Nikon D3 And The Old 85/1.4 Nikkor!

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 13, 2007.

  1. Yep! And using proper buying and selling techniques make it seem like the
    equipment is paying you to use it, which, in fact, that is exactly what is
    happening. That's why following the 18-month rule is so important for dSLR
    bodies.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 14, 2007
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. That's because he's using Canon's dreaded 50/1.4. That lenses is even a
    bigger embarrassment for Canon than the 16-35/2.8 is.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 14, 2007
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Why do you think the colour is off?
    Is it because you believe every image must be identical to
    what you think is reality?
    Yes, lenses that do not work do not put colour casts anywhere,
    you do have a point there.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 14, 2007
    #23
  4. Mostly because it is embarrasing to be so much better than the
    competition.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 14, 2007
    #24
  5. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    I've never used any of the Canon or Nikon 85mm lenses, but I can tell you
    I'd prefer the Canon 85 over the Nikon, without question.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Sep 14, 2007
    #25
  6. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    John Smith Guest

    If you've never used either of them, how can you have a preference?
     
    John Smith, Sep 14, 2007
    #26
  7. Most probably the Nikkor won't autofocus nor have the aperture
    controllable by his camera ... which can be pretty important in
    some situations, especially with todays ground glass screens and
    their suitability for manual focussing.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 14, 2007
    #27
  8. Weight. He was going to throw it at "Rita"...

    I'd chose the Canon one for that purpose myself.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Sep 14, 2007
    #28
  9. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    John Smith Guest

    Oh no, did I fall for another fake poster here?
    Is "Rita" really that annoying "Annika" that was here a few years ago?
     
    John Smith, Sep 14, 2007
    #29
  10. Thanks for posting these tests. It seems a lot of people overlook these
    great old Nikkors that can be had for next to nothing. I don't understand
    why manual focus scares people? Plus the little bit of extra yellow you
    speak of is so minimal it is subjective and can be removed in post. I've
    heard of lenses yellowing with age, but have never actually seen one or know
    if this is true. There's no logical reason for newer designed lenses to add
    yellow.

    The amazing part about all of these Nikon bokeh machines and most other
    Nikkors is they use a 9-blade aperture. I think Canon's insistence with
    staying with 8-blades on their L glass is what is optically crippling them.
    I realize Canon has more QA and design issues with their pro lenses other
    than a questionable aperture design.







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 15, 2007
    #30
  11. Beladi Nasralla, Sep 15, 2007
    #31
  12. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Cynicor Guest

    Cynicor, Sep 15, 2007
    #32
  13. Beladi Nasralla, Sep 15, 2007
    #33
  14. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    None of the Nikons will fit my Canon 5D. So I'd prefer to have a lens that
    fits my camera.

    :)
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Sep 15, 2007
    #34
  15. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    That's a great reason, but if I were going to throw something at Rita,
    whoever he is, I'd prefer a huge rock. I want that Canon lens because if
    fits my Canon camera.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Sep 15, 2007
    #35
  16. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    Where can I see the picture of the Rita's "little sweet ass" ?

    I'd bet my house that it's ass is none of the above.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Sep 15, 2007
    #36
  17. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Sep 15, 2007
    #37
  18. ["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
    Interesting --- if you want bokeh, you shoot wide open (or nearly
    so), so the aperture blades do not even come into the equation.
    Though if you are used to having tostop down for acceptable
    image quality I'd understand why you'd harp on the blade number.
    Using Canon L glass, you actually can shoot wide open, so ...
    try it.
    Which is because they sell so many more lenses than, say, Nikon,
    that the absolute number of problems will still be higher,
    even assuming their QA and design is better than Nikons. Or,
    in other words: there are less people dying per year in Rolls
    Royce cars than your average commuter car simply because there
    are so many less Rolls Royce around. Using that fact to claim
    Rolls Royce cars are inherently safer is a naïve fallacy.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 16, 2007
    #38
  19. Except as soon as you said "nearly", you lost that
    distinction.

    Absolutely wide open, yes. 1/3rd of an fstop closed
    down and it *does* make a difference. Hence usually it
    is relevant. It also makes a difference because one has
    an even number of blades and the others have an odd
    number (which is better).
    That's true with the Nikkor lenses too, but sometimes
    that is *not* what you want. The wonder of those great
    lenses like the AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 is that you get
    great bokeh at f/1.4, at f/2.0 *and* at f/4.0 or
    *wherever* it is that you want the depth of field to be.

    And note that the Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 not only has 9
    blades in the diaphram, they are rounded too.
    Got any real numbers to support what you are saying?

    Just like the abuse of numbers in the top part of your
    commentary, I question this last part too...
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Sep 16, 2007
    #39
  20. It performs better than it looks.
    Not really. While I find my 70-200/2.8 a sweet lens that has decent bokeh
    and low light performance, I still find the 85/1.4 superior for performance
    and bokeh. The 70-200 kills the 85 in an AF speed race. I couldn't do
    without either one.
    The 105/2.8 VR seems to be the bastard in the Nikon lineup. I don't know
    what Nikon was thinking, VR on a macro lens is totally wrong. It's still a
    great lens.
    Yep! The old 17-35/2.8 is the lens to have. I don't understand how people
    can claim it is big and heavy when it is lighter than all the primes it
    replaces.





    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 16, 2007
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.