wesley_chang

<p>Any links to the actual photos?<br>

Thanks...</p>

Does anyone know if there is a depth of field preview button?

One of the best spots for Waikiki skyline shots is on Tantalus. Go up Roundtop drive just before dusk- you should get some nice shots of the Waikiki lights with a beautiful dusk sky. Also, one of the advantages of this spot versus the one from Diamond Head is that you can include Diamond Head in the shot! (The other advantage is that there no hiking involved, there are spots you can literally pull over and shoot standing right next to your car.)

 

The other good spot is from Magic Island, in Ala Moana Park.

I asked a similar question a little over a year ago:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CFiK

 

My overall impression from everyone's advice: get the 2.0.

I did and I was not disappointed. I got it on e-bay. You have to be patient, though.

 

Good luck,

Wes

He wishes!

That's right, that was the lens, I saw that it was a 2.0 that had been mistakenly posted as a 2.8. (My eyes popped out of my head!) It did go for a lot under what would it be expected to have gone for. I almost went for it but chickened out, my whole idea was that I was putting together a relatively inexpensive, small system and $400 for one lens went against my goal! (But because I knew the reputation of the lens and that it would probably go for a relatively low price, I was very tempted!) (I also knew that I could have bought it and probably sold it for more, but knowing myself, I just would have kept it.)I already have a lot invested in a Minolta system based on a Maxxum 7(I must have an affinity for dead systems!) and just wanted to have a small, manual focus system for fun.

 

I have the OM-2 with 50 1.8 for free from my friend (not really free, the CLA on the OM-2 is $89). I just got a 28 2.8 (some rubbing marks/light scratches on front element) for $51 on ebay. My next goal is a 100 2.8, to complete the kit. If I can get one for a little more than $100, then I will have spent < $250 for what I think would be a pretty good system!

 

What do you think?

Wes

Thanks for the reply. It is an Olympus Zuiko lens. I hope you don't mind the dumb question, I guess I already knew what the answer was, but I was just trying to cover all the bases before I spend big bucks on a used lens that the seller was CLAIMING was incompatible.

Wes.

I am new to the OM system. My old college roommate has given me his OM-2 that

he had in college. I have been on e-bay looking for lens. I have found a lens

that I am interested in, but the seller (an ebay auction house) stated that:

 

"Fits OM-3 camera- I could not get it to fit the OM-2 and am not sure what

other cameras it will fit."

 

I have never heard of any incompatiblity problems within the OM system. Am I

unaware of something? Do you think maybe there might be a problem with the

lens mount of the OM-2 the seller tried the lens on?

 

Thanks for your help.

I agree, I think a Negative feedback is too harsh in this case.

So its down to Neutral or nothing. And I'm going to leave....

 

Nothing! I guess deep down, I am a gentle sort also.

 

Hah! Our gentle nature is probably why we are all still hanging onto our dear, departed Minolta.

 

(But I will be watching ebay for another 50 1.4 and if this lens appears again without the proper disclosure, I'll nail him with a negative and a warning for all would be buyers.)

Well, if anybody is still here, I returned the lens and got back all my money, including the return shipping cost. He had already left me positive feedback. I haven't left any feedback yet....still thinking about it. He did pay me back everything...I think he just didn't know any better re: the mold and scratches. What do you guys think? Negative? Neutral? (or just leave no feedback.) (Positive is definitely out of the question, IMO.)

Wedding photos done in the street with a beautiful landscape background, including the flowers, family pets, & children, with a nude bridesmaid standing in front of the wedding car and all of it slightly blurred and out of focus except for the insect on the bride's nose which is very sharply focused.

 

I think that about covers it.

The 5:23 shot is amazing! The "3-D" effect is virtually stereoscopic.

Another question re: mold or fungus. Is going ahead and cleaning the element the only way to know whether or not there is permanent damage left by the offending organism?

I actually paid by cashier's check. In my haste to bid on what I perceived as a good deal, I failed to note that the seller was not using paypal. (Not very smart on my part.)

 

I did get the lens, so I didn't get ripped off in that regard.

 

What I am worried about is whether or not I get my money back now with the return. Oh well, I guess I trusted him once before....

Guys, thanks for all your answers.

 

The prices I quoted above were all for the older, 49mm filter diam lens. The $299 lens was supposedly from a store that went out of business and the picture definitely shows it to be 49mm. I have not seen any 55mm diam ones for sale in the time I have been looking.

 

As opposed to the MD version, where according to Stephen "50 1.4"s were the cheapest and most plentiful available". With Maxxum AF lenses, there are lots of 50mm 1.7's for cheaper prices, but almost no 50mm 1.4's and they seem to always go for above $200. In fact yesterday and so far today there are zero 1.4's and currently there are 37 1.7's. (I know...the next discussion will be...why not just get a 1.7 for cheap. Actually, I already have had one for several years and I just thought it would be fun to have a 1.4 also.) (1.4 vs 1.7 = another discussion!!!)

 

Re: feedback. I agree, full refund + shipping costs warrants at best a neutral rating. Also, if he would have covered the cost of repair I would have given a neutral feedback. (I still will have gone through a lot of hassle and he did misrepresent the item.) (I also get the feeling that if I send it back he might just put it right back on ebay.)

 

Anything less would warrant a negative.

 

If I do send the lens back, I would also hold on giving the feedback for a while to see if he puts it back on ebay. (I'll be shopping for one again, so I would see it.) If he does try to resell, I would then give negative feedback and give a warning to everyone about my previous experience with this lens.

 

In his defense, in talking to him, I don't get the feeling that he was purposely trying to rip me off, I think he may just be clueless.

(But, who knows?)

 

Anyway, thanks again for all the great input.

 

P.S. I am leaning towards returning the lens. My main reason is the fear that after the cleaning, the mold or whatever it is will just come back again. (And actually, Ivan is right: $190 IS a not bad price for a usable AF 50mm 1.4.) (....just not the great bargain $148.50 was!!!) The main thing against me sending it back is the fear that he won't send the money.

 

P.P.S. Any of you have experience with a lens that has been cleaned in this way?

(By the way, Bob and Stephen, I'm not trying to argue with you, your points are well taken.)

Also, recent ebay prices (since I have been shopping):

 

Lens Unused w/ box- $299.00 + shipping.

 

Lens with some issues (flaws on front element coating that were obvious on the photo and a crack in the plastic covering of the depth of field/focusing window)- $212.50 + shipping.

 

Just to give the discussion a point of reference.

For what its worth, this lens is an autofocus, Maxxum system lens, not an MD.

I am not a collector, I am planning to use it.

It is the older 49 mm version.

I wanted to get some opinions on what you would do in the following situation:

 

I just bought a 50mm f1.4 on e-bay. It was advertised as excellent but

missing a rear cap. The seller told me via email that it had no marks or

scratches on any of the elements. I got it for what seemed to be a bargain,

$138.50 + $10 shipping = total $148.50.

 

However, the lens was found to have fine scratches on the front element, I

believe involving the coating. More importantly, the inside of the rear

element had mold on it. I took it to a repair shop (Camera Tech in Anaheim-

30 years in business same location and fairly good reputation) and he

confirmed the problems. Obviously the scratches are unrepairable but don't

render the lens unuseable (the tech said they shouldn't affect image quality).

The repairman says he is sure he can completely clean the mold off the rear

element and can do it for $42. I left it at the shop.

 

I called the seller and he is unwilling to pay anything for the repair, but

instead is willing to refund me completely if I return the lens to him.

 

Do you guys think I should go ahead and eat the repair cost and keep the lens?

(Easier to do since it is already in the shop.)

 

Or should I send it back and hopefully get my money back. (More of a hassle-

have to stop the repair, pick up the lens, repack and ship and hope I get the

refund.)

 

I guess the bottom line is: is a 50mm f1.4 with fine scratches on the front

lens element and cleaned of the mold on the rear element worth $190.50?

 

Thanks in advance for your help.

One other thing: a polarizer is a good idea in Hawaii but be a little judicious with using it with Velvia. The colors (blue sky, lush green vegetation) under the bright tropical sun are already very strong. That combined with Velvia and a polarizer can sometimes lead to sort of a unnatural, over-saturated effect if you aren't careful. (IMO, anyways.) (By the way, I'm going to be there and shooting Velvia next week, also!!! Have a good time.)

"People keep mentioning a " beamer" - I'm afraid I'm to much of an amateur to understand half of the advice. What's a beamer? ( If its not a BMW car?)"

 

For the answer to your question, just click on the Luminous Landscape link posted by Greg S. above.

 

Wesley Chang

How are the better Epson flatbed scanners (used for scanning film)compared to the Nikon or Minolta film scanners?

Amazing, $30 for that little piece of plastic. Makes me shudder to think of all the times I have had to go running back to look for it after I realized I had dropped it! (Luckily, I always managed to find it.) Amazing that I spent only a little more than that (about $45, I think) for an entire used lens on ebay! (A 50 1.7 for my Minolta Maxxum 7...a not bad little lens for the price.)