More on old Nikkor 300mm f4/5 Ai lens
Dec 4, 2020 18:12:05 #
My thanks to all who took the time to comment and help. The lens is ok. It is my technique that was lacking.
I entered the lens into the noncpu directory. Put the camera on a tripod. Used live view magnification. Focus point was 26' away, with a fence 6' beyond that.
I entered the lens into the noncpu directory. Put the camera on a tripod. Used live view magnification. Focus point was 26' away, with a fence 6' beyond that.
Dec 4, 2020 18:14:42 #
Dec 4, 2020 18:17:07 #
The f/8 looks great. You might return for an f/11 specimen. The f/16 looks like maybe some camera shake issue(s) as I've never seen diffraction to be that negatively impactful.
Dec 4, 2020 18:37:40 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
The f/8 looks great. You might return for an f/11 specimen. The f/16 looks like maybe some camera shake issue(s) as I've never seen diffraction to be that negatively impactful.
Same here. Not diffraction. This is a 300mm so f16 is hardly a smallish aperture. The lens only closes to f32 which would barely dip a toe into the diffraction pond.
=====================
Consider that 300mm is the normal lens FL for 8”x10”. Allow that a 24x36mm image requires more sharpness than an 8x10 cuz it needs about 6x enlargement for comparison. I’ll skip the exact math cuz that always attracts geeky trolls, but it should be clear enuf that f16 is not in diffraction territory with a 300mm tele used for the “FF” format.
Note that “F - -“ is the sweet spot in its aperture range !
.
300/4.5 Ai, very happy on Sony
(Download)
Focus peaking rawks :-)
(Download)
MF magnifier for ultimate accuracy
(Download)
Dec 5, 2020 01:30:45 #
photog11 wrote:
My thanks to all who took the time to comment and help. The lens is ok. It is my technique that was lacking.
I entered the lens into the noncpu directory. Put the camera on a tripod. Used live view magnification. Focus point was 26' away, with a fence 6' beyond that.
I entered the lens into the noncpu directory. Put the camera on a tripod. Used live view magnification. Focus point was 26' away, with a fence 6' beyond that.
Glad to see you got it sorted out...looks really good. Enjoy the heck out of that lens.
Dec 5, 2020 09:08:13 #
I told you it is a great lens. Your f16 shot is slightly soft and I bet it was your technique. When using a tele it is very possible to have some soft images due to movement of the camera. I believe I told you that wether also influences sharpness, specially on hot days.
It is a great lens. Enjoy it.
It is a great lens. Enjoy it.
Dec 5, 2020 09:41:05 #
olemikey
Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida
photog11 wrote:
My thanks to all who took the time to comment and help. The lens is ok. It is my technique that was lacking.
I entered the lens into the noncpu directory. Put the camera on a tripod. Used live view magnification. Focus point was 26' away, with a fence 6' beyond that.
I entered the lens into the noncpu directory. Put the camera on a tripod. Used live view magnification. Focus point was 26' away, with a fence 6' beyond that.
Happy outcomes are always great...... "Love it when a plan comes together" - enjoy shooting that "old" lens, reminds me I've been meaning to try out my old Nikkor ED 300mm f4 on my little Sony Nex-5N, it's "tank" heavy, but did very well on my DSLR's. Enjoy the ride!!!!
Dec 5, 2020 10:56:12 #
Dec 5, 2020 11:22:40 #
Nice lens with good photo clarity...the older real glass lenses will always be in vogue because of their quality, both the glass lenses and physical construction. You can also purchase an adaptor for almost any conversion.
Example: I have 2 wonderful Topcor R series long lenses with several adaptors for other cameras. My 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4.5 have been used on Topcon and Exakta's, Nikon's, Leica R's and my Canon 40D Digital in manual mode. All with great results. The cost of adaptors is minimal and extends the use of the quality lenses from the past. David C.
Example: I have 2 wonderful Topcor R series long lenses with several adaptors for other cameras. My 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4.5 have been used on Topcon and Exakta's, Nikon's, Leica R's and my Canon 40D Digital in manual mode. All with great results. The cost of adaptors is minimal and extends the use of the quality lenses from the past. David C.
Dec 5, 2020 12:12:42 #
User ID wrote:
Same here. Not diffraction. This is a 300mm so f16... (show quote)
Although diffraction may not be the issue here, I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with your comment that f16 is not diffraction territory for FF or that f32 would “barely dip a toe into the water”. We can discuss what’s significant, but I can tell you from actual measurement that the difference between f11 and f16 is clearly evident on my son’s 300 f2.8L on a FF and on my 100-400L at 400 mm, and I wouldn’t even measure it at f32. No reason to give away sharpness, so the only time I’m beyond f11 on a FF is when I absolutely need the DOF.
Dec 5, 2020 12:31:54 #
olemikey wrote:
Happy outcomes are always great...... "Love it when a plan comes together" - enjoy shooting that "old" lens, reminds me I've been meaning to try out my old Nikkor ED 300mm f4 on my little Sony Nex-5N, it's "tank" heavy, but did very well on my DSLR's. Enjoy the ride!!!!
LOL :-) Your f/4 ED “tank” was the smaller, lighter weight, and closer focusing replacement for the f/4.5 conventional version. Lucky you.
Dec 5, 2020 13:31:09 #
olemikey
Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida
User ID wrote:
LOL :-) Your f/4 ED “tank” was the smaller, lighter weight, and closer focusing replacement for the f/4.5 conventional version. Lucky you.
Both great old lenses. I really like the f4, but compared to the plastic fantastic stuff of today, it definitely is a tank! To clarify - Mine is the AF/IF model, they were produced from 1987 to 2000, all metal 82mm/9 blade/F4-F32/AF-IF-ED/Tripod collar/close focus 8ft....it weighs in at approx. 46OZ. (advertised weight) so it is a handful, and heavier than the f4.5!! Nikon built it to last, probably still be fully functioning long after I'm gone!! Sadly the "fake leather" sock/lens cap was in such sad shape that I don't use it. Some consider it "slow focussing" but mated to modern DSLR's, the screw drive AF is quick enough for most subjects. No stabilization, so fast shutter and/or mono/tripod/beanbag is best. Drop in filter is cool. It is a pleasure to shoot, looks fabulous, fun if you don't mind the weight!
Dec 7, 2020 18:46:31 #
TriX wrote:
Although diffraction may not be the issue here, I’... (show quote)
There’s “actual measurement” and there’s actual use. Big difference.
Dec 7, 2020 19:04:41 #
User ID wrote:
There’s “actual measurement” and there’s actual use. Big difference.
Not really, the measurements quantify what you can expect in actual use. Been waiting for that, so let me ask you this: If you buy good lenses, do you think they are 10% better in terms of sharpness than a cheaper lens? 20%? (Do you know?) So would you willingly give up that 10% by shooting at a smaller aperture than necessary for the DOF you need? So here are 4 actual measurements of the acuity of lenses vs aperture. Hard to argue with the numbers. For me, I want every bit of sharpness I paid for, but to each, their own. If you want to ignore the effect of diffraction or deny it exists, then it’s your choice, but I’m keeping this in mind when I make the inevitable trade offs when I choose SS, Aperture and ISO. That “DLA” line is diffraction limited aperture.
Dec 8, 2020 09:29:14 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.