n m

Auto aperture is encouraging manufacturers to design aperture rings with minimal respect to the user of the minority of systems that demand the rings. There are sigma lenses using a narrow and recessed aperture ring which is not at all optimal.

I am guessing that if you open an average size 35mm camera back when

there is a roll in there, you lose the frame behind the lens, the

next frame due to a third of it being exposed, and the exposed frame

before the current frame which is partially wound onto the right

spool. Or, perhaps the total spoiled is four if another on the right

spool is partially exposed.

 

I am most in doubt about how lightfast that exposed film wound on the

right spool is. Guess what mistake I made.

I think we are decided that a 35mm is more useful by now. I fail to see that the clunky mirrors of older SLR designs and their winding ratcheting is less obtrusive than the average AF camera.

A cheap aluminium and plastic tripod is, at least, cheap and light. The only problem with it is that to be sure of steadiness you need to use remote release or the timer. Your cheap tripod sounds unusually bad. They are not all like that.

Nikkor 70-300 f4-5.6 ED is a waste of time or money since it is a licensed design from Tamron, and the Tamron badged version is half the price. Buyers of the lens do not like to hear this, but the lenses are there to take apart.

 

The Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO performance is very good for the price range. User comments are consistent in mentioning its sharpness. I agree. On an N80 it focuses quite quickly (it varies with the body). With the Sigma and Tamron 70-300 you also get a bonus 1:2 macro function workable for occasional use.

 

I do not know what IS lens is in your price range but that technological edge really lies with Canon and the motor is in the lens in Canon models. I would like IS myself...

Daniel, when you post a question like this it helps to include whatever you can to describe the problem accurately and exclude certain causes so that people do not waste their time with redundant suggestions. So please do not be insulted if you think the checklists suggested patronise you.

Rather than roll the dice on another drug overdose, Treadwell rolled the dice with bears instead. Neither activity shows his brain in a good light. I suppose we have to hope his addled activities do not affect the future of the park or the bears.

Can someone clarify this point if it is not a trade secret: is this processing some electronically digitized projection or is the negative image projected directly onto the paper?

Eric, you wrote that you wanted to compare the films to your beloved K25 then you said no more about it! I would like to know how you found K64 next to K25. The reason being that next to technical pans, I thought K25 was supposed to be the sharpest film available.

 

As for your scans, the E100G makes the petals look velvet and more haggard than the K64, which may be more detail, but the lighting is also different and there is more colour fringing around the petal edges.

Technology has to move on sometime. The trouble with what you say, Mr. Lopez, is that you are too vague about your complaint. You seem to be referring to the incompatibilities between AI lenses and newer Nikon mounts, and the G lens style? I do not think new Nikon users are very bothered. Their camera is an auto camera and they expect auto lenses. If they want the old style, they can find it used, very easily.

 

I have a feeling that if it cost a company an extra $5 for a feature of ensuring compatibility, they would be selling it in the camera $100 more than the model that did not have it. It is the specification ladder that means they can sell more expensive cameras at higher profit margins to people with more specific needs. For instance the reviews of cheaper equipment mainly reveal the juggling the company has done with the features to make the equipment compete at the price but not cannibalise the sales of items with higher margins. The opinions on these features are not unchanging. Many panned the N70 as not having manual tools such as DOF preview and multiple exposure. But on the other hand in the N70 you got a camera with 1/3 exposure stops, fast responding shutter and wind, with AI compatibility. The N80 sells at the same price point with 1/2 exposure stops, no AI compatibility and more shutter lag, but it does have that DOF and multiple exposure.

 

The users that need everything... pay for it!!

The fastidious who check their prints for grain might mistake matte texture for grain.

 

Glossy photo paper has more contrast than matte so it is probably better. Perhaps matte resists fingerprints better...

Thanks for the link. I had seen a strangely high price for the lens when new, but those used prices look more realistic.

I understand that since this range is sold with kits there are a lot

of similar versions. What I am asking about is here, the version

looking just like the picture he has put up as well:

 

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2880.htm

 

 

 

 

Though Ken Rockwell seems to think quite highly of it, after a few

test shots I am not sure I am in agreement and if this lens is

worthwhile. Though the lack of rectilinear distortion was commendable,

the lens does not deliver the contrast of other lenses I have seen in

the range, with a milky outcome like old lenses. The lens seems in

excellent condition.

 

 

 

 

Can anybody who has had and examined this lens critically add their

impression, and in particular what is the real used price for this

lens? Though it was quite expensive originally for a kit lens I do not

think it is worth very much, but find a comparison hard to come by, as

it seems to get lost in a maze of similar items.

Modern "auto" SLRs in line with their features are a strange mix of "point and shoot" modes and complex dial and button use. They encourage unconsidered shots whilst their complexity can be an impediment. Lack of motor wind and so on will force you to consider what you are doing. If that is what you want to do.

 

Of course, they are generally more expensive than used semi-automatic cameras and lenses of twenty years ago or modern copies.

 

I would recommend used or new relatively manual cameras that sell cheaply nowadays such as the Pentax compatibles. They will not have motor wind or autofocus, but you will have control of the basics, the equipment feels that much more rugged and positive in feel, and you will have a huge well of used equipment at a cheap price to choose from.

 

Or more expensively you could go the route of a Nikon FE2 and AI/AIS lenses which you could still use manually on an autofocus camera later.

Edmund: Right, let's get the book. Now; Baldrick, where's the manuscript?

 

Baldrick: You mean the big papery thing tied up with string?

 

Edmund: Yes, Baldrick: the manuscript belonging to Dr. Johnson.

 

Baldrick: You mean the baity fellow in the black coat who just left?

 

Edmund: Yes, Baldrick: Dr. Johnson.

 

Baldrick: So you're asking where the big papery thing tied up with string be- longing to the baity fellow in the black coat who just left is.

 

Edmund: Yes, Baldrick, I am; and if you don't answer, then the booted bony thing with five toes at the end of my leg will soon connect sharply with the soft dangly collection of objects in your trousers. For the last time, Baldrick: Where is Dr. Johnson's manuscript?

 

Baldrick: On the fire.

I know that the Nikkor handles and focuses considerably better than that Sigma lens. But the capabilities of the Sigma are also different.

 

You are right to be wary of a high profit margin 70-300 ED. The fact that Nikon redrew its originally published lens diagram to make it appear superficially different from the far cheaper Tamron 70-300 LD would appear to speak volumes.

"Who is more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?"

 

(old proverb to become the new motto for photo.net "feedback")

I thought it odd that you would introduce such an inconsistency to your work with this pot-pourri of cheap films. Most people use the same film for the same task.

 

Expecting a lab to compromise themselves with a film of unknown origin is not realistic. Exactly how do you know the film is C41?

Tell us which lab or labs to avoid then. I am pretty sure you can find an inexpensive lab which does not lose a great deal of the frames.

 

I know that viewfinders do not have total frame representation, but even so I avoid composing right to the edge of the viewfinder as well.

You might like to look up what viewfinder coverage your camera has.

Are you a moderator Todd? Re the negative reason for checking on people. I would have thought as a community of photographers there was more positive curiosity to look at people's work and background instead.

Douglas would not need to interpret Carl's post. It was unambiguous.

I like the streamlined forum here. I might like it better if the unified forum view was adapted to show threads in order of most recent additions. Of course I can check on old threads myself, but it presumably takes more of your bandwidth to serve me this way.

"I wouldn't tell the lab anything; it would only confuse them"

 

I see somebody has taken their film to the drugstore before...

Silly Kodak trying to corner a market with proprietary technology. I guess it must be on the way down like disc film and 110 because some second hand chains are not accepting trades on APS now.

You've got to give edward the credit for being consistent. He got his 28-300 after his 28-200 so he must be devoted to the concept.

 

Having an SLR doesn't mean that because the lens can be changed it must be done constantly. But I do think stretching to 300mm at 6.3 is a significant drawback. The first thing I noticed about even an f5.6 300mm a lens was how unlikely I would be able to handhold it. Moreover vignetting can be expected at 6.3 . And whatever you shoot, the lens warps it.

 

Having said that, it is a big step up in quality and opportunities for those only used to normal point'n'shoots and has a justifiable appeal to those graduating from them. I think such people would enjoy it more than a fixed 50mm.