others were 35/1.8 & 85/2). The F2 SLR was almost but not quite as satisfying. My current Df makes better images than the rangefinder Nikons but is twice as heavy and half the fun.</p>

<p>I've owned both and have been much happier with the 500mm F/4 P. It's sharper with and without Nikon 1.4X & 2X teleconverters on older digital SLR bodies and has less chromatic aberration. In my experience, both lenses were excellent on film bodies. I have not tried the 400/3.5 on the newer SLR bodies that correct for CA, so I cannot speak to that issue.<br>

I've used many Nikon lenses with cheap ($20) and expensive ($200) adapters on Canon bodies without ever having a problem, so I don't think that will be an issue.</p>

 

<p>I've had many dozens of good experiences buying used Nikon photo gear from KEH, B&H and Adorama. My auction site purchases of Nikon gear from sellers with positive approval ratings of 99.6 % or better have been quite satisfactory.<br>

Beware of auction site sellers with lower than 99% positive feedback or sellers that do not allow unconditional returns for at least a few days after the merchandise is delivered. <br>

Condition ratings on the auction site can be inflated compared to those from KEH, B&H and Adorama -- "minty" condition, for example, can be worse than KEH "bargain" condition.<br>

Some honest sellers on the auction site inadvertently misrepresent photo gear because they do not know very much about photography. <br>

Much of the photo gear I've seen listed on the auction is overpriced compared to KEH, B&H and Adorama.</p>

<p>My sample is a recently-acquired Questar 700mm F/8. The doughnut-shaped bokeh isn't an issue for the kinds of landscapes I shoot, but the low contrast takes some getting used to. Herbert Keppler called this the sharpest mirror lens ever tested by Modern Photography, but critical focus is more difficult than with other long lenses I've used.</p>

<p>The Spiratone ad brought back fond memories -- I always enjoyed looking through those ads for unusual photo gear. My Spiratone camera bag from 50 years ago continues to serve me well.</p>

<p>The foam ground glass seating often needs replacement on Bronica S and EC series cameras. If focus is off, deteriorated foam is the likely culprit. Koh's Camera (and probably others) can correct this problem.</p>

<p>You could count on Essex to repair classic photo gear nobody else would touch. My Bronica long-lens focusing unit and Minolta Autocord would be unusable without Essex. I hope reports of the company's death are premature. Thanks, Jeff, for bringing this up.</p>

<p>You could count on Essex to repair classic photo gear nobody else would touch. My Bronica long-lens focusing unit and Minolta Autocord would be unusable without Essex. I hope reports of the company's death are premature. Thanks, Jeff, for bringing this up.</p>

<p>Hi, Vanessa.<br>

I had the same problem with a Nikon-refurbished D700. Nikon's west coast service facility in El Segundo, CA eliminated the bands under terms of the 90-day warranty, suggesting that banding is a problem that Nikon knows how to eliminate. </p>

 

<p>Started shooting Kodachrome in the 1950s when its ISO sensitivity was 10. Kept shooting with Kodachrome 25, 64 and 200 until about 2000 when I discovered that I liked landscape color rendition better with Velvia. Now I mostly shoot digital, but still use Velvia for medium format photography and occasionally for 35mm.<br>

My father's Kodachrome slides from the 1930s still have all of their original color -- I wish E6 emulsions had that kind of stability.</p>

 

<p>Wish I hadn't sold my Super 23 to Midwest Photo a couple of decades ago. Having learned photography using an early Leica with collapsible Elmar lens and no exposure meter, I found the Mamiya easy to use but quite heavy for backpacking and poorly sealed against dust. The tilts allowed by the camera back with the lens retracted were a wonderful feature and the 6x9 roll film adapter replicated my favorite 2x3 format 35mm film format. That said, it was easy to forget to remove the lens cap when the viewfinder gave you no clue of the problem.</p>

<p>Nicely done, John. Your results will be a role model for my first-ever IR shots -- in my case, with a Galvin 6 x 9 and Horseman 6 x 9 back on three rolls of Efke 120 IR that are on their way from B&H. </p>

<p>The helicoids for S2, S2A, EC and EC-TL Bronicas are often sold separately, for some reason. KEH has them occasionally for about $50 -- I wouldn't pay more than that.</p>

<p>The large bayonet mount on these cameras (the one the helicoid mounts on) accepts long lenses (400 mm, for example) directly, but these are hard to find. They were made by Nikon and, I think, Komura; each of which companies made a single focusing unit that accepted multiple lens heads (I have the Nikon unit that allows me to use 400mm, 600mm, 800mm and 1200mm lens heads on my S2A and EC-TL).</p>

<p>The Bronica S and earlier models had a different large bayonet mount than the S2, S2A, EC and EC-TL. On the S and earlier models, the small bayonet mount on front of the helicoid is built into the camera -- you don't need a separate helicoid for the S as with the later focal plane shutter Bronicas. But you do need a Bronica bayonet adapter to use the bellows or long lenses designed for the S with later models of the Bronica.</p>

<p>Many online sellers incorrectly list film backs, bellows and viewfinders as being for the S2, S2A, EC and EC-TL cameras. This is incorrect -- these accessories are incompatible and fit either the S series or EC series -- because of different size fittings and mirror designs, none will fit both Bronica series.</p>

<p>I've purchased more than a dozen MF Nikkors based on Bjørn Rørslett's reviews and found that my experience with each corresponds exactly with his comments -- for example, the 400/3.5 was great with film alone or with TC-301 teleconverter, but has way more CA on digital than film bodies. Bjørn's strength is that he goes beyond resolution to examine lens characteristics such as performance at infinity vs close focus, lens flare, ghosting, stability tripod mounts on long lenses, etc. David Reuther also provides useful information that coincides with my own experience using some of the Nikkor MF lenses that he evaluates.</p>

<p>Andy --<br>

I may have the last 1200mm ED that Nikon ever produced -- Roland extended his list of serial numbers after I sent him a photo of mine (150080). Bought it as-is from KEH, then had Essex Camera realign the elements. It's now as sharp as my 500/4 P when I mount it on on a very sturdy tripod and heavy-duty fluid head. It's sharp even at the edges on a 6x6 Bronica frame, which the lens also covers (with very slight corner vignetting at infinity). Like you, I'm looking for the 600 ED and 800 ED -- the only example of either I've found, in the Philippines, costs way more than I'm willing to pay -- more than $6,000.</p>

<p>Max --<br>

According to Roland Vink, the first (pre-AI) version of the Nikkor 500mm reflex takes 88mm front filters while the second version takes 82mm filters -- see <br>

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/accessory.html <br>

for details. If your 500 reflex is 135mm in diameter and 142mm long, it's the 88mm version.<br>

According to Vink, both versions accept 39mm rear filters, much easier to find than the 88mm.</p>

 

<p>I've had good experiences using my TC-14E on 400mm and longer MF Nikkors after modifying it by following the step-by-step instructions I found at http://nikonpages.heymanphotography.com/tcmod/</p>

<p>The TC-16A also works well with my long MF lenses on DX bodies. I haven't tried it on FX or film cameras, but Bjørn Rørslett reports soft edges with the 16A in full-frame images.</p>

<p>Essex Camera (see Kent's link above) did a good job on my Nikon F2 body and manufactured a new diaphragm mechanism for my Nikon AU-1 focusing unit that was missing that part when I purchased it.</p>

<p>Jon --</p>

<p>The 400/3.5 is excellent on film with the TC-301 teleconverter but I sold that lens because of excessive CA with Nikon digital cameras. The 500/4 P is excellent with film and with digital bodies -- better with teleconverters on digital bodies than the 400, but not quite as good on film with the TC-301 as the 400/3.5.<br>

If you're not familiar with Bjørn Rørslett’s Nikon lens evaluations, have a look at <a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html">http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html</a> He does a good job of describing CA with film and digital cameras.</p>

<p>Scott --</p>

<p>Essex Camera Repair in Carstadt, New Jersey did an excellent job of repairing my Autocord after the film advance stopped working properly. Essex specializes in repairs of older mechanical cameras and routinely manufactures parts that are no longer available -- last year they made a new diaphram from scratch for my Bronica S-series focusing unit for 1970-era Nikon 400, 600, 800 and 1200mm lenses.<br>

<br /><br /></p>

<p>Wondering if a modified TC-20EIII would give better results than a TC-300/301 on the manual focus 500/4 Ai-P and the 800/5.6 Ai-S. My TC-301 works fairly well on these lenses, but $500 for the TC-20EIII would be worth the cost if the resulting images are sharper. I've been quite happy using a modified TC-14E and a TC-16A for DX format with manual focus Nikkors.</p>

<p>Here are the results from 1200/11 plus TC-16A teleconverter. Results with modified TC-14E are similar, but the TC-14A is substantially softer.</p><div></div>

<p>The posted image was at 100 percent crop -- here's the full frame, with such narrow depth of field that only the sweat shirt is in focus. </p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>TC-14A:</p>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=748643">Samuel Lipoff</a> asked last week about using teleconverters with his 800/8 ED non-AI Nikkor. Below are test images of the optically-similar 1200/11 ED Nikkor and AU-1 focusing unit using TC-301, TC-14A, modified TC-14E and TC-16A teleconverters. All images were exposed at ISO 400 with a Nikon D200.<br>

The TC-301 image is frisbee players about a quarter of a mile from the camera. The TC-14A, TC-14E and TC-16A images depict a cell phone antenna tower three miles from the camera under rare conditions of negligible atmospheric turbulence. <br>

All combinations were cumbersome and somewhat impractical for everyday use. But some of the combinations are usable given that you have stable support for the camera/lens combination.</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p><br /></p><div></div>