ebogaerts

I also recommend the HS-12 shade versus the HR-1.

Next is stopped down to f/2.8 Notice how the corners are no longer dark and have a lot more definition.<div></div>

Even though you'll probably get a dozen answers telling you the same thing - yes it's common for the 50mm f/1.2 and a lot of superfast lenses. Below is test shot of the 50mm f/1.2 AIS wide open. The next shot will show it @ f/2.8 for comparison purposes.<div></div>

All giggles...<div></div>

Oh - and I forgot (for comparison purposes)to add the same shot outdoors with the f/1.2 stopped down to f/2.8:<div></div>

But I don't really mind it when I get *this* kind of look:<div></div>

"Shooting at f1.2, well, not very often but good to have. It goes softer at f1.2, and it's difficult for such a shallow DOF. I'm gonna try it outdoor today. But again, plenty of lenses can do that in good lighting. So this lens definitely has it's place."

 

The 50mm f/1.2 should really only be used wide open either when you want that specific "look" (and either want or don't mind the many optical imperfections that you get along with low depth of field) or when you need a fast(er) shutter speed.

 

I don't like to use it wide open outside in bright sunlight, as I get this kind of look:<div></div>

In the link that Michael mentions above - thetesting that Robert collected from myself and others seemed to point to the 50mm f/1.2 having the best out of focus highlights versus the other 50mm Nikkors in the test.

 

However, as with pretty much all lenses that I have ever used - and that includes the 50mm f/1.2 - the bokeh is entirely dependent on how "tough" the background is. For example, I've recieved pleasently soft OOF highlights from streelights at night from the 50mm f/1.2. And, on the same token, I've recieved some really rather harsh OOF highlights from the f/1.2 with foliage during the day. But in general I trust the 50mm f/1.2 to give me good results as long as I make myself aware of the situation that I'm shooting in.

Call this a rant or not, but if some lowlife speaking to me from a retail establishment treated me rudely on a phone and called me a liar, I'd reply with something equally if not more ugly and hang up.

 

And, it's absolutely criminal that the state and city of New York have allowed (by inaction) these operations to exist, period.

"The SB-15 is normally mounted to the left side of the lens casting rather ugly shadows to the other side of the subject. Since it�s low it going to give that deer in the headlamps look even more and it�s more likely to give red eye. The SB-27 mounts the same way as the SB-15 so the ugly shadows and red eye problem are much the same."

 

David -

 

I was under the impression that the off-axis positioning of the SB-15/27 helped to cut down on red-eye rather than contribute to it.

There is an alternative to bypassing Nikon USA with potential grey market equipment..

 

www.authorizedphoto.com

 

..is said to fix equipment regardless of grey or us status and is Nikon USA's former midwest facility.

Or they might be, as the "problemo" seems to have gone away.

"Is there a problem or is this just a preemptive OCD clean freak thing?"

 

An F5 that is giving me a DX ISO "err".

Anyone have recommendations on how to safely clean dx contacts?

Give me a minute..<div></div>

"If you want an education in photography and unbiased opinions from someone who really uses the equipment 'hands on' as opposed to lab tests, Ken Rockewell's site is the place to go."

 

But see, Ken Rockwell also doesn't have a problem letting you know his opinion about a lens that he has never even used.

 

Plus, if you ever email him and make a polite criticism about something on his webpage, his immediate disclosure is something along the lines of "Don't take my website so seriously." Which I feel he thinks automatically disqualifies him from any sort of crticism.

 

There are better places to go for information on photographic equipment. Like here, for example. Or Bjorn's site.

Hi Eric - yeah I've read that the performance is really nice @ infinity. Unfortunately it'll have to compete with my 105mm DC for non-macro useage. :)

 

Thanks for the bit of advice, David. I think I have a small roll of Dymo in the house.

Ah, I thought that this was a defect, or something was worn out. Good to know. And oh, Dan, no whining involved - just a simple question. :)

I recently got ahold of a 105mm f/2.8 AIS micro - wonderful lens. The silver

locking knob, however, does not really lock the focusing ring. It only causes a

slight amount of resistance when tightened down.

 

Is this something that can be repaired? And if so, is it costly?

If Nikon wants to commit to the DX sensor size, and *never* go back to 24 by 36mm, Fine. But I agree with Yaron, in the sense that if they decide to do as such, then quit producing lenses that give 24 by 36mm coverage - and start producing fast DX primes. Nikon has already released enough lenses for their film cameras, and if DX is their future and the bulk of their current sales, then why aren't they making at the very least something similar to the 30mm f/1.4 Sigma?

^^ Conrad kind of beat me to the punch, but he's correct. In regard to David Kelley's question, bokeh is just as much of a matter of how "challenging" the out of focus rendition is. Light coming through foliage is just about the toughest scenario that you can toss at a lens' out of focus rendition. Less challenging situations will give varying results - and I am sure in some cases it might even give relatively soft rendition.

 

Others may have different criteria for considering whether or not a lens has good bokeh, for me it's a lens that can tackle even the most challeging situation.

"Didn't know there was an FE 10"

 

It was never marketed for us over here in the states. Years ago I do remember some NY dealers in photo mags listing it - I'm sure they were all grey market.

"If you can't decide between the 105mm f/2.8 VR, 70-200mm f/2.8 VR, or D200, you are not ready to buy anything. There is no direct comparison between them, so it appears that you don't know what you want or need."

 

No offense intended to others who have chimed in on this thread, but Chris' post sums up the situation pretty much. This is not someone who's contemplating which macro lens to get, or which digital camera to get, and so forth.

 

I'd just hold onto your money, Denali. You have to decide what kind of photography you'd like to get into to justify the big cost of either or those two lenses, and whether or not you'd really benefit from the D200.

"You may also e-mail Nikon USA

 

www.nikonusa.com

 

with the serial number. In a day or so, the folks at Nikon USA should send you a answer"

 

I was under the impression from word of mouth on the web and my own experience that Nikon USA did not divulge USA/Grey status on any product over the phone or by email.

"The D80 does not appear to have the AI indexing tab on the lens mount"

 

Seems to me you wouldn't even need such a thing, at least if you're only talking *AIS* manual focus glass - and of course if you program in the minimum and maximum aperture range.