Well it would seem that many of you are happy with your Tessars...also known as originally a 4 element design by Zeiss the same design has evolved as it became faster up to f2.8, with additional correction. The usual focal length is 45-50 in 35mm parlance, 75-125 in MF. any faster and you have a Planar.
Fortunatly the tessars are simple and cheap.
The beauty of the Tessar is: wide open they are the most extraordinary portrait lens available, fewer glass surfaces allows greater micro contrast, not as pin sharp as stopped down, but the subtlest softening of focus only serves the portrait itself. Oh wait, you want to do a landscape picture? Stopper down captain, she can take it.
This is why the Nikkor 45mm f2.8, are so divine still, on a crop sensor the lose the vignette gets and lack of corner sharpness that also contributes to their reputation for portraiture
sr71 wrote:
I ditto that no other.....
Domke, only Domke and always Domke. I have 6, I’ve used them for 30 years, did I say Domke?
Subtle, roomy, tough, cheap enough used on eBay, had a Temba...meh, Tamrac? Meh good straps though, oh and Domke Straps, nothing fancy just perfection
wildweasel wrote:
An older Olympus 70-300 in the 4/3 mount that I use with an adapter to micro 4/3 on my EM1 Mark ll. Really sharp all the way out to 300mm.
Yup, you know the secret! I got the 4/3s 50-200 and 12-60 for a song, work great on my em-1, one simple adapter and I was in business, less than 1/4th the price of comparable set ups.
Oh and I paid $20 on CL for a Nikon FE-2 with 50 f1.4.
Cheap cheap go the birdies
Bigmike1 wrote:
I have had an Olympus E-620 camera for close to 20 years now. I bought it around 1998 or 99 through the Online Post Exchange. It cost me around a thousand dollars. The only savings was probably sales tax. I wasn't looking for an Olympus but this was the cheapest I was able to find. I had looked at a Canon at a local shop that I really liked and wanted to buy but it was around seventeen hundred dollars and I did not feel I could go for that much.
The Olympus served me fairly well until recently. I can no longer view my photos after taking them. The screen fades out after a few seconds. I took it to the local repairman and he said repairs would cost much more than the camera is worth now. It seems that Olympus refuses to sell parts and has a contract with a company in Connecticut or somewhere to do all repair work on their cameras. They are quite expensive. He suggested retiring the camera and buying a used one from KEH or somewhere. I don't think I would buy another new Olympus for this reason. I have a Canon and a Nikon that I use, both used from KEH. The Olympus merely sits on the shelf above my desk now. I was pleased with the pictures it took.
I have had an Olympus E-620 camera for close to 20... (
show quote)
Not aware that in 1998 or there about Oly introduced the e-620, let’s see what a twenty year old digital camera is worth? I suggest that you are assuming that 20 year old cameras should be repaired for free? Anyway sorry your old camera doesn’t work perfectly, digital ain’t film, a lot! Going on inside and in the modern world around you, buck up and buy a newer camera, say a 10 year old e series, around $100, cheaper than repair for certain
RobertW wrote:
When I decided to downsize from my bulky and weighty Nikon Kit, I went to Olympus and have used an EP1, an EPs1, an EM5, an EM1 and am now using a Pen F
Not a single one of these cameras have caused the slightest problem and I have to say I doubt the veracity of the person that tried to bad-mouth Olympus---
I would agree, I have e-600, em1, 2 em-5’s one is IR, love these faultless jewels of camera design. Never not once have I had a problem.
kay55 wrote:
I have been researching bridge cameras on line for a while now and I am on information overload, so now I need to go to a brick and mortar store to actually hold the cameras, I also want their input. The answer I am looking for now has anyone used the Dodd Camera store in Mentor Ohio, I did not see their name mentioned here. Their prices are in line with Amazon and a few others I checked, but I do not know what their reputation is. Any help will be appreciated.
Dodd Camera is great, they have always taken good care of me, I don’t go to the Mentor store but the downtown Cleveland and Fairlawn stores are terrific. I have a rule, if I can get it from a local brick and mortar store, I buy from a local brick and mortar store, even if I have to pay a little more.
Ya want some DR? Get a Fuji s-5 pro, 14 stops no waiting, I’d recommend the S-3 but I don’t want anyone else to know how good it is and drive the price up, to you know, $100.
I’m in the same boat, switched to Oly mft myself, as for bags, the little Domke works great, classic, light and simple
I have a Canon Pixma Pro-100, the 3rd party inks I buy have been terrific, "LCL" and "G&G", never a problem, but I've only done 3 cycles of ink. And, yes I'm curious what others have experienced.
Largobob wrote:
Sorry Flickwet.....I'm still looking for the source I mentioned. I know it's frustrating....and I would have asked for the source as well.
Here are several sites that EXCLUDE the 50mm from the list of recommended lenses for the D850:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/5585760175/nikon-releases-official-d850-lens-recommendation-list
http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/the-d850-blog/the-best-lenses-for-the.html
https://www.thephoblographer.com/2017/10/05/new-d850-here-are-nikons-recommended-lenses/
https://nikonrumors.com/2017/10/12/this-is-the-real-nikon-official-d850-lens-recommendation-list.aspx/
I will continue looking for the source I mentioned.
Sorry Flickwet.....I'm still looking for the sourc... (
show quote)
Oh man don’t worry about it, I’m amazed though, I wonder if it’s about marketing, the Nikkor 50’s are fantastic lenses.
Largobob wrote:
As an aside, I recently read a report about lens quality for the D850. (I wish I could find the reference....). In the report, it claimed that NONE of the 50mm Nikkor lenses are up to par with the pixel count on the D850. Apparently, Nikon hasn't re-engineered their 50mm lenses since the last ice age.
What report where? I find this surprising.
whwiden wrote:
I would stick with your excellent dx camera. If full frame might be in your future, I would look at the 24mm f/1.8 and the 85mm f/1.8 from Nikon. These work well on dx. In fact, they are some of the most highly rated lenses you can get for use on a dx camera. And, they would do justice to a d850. For an alternative single normal lens, look at a Tamron 45mm. For a zoom, look at the new fx version of the 70-300mm vr afp. That lens should also be adequate for a d850. Any of these suggested lenses will be significantly better optically than your current lenses. I would add, however, that your current set of lenses is quite an excellent set, with the 55-300mm being the least strong.
I would stick with your excellent dx camera. If f... (
show quote)
I concur whole heartily, best advice you’re gonna get
I know you stated you want the 24-70 f2.8, yet wouldn’t a DX lens make far more sense? I mean you’re getting a 36-105, nothing wrong with that, but it’s limited compared to what a good DX lens can give you such as 18-xxx, 16-80,85.
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
You are exhibiting at an ART show! You are exhibiting and selling ART and you are the ARTIST! Of course, you shod had sign you work. This has nothing to do with ego, fame or fortune. A signed piece has more value and indicates that the artist takes pride in his or her work. If you continually intend to sell you work, there is no harm or distaste in getting your NAME out there. Perhaps someday soon you will become FAMOUS, why not!
A conservative signature in one of the lower corners of the composition, where it will not distract or obscure any details, is quite tasteful and expected. The mat is part of the framing technique and is not the artwork.If later on the piece is re-framed the mat will probably be discarded. If the signature is on the print, of course, it will remain there!
I have signed all of my portraits and art pieces for the last 5 decades and never received a complaint and in fact, I had clients return for the signature if I occasionally neglected to sign a piece.
Signatures are not usually customary for commercial work or prints entered into professional competitions- the judges are not supposed to know who the makers are and adjudicate strictly on the image.
Avoid a "watermark" or stamped or embossed logo or signature. Do no write "photography. photography by" or any adverting coordinates, just your name. Do not write a notice of copyright or the copyright symbol on the face of any print- that information goes on the back of the print or frame.
I'm old fashioned- I use black or white India ink!
You are exhibiting at an ART show! You are exhibi... (
show quote)
Why not stamp or emboss? I think it serves to enhance the presentation of an artwork
lindann wrote:
I am such a thinker. I take super long to make a decision. I need a sharp lens and not supper heavy. What do you think?
Maybe 24-70 Nikon but is it too heavy. That is the range I am thinking I might need. I like to take photos of the grandkids mostly. Nikon d5100. I am up for opinio. Thank you.
What lens do you have now? Based on your question your knowledge is not that of a pro so...18-55 is sharp, more than sharp enough, 24-70 gives you 36-105 angle of view, is that wide enough? If so than get a 24-120, too slow? Than get a 35 or 50 1.8, not wide enough than 16-85. I would imagine that the 16-85 would suit your needs. You don’t need a pro lens.