gelandangan wrote:

Gosh.. Thats a heavy accusation Vince. I certainly am not as exalted as you say I wish to imagine that I am close maybe Elvis, thanks for the confidence mate!

Don't sell yourself short mate...you forget I have visited and talked with you...the accolades are well deserved.

Cheers, Vince

Elvis wrote:

you are a brave man D I wouldnt dream of doing that job.

It is the price to pay when buying camera lenses for 25$ off Ebay I guess. I will see how it focuses today outside abit, if it works well (ie zooms and focuses right) I'll be happy. If not, it might need more surgery cause I in that case, reversed a lens or something.

Elvis wrote:

Gelandangan I sure wish I was closer to your store cause you would get all my work.

I have a similar sentiment.

Dimitri

I got the 2nd lens I ordered today, a Kiron 80-200mm lens, which shows me, that the other lens had bigger issues then just the one dirty (or what ever it is) lens.

The other one, from today, shows a nice clear picture, focuses exactly like the Nikon FM manual tells me a picture should look when in proper focus, and well, just simply seems to work.

Looks like I got a dud with the first lens but bought it cheap as a "As Is" off Ebay, what can I do? Live and learn. Mind you the lens I got today I was more interested in, as I prefer to take pictures from a distance anyways, or when taking pictures up close, I like to focus on a small detail of a object, and this lens has a working "Macro" setting.

Will still have to pick up a 50mm lens as a general lens though per your advice Geland.

Dimitri

D,
A good 50mm F1.2 would cost about $300+ at today's price, it was about $800 20 years ago.
a 50mm f1.8 which are quite decent can came as low as $100 if it is the "E" series lens.

Generally you want a large aperture so you can gather a lot more light for better image,
also, a larger lens gives you a narrower depth of field so you can isolate your subject from the background.
Buying sight unseen lens or other camera items off the net may resulted in big disappointment.

I had a customer came in with an EOS-5D MKII
(which arguably is the digital SLR with the awesomest video recording ability at the time of its release)
Bought it cheap at half the price of the day from an individual in Latvia, he complain that it wont switch on.
Oh handling the camera, right away I found that there is something wrong..
The camera was lighter than usual..
On further investigation, we found that he only get the shell of the camera with all the external gears built on,
but it has internal parts removed ..
Well, I saw a grown man cry that day.. it wasn't nice to look at.

This incident is not the only one that we see.. a lot of time, people bought cameras with tiny little crack at the body,
the seller claim that all works Ok.. yes it is, until the tiny crack inside develop into a large crack and things starts falling apart.

Cheap does not mean good, cheap means cheap, unless you know what you are doing,
buy your gears from reputable certified sellers.

For the total cost of your outlay, you could have gotten a good Nikkor prime

Your right about good sellers, which is why I looked for cheap lenses, kind of like a "insurance" policy of sorts.

Still its ok, I expected one or the other to be a dud, just glad the Kiron is good, as they were good lenses back when they were being made, as they were designed and build by a company that was staffed with Engineers formally from Nikon.

gelandangan wrote:

For the total cost of your outlay, you could have gotten a good Nikkor prime

Well, both lenses together with shipping were only 70$. Even for a used 50mm prime manual focus Nikkor/Nikon the cheapest I've seen around here is over double that at around 200-250$. Mind you they seem to sell a NIKON AF 50MM F1.8D for 145$ new, but I am wondering about quality with it being so much cheaper then the rest of the line up. Seems to be all plastic and made in China from the reviews.

Dimitri

gelandangan wrote:

D, A good 50mm F1.2 would cost about $300+ at today's price, it was about $800 20 years ago. a 50mm f1.8 which are quite decent can came as low as $100 if it is the "E" series lens.

Geland,

Well I got my money today so first thing I did is, I picked up the Nikon 50mm f1.8D, new, today at the local store, set me back just under 165$ with taxes. It was the store that mixed up the film, cause they feel better to me then the rest of them near by, but the lens comes with a 60 month! Warranty, that is crazy for a little plastic bodied lens.

It is definitely clearer then both of the other lenses, and works better with the focusing element then the telephoto lenses.

But I asked, its their cheapest Nikon lens, unless I buy one of those plastic ones that Holga makes with a F-mount which is about 40$.

Dimitri

good to see you are getting the gear sorted out Im sure I speak for the others when I say we look forward to seeing the results.

That's the way D!
use a serious lens on a serious camera!
you'll find that without zoom, you tends to get more detailed pictures.
Zoom lens would only give you the look of a certain angle, whereas short focus prime lenses 'forces' you to walk forward and thus enable you to see many different angles of the subject.

There is an extra benefit, the more you walk, the healthier you get

forgot to say, focusing split rings would work best with larger aperture lenses.

Geland,

I have 3 different lenses pictures now on a single 36-Exp roll of Velvia, just need a couple more shots to complete the roll, then I'll get them to do a process and scan or something so I can post them here.

Geland, larger aperture as in a combination of f-stop and objective lens size?

Dimitri

the aperture is the diameter of of the optical path.

the f stop is the ratio between the focal length to the aperture.
F1.8 in a 50mm lens would have an aperture size of 50mm / 1.8 or 27.78mm
a 50mm f1.2 lens would have aperture size of 41.67mm !!
Quite an improvement in surface area of the optical path.

The larger the aperture (or smaller F stops) the better and clearer the image going to be.
The "holy grail" are those lens with F stops less than 1, I have a rare 1958 Minolta with F 0.9
Sadly, these ultra larger lens are no longer made, it cost too much for an average joe.

Dimitry, try to take pictures of something (eg a cartridge) about 1 meter away from you, with background of a large park or some large opening (not sky).
Take a picture focusing on the cartridge, but vary the F stops from the lowest to the highest.
If you have a large aperture lens, you will see dramatic changes with each picture shot.

gelandangan wrote:

the aperture is the diameter of of the optical path.

I kind of get that, based on what wikipedia has to offer on the subject. As well as the ability to focus by "bracketting" stuff closer and farther away by changing the depth of field but still quite confused, at this.

gelandangan wrote:

Quite an improvement in surface area of the optical path.

Very true.

gelandangan wrote:

Sadly, these ultra larger lens are no longer made, it cost too much for an average joe.

The average professional probably can't afford them either. There is a Leica (Noctilux-M) which is "slower" then yours, at f0.95 for a 50mm, that is listed at 10,500$!

Dimitri