Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I can fully relate with your bane... (Er.. Maybe too much of Tolkien :-) )
Portraits are my favorite too, as, what can be more interesting for a human being then another human fellow!

Lately, when buying my latest camera, I got the 50/1.8 AF (the cheap plastic contraption) because I had the original 50/1.4 S (the F's one) as the 55/2.8... The new camera (D700) surprised me in many ways, but mostly because it was spot on in MF, as the "little green LED" (the focusing aid) is framed with arrows (left or right) telling you which side you need to turn the focusing ring to achieve focus...(Phew, that was a long phrase for a simple move).
Even in dark settings and at f/1.4!

When I compare the pictures I've made, the MF lenses usually wins... But then, my best lenses are MF (180/2.8, 85/2, 35/2 O.C., etc) because either I already had them from older times or because they where cheap enough to try...

I'm wondering if those lenses were AF, it wouldn't be exactly the same :-)
So, I'm still torn in choosing the next lens to get at the Photo Fair !
(Actually, I'm leaning toward the 105 Micro AF, VR or not) because of portraits and critters...)!

Following are two examples: One of Paul Virilio (good friend and ex co-teacher) in bad light and at 5600 ISO (!) with the 180/2.8 and one of a student in a recent trip to Istanbul in good light with the 50/1.8...

Paul again... Moody...


"What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman

by margouillat (hemidactylus(dot)frenatus(at)wanadoo(dot)fr) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 03:33:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The detail with the manual lens seems better.
By the way, have you seen this article and review posted by Torres two weeks ago.
http://www.rytterfalk.com/2009/04/20/initial-dp2-review-with-full-size-shots/

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 04:09:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Eh, eh... That's what I feel too :-) But then it's the 180/2.8 AI that is an exceptional lens in whatever version (AI, AIS, AFD)!!! I bought mine used when I was 25 (Eeek)!

Thank you for the link ! The DP2 seems a good pocket camera, but those aren't my cup of tea... I used to go everywhere with a Bronica SQ 6x6, even on top of mountains (younger then). So weight or conspicuousness isn't a problem for me, on the contrary.
I feel that once the camera (and the photographer) is seen frankly, he isn't felt as a menace after some time... And big cameras often help for a chat :-)

Though I came into digital with the Coolpix series (swivel ones), I do like the 24x36 feel. I might change when getting older still or when Leica will have a true M something (though I would need to win the loto then...) :-)

"What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman

by margouillat (hemidactylus(dot)frenatus(at)wanadoo(dot)fr) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 04:36:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Just to add that what bothers me more is the lens size. Or to be more precise, those new zooms that are just monstrous (Aka 24-70/2.8)!

I often dream at a zoom that would be as the Leica Tri-Elmar, three primes in one lens, no in between focal length.
A 35-50-85, f/4 would be a dream for traveling :-)

"What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman

by margouillat (hemidactylus(dot)frenatus(at)wanadoo(dot)fr) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 04:49:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
margouillat:
I bought mine used when I was 25 (Eeek)!

So that was about 15 years ago ;)

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!

by LEP on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 05:07:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's what my parents did... After they were 40, their birthday cake was definitely stuck with the same number of candles... I didn't realize until much older, as it seemed normal at that time :-)

"What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman
by margouillat (hemidactylus(dot)frenatus(at)wanadoo(dot)fr) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 05:13:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
margouillat:
105 Micro AF, VR

This is my favourite lens of all time.  My photography tutor from my college course last year has the non-VR and he totally coveted mine and borrowed it a couple of times and came back drooling.  It is an amazing lens. I didn't really know what I was buying at the time but I am so glad I did.

If you are used to MF you'll enjoy it - the AF has trouble sometimes and can't lock easily.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 05:26:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

and came back drooling

Not cheap, but it seems worth it !
I was used to the 85mm on DX for portraits, so I guess the reach of the 105 would compensate somewhat that habit in FX ?
Anyhow, and even if LEP thinks I'm a youngster ( :-) ), I like shooting small critters in summer in my favorite island and can feel my back or my legs when kneeling or sprawling in the thorns with the 55 or the 60/2.8 AFD...!
This one will give me a bit of respite... Till old age when I'll need a 300 or 400 micro !

Fly fishing...

"What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman

by margouillat (hemidactylus(dot)frenatus(at)wanadoo(dot)fr) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 05:49:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
IMHO you may be making too much of lens sharpness vs. style, composition and other factors.  I like both of these portraits and find both are more than adequately sharp. There are, of course, differences in lens resolutions, but you would need to enlarge the detail considerably and ensure other conditions were the same to really compare them. The photo on the left may say more about the D700's capabilities in low light than about lens sharpness.

There are many web sites on lens performance, but  Ken Rockwell's Nikon site has a pretty good discussion and some side by side tests of many many Nikon lenses and their performance as well as candid remarks about other factors. If you or others haven't visited the site, I would recommend it.  Again, personal preference, experience, and opinion differ so be aware.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears

by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 10:36:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You are absolutely right, of course... :-)
In fact, I'm not searching sharpness "per se", and many great pictures aren't that sharp anyhow!
Let's say it's a by product of testing MF and AF (hyperfocal and al)... The 50 is short, hassle free, and cheap (It can take some beating), while the 180 needs the two hands, a bit of thinking and some good positioning :-)

I'm a bit on the "longer" side of focal lengths (even in film days), the 85/2 AI is for me the everyday strolling lens (even for architecture), the 50 is really great, but I feel I would like to try in the 105/135 department...
Those two focals are in DC or micro (for the 105). The DC is for "defocusing" in portraits (I used nylons on enlarger's lenses in old times ;-) ), so the micro/macro one is very tempting.
The 105/1.8 AIS seems the good size to keep in a (big pocket), it's MF.
The latest 105 ED VR is really big but looks like a superb lens (In Whales).
If I find a cheap and clean 105 AIS I might give it a try, if not... I'll break the Piggy Bank and get the Macro VR one for Father's day :-)

As a side note I usually find myself agreeing with Bjørn Rørslett quite often...!

When I'll win loto, I'll get the 85 PC :-)

"What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman

by margouillat (hemidactylus(dot)frenatus(at)wanadoo(dot)fr) on Sun May 31st, 2009 at 01:40:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series