Zoom Lenses Seem To Be Increasing In Popularity (Page 9): One feature I miss in today's zoom lenses that were common in the 70s and 80s - push-pull zooming....I know creep was a...

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

One feature I miss in today's zoom lenses that were common in the 70s and 80s - push-pull zooming....I know creep was a problem but I always used to steady the lens with my hands as I was shooting anyway. Also you could do some cool "zoom" effects hard to do with the twist barrel.

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

burkphoto wrote:

That was relatively early in the development of co... (show quote)

I still that early 43-86mm f3.5 zoom, I bought it in early 70 with my Nikon FTn & Nikkormat FTn instead of the standard 50mm, I have been using it many years, It was on one of the bodies all the time, yes it was "ghost" all over the image when shooting against bring light, and a little soft due to no coating on the glass. I always stop it down to 5.6 or 8 to get a sharper image.
I try it with my Df, it comes out fine.

(Download)

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

wingclui44 wrote:

I still that early 43-86mm f3.5 zoom, I bought it in early 70 with my Nikon FTn & Nikkormat FTn instead of the standard 50mm, I have been using it many years, It was on one of the bodies all the time, yes it was "ghost" all over the image when shooting against bring light, and a little soft due to no coating on the glass. I always stop it down to 5.6 or 8 to get a sharper image.
I try it with my Df, it comes out fine.

It’s definitely a special effect lens. There were at least two versions of it, and I had the worst. I am not a big fan of Ken Rockwell, but this sums it up:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-worst.htm

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Mac wrote:

No idea at all? Knowing where you are going and/or why you are going there should give you a pretty good idea.

As my wife and I wander through a forest or swamp, she has her binoculars, and is looking for birds, but I may photograph
(1) entire scene
(2) flowering plant along the path
(3) insect at my feet
(4) small mammal at medium distance
(5) large mammal at medium distance
(6) bird she sees at great distance
(7) something I can't even think of right now

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Mac wrote:

No idea at all? Knowing where you are going and/or why you are going there should give you a pretty good idea.

Or look at the pictures I took while riding a logging railroad last summer
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-473004-1.html
Picture #6 was taken with focal length 18
Picture #7 was taken with focal length 79
The two pictures were taken two minutes apart, with two pictures between them.
I would have hated to change prime lenses as the train lurched between the two locations, especially since part of that time had elapsed before I knew that I wanted to change focal length, but it was an easy task with the 18mm-135mm lens I was using.

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

burkphoto wrote:

It’s definitely a special effect lens. There were at least two versions of it, and I had the worst. I am not a big fan of Ken Rockwell, but this sums it up:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-worst.htm

I read his site too, he give put very useful information that I did use as my reference. Nikon did come out another AI version of that lens later years said to be an improvement.