don_copeland

<p>Get the Katz Eye. It's probably not much more expensive and comes with the tool to remove/insert.</p>

I use the Katz Eye in my D700. Love it. I had to make a few adjustments when installing it and

Rachael Katz, family business owner, gave perfect support (on a weekend). It is a genius design and

installation. She warns (as do others) that it is a more precise and delicate operation than changing

on my F3. I actually found it to be incredibly easy, easier than the F3, especially with the instructions

and tool that comes with the product. Focussing is a dream with the split image with MF Nikkor AIS

and Zeiss ZF. If you want it and can afford it, buy it. If you need support you can easily get it. You

won't regret it. It will not be a bad decision. And If I'm wrong, you can probably get most of your

money out of it on eBay while your model is somewhat current.

<p>Peter thanks for being the guinea pic, canary in a coalmine.</p>

<p>Same lens, no problem.</p>

<p>Love my Primes over zooms. I slow down the process and shoot more angles and prespectives by foot.</p>

<p>I had my 5400 converted to IR.<br>

5400 is a magic little beast; I've had 3 of them.</p>

<p>Primes baby. Primes will make you work for it and LOVE it.</p>

<p>I upgraded from the Nikkor you ask about to the Zeiss ZF 100mm Makro Planar f/2.0<br>

It's 3.5x the price and just a beautiful lens. If you never upgrade, you'll never notice the difference. that one you have is damn near perfect. if you want to sell it on Ebay and plunk another $1000 down, get the Zeiss. Wait for the Chip. Or have only one AIS lens.</p>

<p>Get the Katz split screen for some of the Nikons. D700 for mine. The camera needed a slight calibration and they talked me through it on the phone. Excellent product and excellent personal service; the owner gave me her cellphone number and helped me calibrate it on a Saturday. They truly love what they do and so you get a great product and great service. </p>

<p>Don't forget, live view will not work when the aperture control is on the lens, it needs to be via the body's sub command dial</p>

<p>Ted, for future technology sake, hold out on the ZF.2.</p>

<p>John Morris and any others that use D700. It is important to select aperture control on the body if you want to use Live View. If you select aperture on the lens-ring, Live View does not work (on many lenses).</p>

<p>Joseph, regarding item 1, question. When I program my lenses into my D700, does it also consider the angle for metering? I had always assumed that it was just a max aperture index. I'm not challenging you, I simply don't know.<br>

2. Monochrome D90? That's a new one one me. Do tell. It is common opinion that digital is not good for B&W, so Is it a sensor change?<br>

6. Opinion, and mine is different, out of 25 years ritual turning the ring. Truthfully, I was excited about aperture control on the body when the N80 came out. But I quickly realized I'm an old-school aperture ring guy. I understand why they are gelding lenses, however on a $1500 lens they should be able to add the cost of the aperture ring. just my whining opinion.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ted, you will love, love love your 100mm Makro Planar when you get it. The only thing you need to know is it is 1:2 and it has a very long focus throw. I takes a few turns to go from Makro to distance.</p>

<p>Ted, don't let that stop you from getting the Zeiss Makro. Buy either model you want, the chipped or the non-chipped. Not many Nikkors are retro-upgradeable either. I think it's a bigger crime to manufacture "G" or gelded lenses without the aperture ring that I cannot shoot on my perfect F3.<br>

Perhaps the reason to chip the ZF lenses is so that they can be used on lesser models.</p>

 

<p>Ilkka, you are right, it is of no difference than the Nikkor AIS lenses, and generally no big deal. Unless, as you mention several lenses in the bag. But I do have 3 Ziess and 2 Nikkors in the bag that I need to set the data for the lens when I change the lens. I have a few Autofocus, but I generally reach for the manual primes. Interestingly, I have a Cosina Voigtlander 20mm Color Skopar and it has the chip. <br>

I do not think EXIF depends on the chip, but I'm not positive. Also, I thought that most of today's modern MF Nikkors have the chip, but again I'm not certain. I do know the 45 is a P, chipped, lens.<br>

Ilkka, you have a point in that it does not matter, really. Cause if we are using manual focus primes, we are slowing down for thought, quality, ritual and precision anyhow.</p>

 

<p>Hi,<br>

When the news broke this week that Cosina-Zeiss will be introducing a line of 'chipped' AIS lenses, I sent a note to the Product Manager at Zeiss asking if my ZF's will be upgradeable to ZF.2. <strong>Here is their response:</strong><br>

Dear Mr. C.......,<br /><br />Thank you very much for your email.<br />Carl Zeiss is not currently offering an upgrade of the ZF lenses to ZF.2 lenses as limitations in use must be generally expected. <br /><br />Mit freundlichen Grüßen/ Kind regards<br />Nicole Balle<br /><br />HINWEIS: Ich bin vom 24. Dez bis 10. Jan nicht erreichbar.<br />PLEASE NOTE: Our offices are closed from Dec 24th to Jan 10th.<br />________<br /><br />Carl Zeiss AG<br />Geschäftsbereich Photoobjektive / Camera Lens Division<br />Marketing/PR</p>

 

<p>I own three of the Zeiss lenses for my D700. Sometimes when I change lenses, I forget to set the camera to the non-cpu lens (non-chipped). And I am super bummed that mine don't have the chip now that I hear the new ones will. I hope they will have an upgrade program whereas I can send my lenses to be converted. I wrote an note to the Product Manager over at Zeiss to ask him to develop such a program.</p>

<p>it might not be the chip. make sure it's in the mode to change your aperture on the sub-command dial and not the aperture ring. try that. <br>

My Tokina (same lens) workswell on my D700</p>

<p>Peter Hamm Wrote:<br>

"A DX camera, like a D300, would, because of the crop factor, make your 400mm reach into an effective field of view of 600mm. There might be your answer. That is the chief ADVANTAGE of DX sensors!"<br>

This makes me pause and consider my lens strategy for a big, expensive, fast and long lens for my D700. Maybe keep my 180 f/2.8 and get a used D200, instead of dropping whopping dollars on a sweet 70-210 2.8 VRII.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I've had some problems using live view with some Nikkors and Non-Nikkors. Be sure to set your custom function for aperture control on the sub command dial and NOT the aperture ring on the lens.</p>

<p>I've had some problems using live view with some Nikkors and Non-Nikkors. Be sure to set your custom function for aperture control on the sub command dial and NOT the aperture ring on the lens.</p>

<p>James, regarding that F7 you found, keep it handy. While in live view, some lenses don't work when F7 set the change the aperture on the lens. You must select aperture with command dial. Otherwise, live view is dead on my Nikon Nikkor 16mm AF-d, Zeiss ZF 25, 50, 100, and Voigtlander 20mm. My other AF Nikkors and AIs Nikkors work fine with Live View. Also, find the Custom Function for Exposure delay. When you are on the tripod, it gives a one-second delay before releasing the shutter - settles the camera down from hand motion.<br>

I don't like "G" because I've always controlled my shot by aperture and I've always rotated the dial, starting in high school in the 80's with Pentax K1000, Canon AE-1, in the 90's with Nikon N6006 and N90s and now with the D700. But some of the G lenses are simply wonderful glass. It makes perfect design sense to remove the cost, weight and breakable parts from the lens, I'm just spoiled.</p>

<p>Regarding the Non-AI, You will need to change the custom function for aperture selection from the aperture ring to the sub-command dial. You will need to shoot in Manual mode, trial and error for shutter speed.<br>

I have the D700 and the Nikon PK13 non-ai tube. <br>

And I do not think you can shoot faster than full aperture, wide open. That's a bummer.<br>

I suggest the AI or AF versions. Kenko AF versions are same price on Ebay today as B&H.<br>

Good luck.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ok, I got both lenses in. Side by side, the 2.8-4 is a little larger in diameter and length, but feels more solid, more tank-like (again in a good way). I did a quick and dirty under the following contraints; Focal lengths 24, 35, 70, 85 @ f/wide open, f/5.6, f/8, f/11 and f/22. On both lenses for light falloff, distortion, aberation and sharpness (by eye of familiar urban landscapes). tripod mounted, 200 iso daylight, corrected exposure +0.7 for detail comparisons.<br>

Both lenses performed almost identical in that sharpness and falloff were acceptable by f5.6 and above. Both lenses presented evidence of what Thom Hogan and Ken Rockwell talk about (sharpness, falloff, distortion), but my samples were quite acceptable for what I expecteds. These are high quality Nikkors. Certainly not as well as the 24-70, but I'm not sure the 24-70 Af-s F/2.8 G is worth four or five or six times the money. (I paid used $275 for the AF-s, and $350 for the 2.8-4, both EX+). <br>

The 2.8-4 feels better and I like the macro in a pinch, for a walkabout. Otherwise I love my 105mm Af-d Micro-nikkor at 1:1. Both focus quickly; AF-s is nice if that is important to you. Otherwise the f2.8-4 is acceptable.<br>

What I don't like about BOTH lenses is that when they zoom, they extend way out. It looks cheap and it's also how I busted a 18-200 dx. I tapped the extended front element on the table and the zoom crumbled like dry toast. It was an eB*y acquisition, so I called Nikon to confirm it was a Nikon USA model which they looked up and assured me it was. I sent it in and they returned it unfixable as not a USA model - go figure. They tell me it is, they tell me it's not. So, that's the last of cheap construction zooms for me. I am hoping these lenses are not similar, but I'm afraid the AF-s is. I've dropped many of my nikkors dozens of times and just known they were toast, but they survive unscathed or just a tad more seasoned. All my primes (16, 24, 85,105 and 180) have tumbled and rolled and survived; they got broken hoods or filters but the lenses always take the beating and survive; viva la Nikkor. I hope these Viva la well.<br>

The 2.8-4 weighs about 19.5 oz and the AF-s weighs about 15.3 oz. About a 1/4 lb difference for 1/2 stop (which is meaningless at 1600-3200-6400 iso). Our D700's will eat this half stop, even in low light. <br>

The other test I did was go into a windowless room and try to focus in a dark corner of the closet. Both performed flawlessly, better than I could see through the viewfinder. The f/2.8 did not appear to me much brighter in the viewfinder if at all. I give all this credit to the D700 and I'm not sure a fair test on the brightness of these lenses in the viewfinder or ability to focus in low light can realistically be performed on the D700 - perhaps on a lesser camera the difference will be evident.<br>

So, In reality either one of these is probably fine; pick one and don't look back. What's more important? AF-s Gelded vs Aperture Ring? F/2.8 vs lighterweight? only you know.<br>

I'm still undecided and unthrilled (unthrilled because of the giraffe-neck zoom); I might take a good hard look at the Sigma HSM 24-70.<br>

Whichever you choose, happy shooting.<br>

-Don in SF</p>