chip_chipowski

<p>It is a fair question as to why the 58mm FL. I did not see any discussion about that in the interview. I like Mr. Sato's description of a "3D hi-fi lens." What does that mean? I don't know. But it sounds good. Also, the images I have seen from this lens do have a special character I think.</p>

<p>Andrew, I see the 58mm as a kind of prestige project as opposed to a meat-and-potatoes product. All I can say is that I have seen some very lovely images taken with this new 58G. As for your take on the 18-200 recommendation - why so cynical?? :)</p>

<p>Regarding future advances: "I'm sure that we will forever continue our efforts to increase sharpness at the point of focus. We do not, however, feel that this alone is sufficient."</p>

<p>This is an interesting article: http://nikkor.com/technology/02.html</p>

<p>Also, check out mid-article where one of the designers recommends the much-maligned 18-200!</p>

<p>Bill - holy cow, what did that piston come from??</p>

<p>I had this with my D50 several years ago and I was not blown away. I like the results from my 70-300VR much better. You are right though, it is a pretty good value for constant f/4.</p>

<p>and an anchor</p><div></div>

<p>Sorry but I've got rivets here</p><div></div>

<p>Just trying to keep the thread grounded here. OP said "on paper...." I wasn't being cute, I was honestly wondering whether you had handled both.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I suspect a more thorough test will find more even performance from the sigma overall and some corners cut with the tamron,</p>

</blockquote>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>actually, the Tamron's build quality isn't better than the Sigma's</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Eric, do you have any experience with the Tamron? Based on your first quote (i.e. speculation) I want to clarify if the second quote is also speculation.</p>

<p>Wouter made some good points. This is specialized gear, and age may be of higher concern for underwater gear. Most Nikonos V kits on ebay are going for around $200 or less. The watch may be worth a bit too. I only see the 35mm lens in your photos but there are some accessories for a 20mm? Regardless of the value, I agree with Chuck - this is all cool stuff belonging to an interesting person!</p>

<p>Eric, I don't think the OP mentioned anything about nightclub photography. It sounds like stabilization might work well in a low lit room, so long as the subjects aren't moving around. Jonathan, I hope you share your final choice and any experience - especially if it is the Tamron, since it is so new.</p>

<p>George - I have never liked split prism screens. I just recently got a Mamiya M645, which came with one of those screens. I changed it out for a plain screen and I greatly prefer it. I think the split prism is good for critical focus, but it gets in my way during quick, hand held shooting. Especially with the large finder of MF, I prefer a plain screen. </p>

<p>Wonderful shot, Bill! And bonus points for nailing the theme!!</p>

<p>Canon has some great new compact STM lenses. If Nikon made a pancake 24mm like the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1081812-REG/canon_9522b002_ef_s_24mm_f_2_8_is.html">Canon</a>, I would almost certainly buy one.</p>

<p>There is no question M43 is most compact compared with Nikon DX. However, I think Nikon deserves credit for addressing the compact aspect of DX. It now has collapsing versions of the popular 18-55 and 55-200 lenses. I have the 18-55 and I think it is excellent. Very easy to use the unlock mechanism and the VR + optics perform great for the price point. So now if you want to go small & light, I think the D5500 is a great option: <a href="http://img.scoop.it/xiZobnn0mzZHhRlGdMPGpTl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9">D5500 in hand</a>.</p>

<p>On the other hand, Nikon DX does not have a full range of compact lens choices like M43 does. It has the kit lenses mentioned above. You could also count the 35dx and 40dx, which are pretty small. The f/1.8 FX primes start getting out of the compact class I think. I would be enthusiastic about a range of compact f/4 prime lenses for FX. And for DX, it would be nice to get a wide angle prime but I am not going to hold my breath. Like Howard and ww, I love my little Coolpix A for a compact DX wide angle :)</p>

<p>D300 w/ Tamron 60mm @f/13</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks Rodeo - I think if I am not able to find a reasonably priced replacement set, I like your idea of peeling off the old and using it as a template. </p>

<p>Thanks x2 Stephen. Appreciate the tip on Pliobond. I did check out cameraleather.com but good idea about contacting them. I will update this post if I learn anything helpful.</p>

<p>Hi everybody,</p>

<p>I just got my first MF camera: A Mamiya M645. I just love it, first two rolls of film were dropped off today and I look forward to picking them up tomorrow!</p>

<p>This particular M645 seems to work quite nicely. It had a CLA within the last couple of years with new foam, etc. However, the leatherette is peeling in multiple places. </p>

<p>My questions:</p>

<p>#1: Does anyone know of replacement leatherette kits for the Mamiya 645? I can't find anything. I reached out to MAC group, but they said Mamiya is being handled by Phase One. I sent an email to them and I am waiting to hear back. Any insider tips on where else I might find new leatherette?</p>

<p>#2: Is there any adhesive that would help reset the existing leatherette? I want something that would work, without causing damage. Maybe a tough ask??</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Okay, just tried again and got the zapper noise in Commander mode, regular noise in TTL mode. </p>

<p>Edwin, I just set my D300 to commander to fire a test shot. Just the normal flash sound, nothing unusual. <strong>BUT</strong>, I know what you are talking about. I have definitely heard the big zapper noise when using CLS. For my test shot, there was no remote flash, so maybe that is part of it? I can try with my SB-800, I mean BZ-800, when I get home.</p>

<p>Andrew, we all know you and the DF are destined to be together :)</p>

<p>Thanks for sharing the link, Peter. The background blur on those shots stood out to me. Maybe this is a function of lens speed. As Shun alluded, it will be harder to limit DOF on this lens versus a 2.8. But the bokeh just looks a little nervous to me nonetheless. I am not a certified bokeh expert.</p>

<p>I agree with Ilkka - I think Nikon would be foolish to abandon the F mount. I am not at all anti-mirrorless but I do not think it is inevitable mirrorless will replace DSLR. I understand the point Shun made about frame rate, and I think that would be a cool option for a lot of photographers and there are probably nice video advantages too.</p>

<p>When talking about the FX format, is there really going to be a huge size difference between a Nikon DSLR and Nikon mirrorless? FX lenses are still FX size, right? We have had threads about the size difference of a Sony A7 kit and a Nikon FX kit and it ain't necessarily a big Sony advantage. </p>

<p>I do appreciate those who want a return to form factor like a Nikon FM or similar. What about a duel FX line of cameras? One is FX DSLR and the other is like FX rangefinder. I think Nikon could approach these hypothetical lines with completely different philosophies. Right now, I would say Nikon FX DSLR is mostly about performance, with size/weight being secondary considerations. For a compact FX rangefinder, I would want pancake lenses and smaller f/3.5 and f/4 designs where possible. Sony seems to have both options with its A7 line, some small lenses and some big boys. Anyways, lots of great cameras for everyone :)</p>