patrick smith

The 50mm f/1.2 would mount and take pictures, however the D70 will not support any metering for it (from what I recall) and it will only operate in M mode, unless it is chipped (but I don't remember what features are restored by that process).

On the bottom of the camera, a few millimeters closer to the lens mount than the info plate (with FCC on it). It is engraved and the same color (or very close) as the rest of the base. You have to hold it at a certain angle to see it.

I used my 28-105 on my D70 today. It is a little long on the short end, but I can use my 18-35 to go wider. I tend to wish for length, but if your dad wants to go wide more often, whatever f.l. repetition there is will be balanced out by the 18-28 range. You might consider the 12-24. Of course, it's f/4 and around $1K. For the reasonable price that the 18-70 adds to the D70, it's probably worth it.

While this will insult your intelligence--gravely, you do have the ISO set to either 160 or Auto, right? Is the Metz compatible with the Nikon in all modes and flash modes? It's something with the ISO, the flash, or the rated shutter speeds. A lens, in my experience, will not make film granier.

The forum was at its best when it was a political forum with liberals and conservatives. When Frank decided that he was "fresh out of friends" and adopted a partisan stance for the official stance of the site, things devolved quickly. It was fun while it lasted, but there is no reason to obsess over the demise. Post mortem examinations such as these are fun, but they won't right the wrongs that ended the ULF. I, for one, intend to write that chapter in my internet life off completely. I was young and feckless.

Stu, I frankly don't recall him ever making those points. In fact, I think he was engaged in actions that prove those points. Really, John comes much closer to the heart of the matter. Frank ranged from amusing to offensive--though always far right, but when the tables were turned (i.e., the liberal elements finally gained the upper hand), he torched the place. If he can't handle the idea that there are people that hold opposing opinions and that they will advance those opinions as vociferously as he does, then that's his problem. Not mine. The ULF needed to be dismantled, but not simply because no one supported Frank.

 

John, if you are really interested in all the facts about that incident, email me.

 

My vote is to forget all about the ULF.

He stated the lack of support for his political beliefs as the reason for shutting it down. However, interest in all the fora, even the political ones, had waned. Things had gotten nasty (I'll take some of the blame for that). Finally, the topics of discussion had become repetitive and cyclic. Those were three good reasons to terminate the forum. Doing so simply because no one agrees with you is probably not the best reason to do that. At best, he was looking for an excuse he could rationalize, and at worst, he did so out of childish spite. I certainly prefer to think that the former was the reason.

Frank is permabanned from PN in general at the highest level; I know that for a fact. I suppose I was a "major player" there right at the very end, so perhaps I have some valuable opinions (I doubt it though). I'll miss the place, and perhaps he is going to get something else going soon. However, as T.S. Eliot said, "The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason." I warrant that it was time to scrap the then-current ULF, but doing so because no one (myself included) supported the ultra-right wing ideology Frank had recently adopted strikes me as a bit hollow. It was his party and he could do as he pleased, but there were better reasons to terminate the project.

As a soon-to-be-deleted aside, the last time Jay figured prominently was a couple (maybe more) months ago.

I frankly like the idea of a 75mm f/1.8, and that is weighing heavily on my mind as I ponder a D70. I say that the 50mm f/1.8 is a marvelous lens that is worth much more than 99.95$.

I would recommend the AF-D 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 ED-IF. The aperture is not really a drawback as far as I am concerned, it has fast AF, and it is relatively light. It is a good buy and, while it isn't the AF-S 17-35, it isn't too very far behind.

I work fast by setting a shutter speed and twisting the aperture ring on the lens until I reach the desired +- readout. If I really need to work very fast, I set the camera to A mode and stop the lens way down for DOF and shoot. To answer your question: no, the display isn't idiotic, just different.

My guess is either focus distance or a tripod. To find out, here's what I would do:

 

Find a hard steady surface, set the camera down, set a shot up, and take a picture. Leave the camera on the surface with only a minimum of contact for stabilization &c. Use the self-timer or be very careful with the shutter release. I think that should come very close to a tripod-like environment. If that doesn't improve sharpness, then see about distances.

Methinks that the D70 will suffice as the general replacement for the D100. What can they do to the D100 that wouldn't take a bite out of D70 sales?

I chose Nikon because Nikon felt right in my hands. From my F3hp to my F100, I feel 100% comfortable and at home on any Nikon. The style of them also attracts my eye. That squared off, rugged appearance really does it for me.

I don't know. I think the F6 kills two birds with one stone. With the MB-40, you have a successor to the F5 and without you have a more fully featured F100. The F100 has been a very fine camera, and I can't see too much that they can do to it. Perhaps they'll add the new AF module and update the meter; however, beyond that, what can they do that won't make the F200(??) the F6?

I use two zoom lenses: a 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D EDIF and a 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D IF. Stopped down to f/5.6 or so, I really can't tell the difference between these and some primes. My eye isn't terribly good, but I'd say they're both very good lenses. I'd go with a 28-105 and a 50mm f/1.8D for low light. You'd then have a pretty good AF setup for a backup and all-around travel kit.

It's more of a prism problem, if it is a problem, because I don't recall the mirror playing any role in the ADR setup. Correct me if I'm wrong. If there is a problem, it is as simple as swapping out prisms.

I have an F100, N80, and F3HP. My 50mm f/1.2 AI-s lives on the F3HP and my 50mm f/1.8D lives on my N80. The F100 usually has the 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D or the Micro 60mm f/2.8D on it. If I want to go light, I will just take the N80-50 f/1.8D set up. It gets used for all manner of things. Shooting family events, parties, some art applications, but I find myself going light more and more often.

If I want to do available light, landscapes, or other high portability work, I take the F3HP. It is still a darned great camera, and it (and the F100) is the reason that I don't have an F5 yet. More or less because there is nothing that I want to do that I can't do with those two bodies.

If I am shooting in a studio-type setup, and I have time to meter well and bracket every shot, I take the F100 and its lenses. Not that I can't do that with the other two, it's just that I feel more comfortable just shooting straight with the N80 and F3HP.

 

In other words, I use my Nikon MF to take pictures.

A good corollary to "Radical Chic" is Wolfe's discussion of the Wah Ching and the Red Guard in "Funky Chic." That covers a bit more of the fashion element in revolutionary ideology.

There could be a large particle on your CCD, which might cause the light to do that as it passes around it. It might be ghosting. To me, it looks like a lens issue.

1. That is what is, I believe, called flare. It will happen when you point your lens at a bright light source.

 

2. Nikon says that the small thin line is a product of the Vari-Brite screen when it has its gridlines activated and it isn't to be worried about. At least on the N80, it says that. I presume that applies for the D70.

G lenses have no aperture ring, and they are controlled fully by the camera. You won't have any trouble on a D70, but many MF cameras can only shoot at the minimum aperture. All G lenses are D lenses, that is, they transmit distance information to the camera for flash exposure. Some say that there is no appreciable advantage to a D lens. An ED lens incorporates Nikon's Extra-low Dispersion glass in one or more elements. This glass (I think) tends not to be subject to as many chromatic aberrations and other glass-created issues. Sigma's APO, I think, is an abbreviation of Apochromatic, which is what some (again, just relying on hazy memory) manufacturers call ED glass. I've noticed that ED glass has a look to it that is hard for me to quantify. I would go with the 70-300 f/4-5.6D ED lens, if I had to choose among those lenses. A telephoto lens that people seem to regard highly is the 180mm f/2.8. No, it won't get you to 300mm and it is pricier, but I have heard the quality is outstanding. But, good luck, and I hope this helps.

Now, when you say "The LIMIT/FULL switch seems not to function," do you mean it moves but has no effect? If so, then I imagine some sort of piece that connects it to the drive system has broken off. The resulting jam would make it hard to shift from A to M. What body are you doing this on?

At the risk of being unhelpful, what about a decent light meter? You can get spot, incident, and flash metering. That way you can keep a good chunk of your money for lenses and such.

 

To answer your question: buy a gently used F100. It is a fantastic camera. If manual focus and metering is important, buy a FA in good shape. It can't AF, but it can matrix-meter with all AI-s lenses (I think), and it might be able to work on pre-AI (someone who knows??) lenses.

I know that the F3HP has been discontinued, and B&H lists the USA N90s as backordered. If it hasn't been cut yet, it's days are numbered and measured with coffee spoons, so to speak.