Ian Rance

<p>Live view works best when you zoom in and manually focus on the subject I find. I have tried the live view AF but was not impressed and now use it only in very good light. Contrast detect AF has a way to go yet.</p>

<p>Thanks for the input - and good to see others are still enjoying this lens. Its a shame it has become expensive, however they were selling new for £199 which was a very fair price I think - especially as for that you got a metal hood and NC filter too.</p>

<p>I asked about focus fine tune recently and after spending time doing it I feel that it is 80% the lens but also how it reacts when mounted on different bodies. Because the lens is focused wide open, the camera is focussing with the lens in its worst state (for image quality). With this softness the focus system of the camera must decide what is the best 'in focus' state and with the aberrations in the lenses of the AF system adding to the mix along with minor lens element misalignments (in the actual taking lens and the body) it is easy for errors to manifest themselves. I have noted that the very latest AF system in the D750 and D810 seems to be the most robust against errors - a little better than the D800. I would like to think that Nikon are understanding the technical issues and work to improve them on newer bodies. My D7000 was the very worst for AF error and despite battling with AF fine tune I could never get repeatable results. Sending it back to Nikon got it sorted in double quick time - for a reasonable fee. That was grey market too which I was told Nikon would not touch.<br> To sum up I do think your lens has a fault so needs to go back for repair. I do think repair is often better than replacement in this instance.</p>

<p>And the good contrast works well for landscape too. So, please do share some 45mm P photos if you can.</p><div></div>

<p>The 45mm focal length is very appealing.</p><div></div>

<p>One of Nikon's less popular lenses from the mid 2000's, usually when mentioned gets greeted with "I can have a 50mm f1.8 for less and anyway its more style over substance". My years using this lens have told me that nothing is further from the truth. It is one of those rare lenses that is more like a window than any other (due to the low element count and excellent coatings). I was out enjoying it today and unlike even some expensive lenses none of the photos came out 'badly'. If I am feeling a bit lacklustre, an hour out with the 45 P soon gets me feeling better. I share a few simple images from today, but please do share your 45 P photos - always good to see them.</p> <div></div>

<p>Hector, if I remember correctly it was the celebration of 100 years of the Box Brownie and David had been doing some portraits with his own camera then swapped over to the Brownie. You are right, the photos were excellent - I use my own Brownie (1930 model) for a similar effect. When you take time to understand the Brownie and what it can and can't do the resultant photos can be magic.</p>

<p>Good comments. You know, I was almost believing the complaints at one stage. They were delivered with such authority how could they <em>possibly</em> be wrong? I sometimes visit a few other popular photographic websites, not only for inspiration but to keep up with the new technology. Recently they are more depressing than interesting so I prefer to just use what I think I may like and see how it goes.</p>

<p>On every photographic website and especially YouTube there are people moaning about cameras and lenses. I try to filter it out to get to the good stuff but recently with the mirrorless systems being discussed the moaning and whining seems to have got worse. I use the term moaning but that is putting it politely as often threads completely derail with twaddle.</p> <p>I don't think I have ever moaned about a camera or a lens in my whole life. I have used some that were downright poor but I still used them as best I could. No moaning. I still could get a decent photo if I tried. But now we have photographers telling us how things are downright unusable and making a real fuss. Some examples:<br> Lenses with 'unacceptable' fringing, aberrations, colour, sharpness, vignetting, distortion...blah blah blah.<br> Cameras that are 'unusable' due to one button not being just where they might wish or missing some fluff feature.<br> Moans about whole manufacturers for not being making what they want and how they are making a big fuss about 'moving' to another brand.<br> How their bad experience with one item whips them up into a right tizzy and everyone must be told.<br> How they tried something in the shop and found out then and there it was no good and take time to tell others how they should find it no good too.<br> Commenting how their choice is the only logical one because how all the other brands are so far behind. Especially true for those chasing the megapixels.</p> <p>Most of these comments are backed up by often pretty flaky photos and half-baked 'facts'. Honestly, we are so spoiled at the moment with the use of not only all the great lenses and kit from the past but new stuff too. The only thing I could perhaps moan about is the effort it takes to actually get the good photos in the first place which shows up my lack of skill and experience at times.</p> <p>I remember David Bailey (as an experiment) using a basic Box Brownie camera to take photos of the Queen. The photos were great - and that has got to be one of the most limiting and unergonomic cameras ever. So why so much moaning about kit? What triggers this off? Are people honestly that upset about photographic kit?</p>

<p>Joe, the 24mm f/2 was a very nice lens indeed. Mine was pretty tired - dented filter ring, not able to focus to infinity and well used looking, however the lens was unique indeed. The way it performed wide open was very appealing to me - but stopped down it was identical to the f/2.8 version. Here is a photo wide open I took with it. http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/9955785-lg.jpg and eventually I sold it, however I am on the look out for a better example. I still miss it.</p> <p>Edit to say that was taken on Fuji Reala. Oh how I miss that film - Ektar looks horrible in comparison to me. Cold and faded.</p>

<p>Thanks Joe. The lenses that I have had do this were a VERY heavily used 24mm f/2, a 35mm f/2.8 (also well used) and currently a 35-105mm Ai-S which looks great but the ring is sluggish. Cheaper metal I suppose. I will see if I can re-align the spring a little.</p>

<p>I have encountered a few older and well used Nikkors with stiff aperture rings that feel like they are jamming and dragging.<br> I initially thought that it was the grease that had dried out so opened the lens, cleaned the old grease from the aperture ring and renewed and then re-assembled. Sadly the improvement was minimal, due to the problem being that where the spring for the aperture detents bears against the ring, there was a wear groove which increased the surface area on which the spring bears and therefore increased drag. Whilst a new aperture ring is the way forward I was wondering if anyone had tried honing the area where the spring drags to remove the grove with a circular whetstone - and whether this helped at all? If the ring is hard anodised then the anodising will also be adding to the feel of the ring and therefore honing will not help all that much.<br> I thought I would ask in case someone had tried before me!</p>

<p>After your drink has been poured you can either drink it inside (where you can hear the quiet chat of other pubgoers) or into the garden where the smell of warm fields and country sounds compliment a ploughmans lunch.</p><div></div>

<p>On finding yourself inside, make a choice of the refreshing cellar cool ales.</p><div></div>

<p>As last Sunday was nice weather we took a walk over the fields to a local pub for lunch. It is really nice to walk to set up an appetite and see all the secret corners of the countryside that the car can't reach. Ancient footpaths wander along the valley and eventually you find yourself looking across the graveyard to the pub. That is often the way - pubs and churches are right next to each other.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you for the input. I did not realise that you could not have both methods assigned - I wondered why the camera was chastising me for trying! I have used the DOF preview button and the function button to get the two I needed. Sorted!</p>

I have been trying to set up the function button on a DF, however I am slightly struggling. I want one press to access the top item in my menu and a press of the function button and a turn of any dial to set the auto ISO. However I'm only given the choice of one or the other - both cannot be used. Is this correct operation or is there a workaround? I really don't want to go through the menu every time I want auto ISO so any input welcome.

<p>You are right, I shouldn't generalise, however the sheer amount of selfies I was getting on Facebook (before I left last year) was unlike anything I have ever known. Something changed in the way people saw themselves.</p>

<p>These days taking a picture of yourself is something that is so easy to do with bits and bobs available to make it easier. As a teen in the 1980's I wanted to try it myself but it was not as easy as today by far. Anyone else have a go at it back then?<br> Here's my (incomplete) list of self portrait hurdles in the 80's. Remember, most cameras given to younger people were hand-me-downs from uncles or from fetes - not even well off children had an SLR.</p> <p>1. Mechanical self timer issues. The clockwork timer on the camera used to be notoriously unreliable. I had them jam up, not take the photo at the end or take so long to get the photo taken that my smile had turned to a grimace.<br> 2. Minimum focus distance. Trying for hand held selfies at arms length was a no-go as many cameras used to only focus to 5 feet or so (if you were lucky).<br> 3. Explosions. As electronic guns were very expensive and a luxury item I used to use the barely affordable flash bulbs (like AG3's). £3.99 for 10 - so a months pocket money even for those! The one time I set up a flash self portrait the bulb exploded and sent glass and burning material onto me along with a deafening bang.<br> 4. Blanks. Cameras used to have a mind of their own and more often that not would take a blank. Maybe the stress of being put on a tripod?<br> 5. Head missing. It was never easy to guess what would be in frame if I was setting up for a self portrait. I was usually wrong...<br> 6. Exposure. When the camera only has 'sun' or 'cloud' settings as most consumer ones did (after I ditched the 1950's one) I could never get enough exposure indoors. I was always a shadowy silhouette with a speckled and grainy core.<br> 7. Blurred. Due to flaky process and print, most photos were fuzzy at best. Even when I thought I <em>may </em>have a good photo, the enthusiasm was soon quashed by the wallet of prints when I got them back.</p> <p>So did you manage as a young person to take a decent self portrait? Thinking back I am kind of glad I was not part of the self absorbed selfie generation as I have always been very shy and self conscious.</p>

<p>When I have travelled it means that I am usually walking A LOT - between places of interest, stations and even going around the places I am visiting. At the end of the day I was usually pretty much dead on my legs and my shoulders aching from the ruck sack straps. Personally I value lightness and good quality so I took on my last trip:</p> <p>28mm f/3.5 prime<br> 45mm f/2.8 prime<br> 100mm f/2.8 prime<br> 35-70mm f3.3-4.5 zoom</p> <p>All of these were quite manageable and I got some lovely photos. Just a thought.</p>

<p>Interesting to know Michael. I have not come across the 24mm Tamron yet but when I do I will pick it up for sure. I have just acquired a Tamron Adaptall 90mm f/2.5 with all boxes and life size extender in as new condition for £10 at a local charity shop. Initial testing shows it to be at least as good as the Nikon 105mm Micro. £10 is too low in my opinion but the price was reduced from £18 because nobody wanted it. Oh well.</p>

<p>The lens was in as new condition and the performance matched the looks. Honestly, if a lens as good as this does not sell for £10 and ends up in the bin it is a bit of a sad time for photography. Here is a 100% corner crop at the long end where it is at its 'weakest'. How many other lenses are ending up in the bin? Are they not good enough any more?</p><div></div>

<p>Peter, I am working with the 70-150 today and I must say that I am REALLY happy with it. It was in the bin as it was unsellable (nobody bought it at £10) so I had it. What I am seeing is really quite unbelievable. Punchy colour, sharpness and 3D rendering worth many hundreds of £££'s if it were a new release. Yet people are in the same camera shop struggling to pay for the brand new 'must have' lenses and in some instances having their card declined due to insufficient funds. This is a personal opinion but if you were to take a lens like the 28mm Tamron and 70-150mm Vivitar instead of £1,500 worth of new lenses and with the money saved go on a wonderful photographic trip (or three) I am sure it would make people happier long term, but then once the gear lust sets in then for quite a few that is all that matters. Better men than me have tried and failed to convince them so I don't try any more.</p> <p>To finish off here is a quick shot from the 70-150 that was IN THE BIN!</p> <div></div>

Chuck, with the F100 (but not the F70 or F90) the sticky back syndrome can be somewhat ameliorated by leaving the camera in an open area for a week or two. I have an F100 that is kept in a camera bag and suffering from this. Leaving in the open air has reduced the stickiness by at least 90%.

<p>What do you think of it Stephen? Its an easy to like lens I think.<br> Thanks Paul. That is St Albans cathedral - lovely light in there. Shame it loses some of the impact downsized to 700 pixels but you can see what I like about it. As to other cheapies just wait until I get to my Nikon fit Vivitar 70-150 CONSTANT f/3.5 macro zoom which is offering astounding performance for £0. That's for another day though - I'm still out there having fun shooting it.</p>