vietnam photo

<p>On Canon 5D or 5D mk2, you would need to shave either the Canon mirror or the lens rear shroud. It's very sharp in center and is soft in extreme corners. I sold my Zeiss 21mm ZE after having this lens. Both are superb. I just prefer Leica's rendering and color gradation better. Interesting my Leica copy is sharper than Zeiss 21mm at center f2.8 -- this is contrary to most reports I saw on Internet. I think it flares easier than Zeiss though.<br>

--Cuong</p>

<p>2x APO works fine on 180mm 2.8 APO but you need to stop down to 5.6.<br>

1.4x APO works fine and has no (or barely discernable) IQ degradation at 2.8. It took me more than 6 months to find a 180mm 2.8 APO version that accepts 1.4x APO.</p>

<p>I made a response and then realized the question is in wedding forum. I am not a wedding photographer and thus my answers are irrelevant. Oh well, FWIW.</p>

<p>I switched from Nikon to Canon because 5D was king of high ISO IQ. When D700 came out, I contemplated returning to Nikon but I stayed. I use 24mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4, 70-200mm f4 a lot and Nikon has no equivalence. Nikon 28mm 1.4 is too soft for me and I sold it, making great profit. BTW, I also LOVE Nikon 14-24mm on my 5D, using 16-9.net adapter.<br /> I just returned from vacation. 45% of photos were with 35mm 1.4, 30% with Nikon 14-24mm and 25% with 70-200mm f4.<br /> I have been keeping Nikon body and lenses just in case I do return to Nikon but that changes now. Canon comes out with 17mm TS-E and 24mm TS-E which seals the deal. Time to sell my Nikon gears.<br /> I do dislike Canon flash system and will have to live with it. Fortunately I rarely use flash. And I still miss Nikon handling. So in this case, Canon fast WA lenses with TS-E capability made my decision.</p>

I could not believe I see such kindergarten arguments here. It is amazing that this thread made it to the home page of photo.net

I am an extremist. Whenever I am about to buy the new D300 or D3, I changed my mind because I can't stand using Capture NX, which supposedly gives the best skin color. Capture One 3.7 is almost as good but it does not support D300. Capture 4.00 also takes simplicity and elegance from 3.7 and turns it into clumsy interface. I am happily staying with 5D and C1 3.7.

I have both 17-35mm and 17-55mm and use them on D70 and then D200. I already have 17-35mm and bought 17-55mm with an intention to sell 17-35mm. But after a trip to Yosemite, I changed my mind and am thinking of selling 17-55mm instead. 17-55mm is a terrific lens for photo journalist and party shoot or photos at close-medium range. But for landscaping photos and shooting in the sun, it flares LIKE CRAZY. Its sharpness also drops fast after f8. So, the choice depends on what your shooting style is.

Thanks all for your help. Just paid for it :-)

I have an opportunity to buy 35mm f1.4 AI at a very good price. Just

curious if there is any difference in performance between AI and the

newer version AIS? Thanks.

I am thick today. How does having a mirror in the center of the frame would help?

I did try to have the camera really parallel with the wall but I did not really succeed. Any trick? And why does a "little bit" of tilting make a difference in measuring the sharpness at corners for WA, especially when at F/8? I don't recall having this problem with lens at longer focal length like 85mm. Thanks.

Say I have a wide angle lens which I want to evaluate sharpness at

corners as well as at center. I shot a brick wall and per this URL

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html, I have plenty of DOF (f8, focal

length 15mm, distance from camera to wall, 3-4 feet. The lens is 15mm

3.5 Nikon).

 

So given that DOF is quite a bit, why is it critical that the camera

must be really parallel with the wall? In my first shot, the camera

was a bit tilted. The righ corners are more blurry than the left

corners. I adjusted the camera and the results are reversed, i.e.,

right corners are sharper than left corners. Thanks.

 

-- Cuong

Thanks Dave, does it mean if the lens serial number in the range of A 55/3.5 Micro Auto NKJ Ai kit 63 5- 238011 < 240240 - 267764 >, as per Roland's web page, it is AI'ed by Nikon?

 

I am very curious to try this lens. I have tried 60 f2.8, 105 f2.8, and 200 f4 and like 200 f4 the most so far but it is too heavy for me. As Bjorn's evaluation of lens performance is right on, i.e., I usually consult his website before buying lenses, I am so curious to try this lens rated highly by him.

Thanks again. A picture is worth a thousand words, especially for an ignorant guy like me :-)

That's very nice resource. Thanks to everyone for your tremendous help.

In http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html, Bjorn describes 55 mm

f/3.5 micro Nikkor with auto compensating aperture, single coating. He

talked about the version with auto compensating.

 

Does it mean that there are two types of 55m f3.5 P, single coating:

with and without auto compensating? If so, are there any differences

in optics or photo quality?

Could you post photos of the lens?

 

Many thanks.

"WHy is Nikon Capture 4.1 run so slow?" Did you run the latest version of NC? On my system, it takes about 4 seconds between the time I click on the file name until the time the image is displayed. This is not exactly instantaneous but I would not call it "so slow".

Harvey, thanks for your input but I am CRT die hard. Few years from now, LCD might interest but not now -- for sure :-)

As manufacturers are abandoning CRT, does it make sense to buy one and

keep it in the garage for future use? I am a die-hard CRT fan. WOuld

the CRT gun/mask be affected by time despite unuse? Thanks.

I have this e-book and am reading with my note book. I would highly recommend it but I do wish he supplied sample photos so that readers can practice along side his chapters.

Hi, can I calibrate my monitor with EyeOne and match my printer with

Monaco EZColor? It seems to me that EZColor is a stand-alone utility

and does not how the monitor is calibrated (as long as it is

calibrated properly). Thanks.

Thanks everyone for a very insightful mail thread. I think Costco/Drycreek Photo makes sense because the photographer is in control throughout the entire workflow. The Costco or any lab printer is merely an output device and does not interpret/modify the image in any sense.

You wrote "softproof the image to see where it needs to be tweaked if at all so that it will print as accurately as possible to the original". I think you said that the photographer should tweak the image so that it matches the soft proof and send in the tweaked image. If so, that seems a lot of work if the photograph has to repeat this step every time. The following instruction (step 14) from DryCreek Photo makes sense as the conversion is done automatically. http://drycreekphoto.com/Frontier/using_printer_profiles.htm

Ethan, per DryCreekPhoto website, before we send in photos to

printshops at Costco, we should convert our photo using the profile of

the printer at that Costco store. My question is if my monitor is

properly calibrated, say with tools like Monaco XR or Gretag, why

should we still go to this step. Why can't the printshop accept our

jpg as-is and do the conversion for us? Is it a cost issue or is it an

accuracy issue, i.e., it is best that the photographer do the

conversion to ensure proper matching between color spaces of

printer/paper and his monitor? Thanks a lot for you answer. My

brothers and I are having heated discussion on this.

Thanks Ethan. You are saying that it is worthwhile to wait for ColorEye rather than buying the Gretag v2. now?

 

I have another question about profiling for printer. I will post it in another thread and appreciate if you could answer. I know you know because DryCreek Photo works with Costco print-shops :-). Thanks.

Hi Greg, I own a I960 and love it. Does I9900 produce a better print quality to make the upgrade worthwhile (assume that I rarely need to print large size)? Thanks.