The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun Pictures with Nikon

routlaw

Member
Alex I have this lens, love it for its optical quality though it will soften up at the most extreme movements in the corners. Mechanically I think Nikon could have done better with this lens. The lock knobs are far too small to be useful and often if the lens is in the vertical shift position and you don't really crank down on the tiny lock knob the lens will drop its shift. The tilt mechanism does not a built in brake like the 85 PC lens either, meaning the leveraged weight will just allow the tilting to drop down with gravity if you are not careful. Both issues are annoying at best.

The T/S lenses are no replacement for a LF view camera and its capabilities (image quality aside), they simply do not have the versatility of movements and image manipulations of a true VC. Last year I heard Rodenstock was to come out with some T/S lenses for Nikon and Canon that were much more adept and versatile but thus far they seem like vapor ware.

Bottom line is I would still recommend the 24 PC-E but with the aforementioned caveats. BTW, nice images from that D3x that you have been posting. From my perspective the image quality from this camera seems very unique, not like anything I have seen from Nikon or camera company previously. Colors seem very liquid like without looking plastic.

Below are a couple of images from the D3/24 PC-E combination, which I don't think I have posted before, probably should've checked to make sure.

Hope this helps.

Rob

As to the lenses I really like to try 24/3.5 PC-E for architectural photography. BTW, if anyone tried it how does it compare to large format cameras movement capabilities wise?
 
Last edited:

Lloyd

Active member
Thought I recognized it. I camped there for a week about 16 years ago. Didn't even have a camera with me!! (I did have a fly rod, however;)) Great place, I need to go back.
 

routlaw

Member
I camped there for a week about 16 years ago. Didn't even have a camera with me!! (I did have a fly rod, however;)) Great place, I need to go back.
Nice little campground. The "squiters" are sure ferocious there though. :angry: Should have been some good fly fishing in the area in between swatting bugs though. :thumbup:
 

Lloyd

Active member
Nice little campground. The "squiters" are sure ferocious there though. :angry: Should have been some good fly fishing in the area in between swatting bugs though. :thumbup:
Isn't that the truth (the "squiters" part)! And fishing, not too bad:thumbup: All along Grasshopper Creek, and then along The Beaverhead.

I really did enjoy the State Park as well. Very interesting place. I need to go back one day. Thanks for planting the seed... just might wander up that way sometime this summer.
 

routlaw

Member
Isn't that the truth (the "squiters" part)! And fishing, not too bad:thumbup: All along Grasshopper Creek, and then along The Beaverhead.

... just might wander up that way sometime this summer.
Yeah its a vicious cycle, "squiters" feed on the people, fish feed on the "squiters" and people feed on the fish. Must be a better way, this is totally inefficient not to mention annoying. Seems like there ought to be a way to just let the bugs and fish work it out and leave us people out of loop on this one. :ROTFL:

Stop by if you make it up this way, should be a great year for wildflowers etc given the moisture we have had this winter and spring. Which of course always means more bugs too. :thumbdown:
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
I shot this last night during a session for a friend. There's nothing at all that's especially interesting or striking about it, and yet for some reason I was just absolutely smitten with it as soon as I saw it on the LCD. (That's very unusual for me, so much that I wrote a blog post about it.) You probably won't think much of it, but they say love is blind!


[Tech data, such as it is: D300; 50mm f/1.4 AF-G; ISO 200/ 1/250 @ f/6.3.
Lighting was via my now-standard "no brainer" setup, with most of the light washing out the background of the room and a 16-inch pan reflector frontlighting the subject.]
 

AlexLF

Well-known member
Alex I have this lens, love it for its optical quality though it will soften up at the most extreme movements in the corners. Mechanically I think Nikon could have done better with this lens. The lock knobs are far too small to be useful and often if the lens is in the vertical shift position and you don't really crank down on the tiny lock knob the lens will drop its shift. The tilt mechanism does not a built in brake like the 85 PC lens either, meaning the leveraged weight will just allow the tilting to drop down with gravity if you are not careful. Both issues are annoying at best.

The T/S lenses are no replacement for a LF view camera and its capabilities (image quality aside), they simply do not have the versatility of movements and image manipulations of a true VC. Last year I heard Rodenstock was to come out with some T/S lenses for Nikon and Canon that were much more adept and versatile but thus far they seem like vapor ware.

Bottom line is I would still recommend the 24 PC-E but with the aforementioned caveats. BTW, nice images from that D3x that you have been posting. From my perspective the image quality from this camera seems very unique, not like anything I have seen from Nikon or camera company previously. Colors seem very liquid like without looking plastic.

Below are a couple of images from the D3/24 PC-E combination, which I don't think I have posted before, probably should've checked to make sure.

Hope this helps.

Rob
Wow, the images are perfect!!!

Thank you for the detailed info on the lens. Considering what you said I think I get a 14-24 first and then we'll see. Honestly, I'm glad my Linhof is still with me ;)

BTW, have you done any perspective fine-tuning in PS? Or is it all the lens?
 
Last edited:

routlaw

Member
Wow, the images are perfect!!!

Thank you for the detailed info on the lens. Considering what you said I think I get a 14-24 first and then we'll see. Honestly, I'm glad my Linhof is still with me ;)

BTW, have you done any perspective fine-tuning in PS? Or is it all the lens?
Thanks Alex, glad you liked them.

Just and fyi, I tried 3 different 14-24 lenses on two different D3 bodies and one D2x and ended up rejecting all three due to focusing issues mostly but also some other problems. Due to the very large front element on this lens you will get some very inconsistent focusing issues under critical conditions at virtually all focal lengths. On the one hand I loved the lens for its focal lengths and general overall optical quality, but no amount of in camera focus fine tuning could correct for the problematic focus issues I had with all 3 lenses with 3 different bodies. Over a period of a week I literally ran hundreds of images thinking I was doing something wrong but kept to my methodical methods of testing and came up with the same results each time. I bought the 24-70 and it has worked flawlessly.

Yes I have used PS for small scale perspective corrections and fine tuning and think its ok for that, but would not use it as a complete replacement for what camera movements or T/S lenses can accomplish.

Hope this helps.

Rob
 

Lloyd

Active member
Thanks Alex, glad you liked them.

Just and fyi, I tried 3 different 14-24 lenses on two different D3 bodies and one D2x and ended up rejecting all three due to focusing issues mostly but also some other problems. Due to the very large front element on this lens you will get some very inconsistent focusing issues under critical conditions at virtually all focal lengths. On the one hand I loved the lens for its focal lengths and general overall optical quality, but no amount of in camera focus fine tuning could correct for the problematic focus issues I had with all 3 lenses with 3 different bodies. Over a period of a week I literally ran hundreds of images thinking I was doing something wrong but kept to my methodical methods of testing and came up with the same results each time. I bought the 24-70 and it has worked flawlessly.

Yes I have used PS for small scale perspective corrections and fine tuning and think its ok for that, but would not use it as a complete replacement for what camera movements or T/S lenses can accomplish.

Hope this helps.

Rob
That's very interesting, Rob. I've heard a couple of people beside yourself saying they had focusing issues with that lens as well. I've had one since early after its release, and have had no focusing issues at all. Strange.
 

routlaw

Member
That's very interesting, Rob. I've heard a couple of people beside yourself saying they had focusing issues with that lens as well. I've had one since early after its release, and have had no focusing issues at all. Strange.
Exactly it struck me that way as well especially given the ranting and raving reviews on this lens. I wanted the 14-24 in the worst sort of way too and still do. Mind you there were some very good attributes with the lens though not the least of which was very little distortion even at the widest focal length, no small task to overcome. My guess is for a lens of this complexity the slightest paper thin misalignment of the elements will interrupt the focusing integrity.

At times I could get the corners sharp but the center would be out of focus and vice versa. Using the yardstick method at a steep angle for focus check the 14 mm setting might close focus substantially, then zoom to a shorter focal length like 24 and the lens would be way back focused. Worse still, moving to a mid ground focus target and things might just flip flop from the above scenario. In the field focusing at infinity for landscapes rendered absolutely nothing in focus, not even close. Creating, let alone implementing a saved menu set of focus fine tuning for this lens would have been a nightmare at best, let alone trying to remember the code.

All 3 lenses were consistent with this problem, and none had similar serial #'s, thus I just tossed my hands and gave up.

I am glad you got one of the good copies, and just thought I should warn Alex if he is serious about buying one, run some test first.

Rob
 

Lloyd

Active member
Exactly it struck me that way as well especially given the ranting and raving reviews on this lens. I wanted the 14-24 in the worst sort of way too and still do. Mind you there were some very good attributes with the lens though not the least of which was very little distortion even at the widest focal length, no small task to overcome. My guess is for a lens of this complexity the slightest paper thin misalignment of the elements will interrupt the focusing integrity.

At times I could get the corners sharp but the center would be out of focus and vice versa. Using the yardstick method at a steep angle for focus check the 14 mm setting might close focus substantially, then zoom to a shorter focal length like 24 and the lens would be way back focused. Worse still, moving to a mid ground focus target and things might just flip flop from the above scenario. In the field focusing at infinity for landscapes rendered absolutely nothing in focus, not even close. Creating, let alone implementing a saved menu set of focus fine tuning for this lens would have been a nightmare at best, let alone trying to remember the code.

All 3 lenses were consistent with this problem, and none had similar serial #'s, thus I just tossed my hands and gave up.

I am glad you got one of the good copies, and just thought I should warn Alex if he is serious about buying one, run some test first.

Rob
Thanks for expanding this, Rob. I'm interested in doing some additional testing with my copy now. May take a few days, but I'll update with results.
 

routlaw

Member
How does the problem manifest? I would have thought depth of field would cover up any focusing errors in a lens that wide...
Stuart, see my last post for answers to your first question. Its complex but hopefully my explanation will make some sense.

But regarding your DOF question being covered up by such a lens this has not been my experience. Even at 14 mm which is very wide indeed, if using the lens for extreme foreground to infinity compositions that is not necessarily true given diffraction loss past F8 for a D3x or around F11-ish for the D3. Granted one could stop down further to increase DOF somewhat but in general IQ falls off rapidly from my experience, negating the increased DOF. With my D2x anything past F8-F9 softened up pretty quick which was very frustrating for field work.

Let me know if you need further explanation.

Rob
 

routlaw

Member
Thanks for expanding this, Rob. I'm interested in doing some additional testing with my copy now. May take a few days, but I'll update with results.
Be interesting to see what you come up with, will look forward to your report.

Rob
 

woodyspedden

New member
Alex I have this lens, love it for its optical quality though it will soften up at the most extreme movements in the corners. Mechanically I think Nikon could have done better with this lens. The lock knobs are far too small to be useful and often if the lens is in the vertical shift position and you don't really crank down on the tiny lock knob the lens will drop its shift. The tilt mechanism does not a built in brake like the 85 PC lens either, meaning the leveraged weight will just allow the tilting to drop down with gravity if you are not careful. Both issues are annoying at best.

The T/S lenses are no replacement for a LF view camera and its capabilities (image quality aside), they simply do not have the versatility of movements and image manipulations of a true VC. Last year I heard Rodenstock was to come out with some T/S lenses for Nikon and Canon that were much more adept and versatile but thus far they seem like vapor ware.

Bottom line is I would still recommend the 24 PC-E but with the aforementioned caveats. BTW, nice images from that D3x that you have been posting. From my perspective the image quality from this camera seems very unique, not like anything I have seen from Nikon or camera company previously. Colors seem very liquid like without looking plastic.

Below are a couple of images from the D3/24 PC-E combination, which I don't think I have posted before, probably should've checked to make sure.

Hope this helps.

Rob

Rob

I can almost "taste" the transition from wet to dry in this image. WOW! I just stared at this for about five minutes not so much on the photography but on your ability to catch this in such a visceral way. You are really good man.........keep inspiring the rest of us......please!

Woody
 

routlaw

Member
Rob

I can almost "taste" the transition from wet to dry in this image. WOW! I just stared at this for about five minutes not so much on the photography but on your ability to catch this in such a visceral way. You are really good man.........keep inspiring the rest of us......please!

Woody
Woody thanks so much for the generous compliment, much appreciated and glad you liked the images!

Rob
 
Top