Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Fixed Focal Length Lenses you use on DSLR

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 5:17:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at
this crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense.
That's a very narrow 15° or thereabouts.

My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
on a most-of-the-time basis.

The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.

The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...

So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
June 1, 2005 5:54:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 7kqig$jg1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
> The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
> Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at this
> crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense. That's a
> very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>
> My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
> useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
> on a most-of-the-time basis.
>
> The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>
> The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL lenses
> (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>
>
> --
> -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
> -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
> -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
> -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Most of my FFL primes are non-CPU manual focus (which means they don't
meter on my D70). But, here goes:

50mm f/1.8AFD -- portraits
60mm f/2.8AF -- macro
8mm f/2.8AI -- when I feel "creative" or am frustrated by the FOV multiplier
doing in my lens choices <g>
500mm f/8 -- don't use on DSLR
24mm f/2.8 -- don't use on DSLR
everything else is a zoom

What do you have in mind for the 300mm f/2.8? Wildlife? Long enough for
birds?

George
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 6:41:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 7kqig$jg1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
> The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
> Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at this
> crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense. That's a
> very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>
> My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
> useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
> on a most-of-the-time basis.
>
> The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>
> The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL lenses
> (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>

55mm macro for close-ups
85 1.8 for portraits
500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.

I recently had a chance to play with a 105 f2.8 AF micro lens and really
like it a lot. Nice for close-ups and really tight portraits.

All lenses are Nikon on a D70
Related resources
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 6:56:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

george wrote:

> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:D 7kqig$jg1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
>>The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
>>Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at this
>>crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense. That's a
>>very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>>
>>My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
>>useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
>>on a most-of-the-time basis.
>>
>>The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>>
>>The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>>
>>So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL lenses
>>(often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Alan.
>>
>>
>>--
>>-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
>>-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
>>-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
>>-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
>
>
> Most of my FFL primes are non-CPU manual focus (which means they don't
> meter on my D70). But, here goes:
>
> 50mm f/1.8AFD -- portraits
> 60mm f/2.8AF -- macro
> 8mm f/2.8AI -- when I feel "creative" or am frustrated by the FOV multiplier
> doing in my lens choices <g>
> 500mm f/8 -- don't use on DSLR
> 24mm f/2.8 -- don't use on DSLR
> everything else is a zoom
>
> What do you have in mind for the 300mm f/2.8? Wildlife? Long enough for
> birds?

I'm not much of a bird shooter. I use it at fairly short distances for
sports and some people shot. For horse jumping last year it was perfect.

300 is not -that- long, but on the 7D is like 450mm equiv. for 35mm. So
it can be used for birds if close enough. Add the 1.4x or 2x and a
pretty long lens is at hand...

The problem with the 300 f/2.8 is its size and weight. Handhoding is a
forget about it proposition. I use a Manfrotto 58 tripod (monster)
with a Wimberly head (monster) with the 300... so it's definitely not a
casual use lens. I'd like to try it an airshow, the Wimberley should be
ideal for that. I'd like to find a smaller/lighter tripod to use with
that lens. My 190 is to small, head is wrong. Monopod is okay.

I'd sell the 300 f/2.8 if I had a reasonable offer. I just don't get
enough use out of it.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
June 1, 2005 9:08:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
>
> > 500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
>
> Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
> (750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
>
> Post please (with highlights).
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>

Remember, Tony Polson has taught us that aperture shape does not
matter. Therefore, you cannot see any donut-shaped defocused
highlights in pictures takn with a 500/8 mirror lens.

Brian
www.caldwellphotographic.com
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 9:25:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Sheldon wrote:


> 500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.

Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
(750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?

Post please (with highlights).

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 9:48:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:17:03 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
> lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?

I have 28mm and a 50mm f/1.8 primes. They're a stop and a third
faster than any zoom I own at any focal length, so there's that.
Also smaller and lighter, particularly the 50mm. Sometimes I use
that as my walkaround lens when my back hurts. :-)

I used to use the 28mm pretty much exclusively, as I was trying to
get good at using a "normal" focal length. You know, the usual
Henri Cartier-Bresson worship. I might do it again for a little
while, I've felt kinda photographically stagnant for the last week
or two, and the discipline might loosen me up.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
June 1, 2005 11:02:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL lenses
> (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?

400mm 5.6 L and 1.4x for wildlife , on 10D
85mm 1.8 for general use
rest are zooms
tempted by 200mm f2.8 L (will give 280 with 1.4x)
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 1:30:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 7kqig$jg1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
> The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
> Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at this
> crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense. That's a
> very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>
> My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
> useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
> on a most-of-the-time basis.
>
> The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>
> The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL lenses
> (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>
>

15mm fisheye Sigma, 50mm f1.8 Canon, 100mm f2 Canon, the latter two when
speed counts...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 3:57:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d7kqig$jg1$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
>Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at
>this crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense.
>That's a very narrow 15° or thereabouts.

[ ... ]

>So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
>lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?

Well ... of my lenses, only two (which can be convinced to work
with the D70 without aperture ring surgery) are zooms.

I'll list them first:

1) 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 D -- general purpose lens when walking around.
Good macro capability.

2) 80-200 f4.5 -- Has AI, but not a CPU. I have actually not yet
used this on the D70, though I used it on the NC2000e/c before,
as the metering worked there.

Now the "primes":

First the ones with CPU:

3) 50mm f1.4 AF with CPU. Nice light lens when I can live without
zoom -- especially when I'm doing a lot of walking. It is small
enough to be protected by the crook of my elbow when walking in
crowds or in other close quarters.

It's f1.4 maximum aperture lets me do a lot more in low light
without needing to fire up the flash.

4) 180mm f2.8 -- manual focus, retrofitted with a CPU. Nice long
reach (effective FL is 270mm).

Now those without:

5) 20mm f2.8 with AI, so I can mount it, but not use it with
built-in metering. Exposure by hand-held meter or by guessing
and chimping the histogram.

Used when the zoom does not go wide enough. (Note that I do not
have the "kit" lens.)

6) 16mm f3.5 Fisheye -- same metering situation as above.

Used when I need even more coverage -- or actually want the
distortion.

The lenses listed above live in the camera bag or on the camera,
depending on my current whims -- with the exception of the 80-200mm
f4.5. My most likely uses for that would require the metering to work
for quick response. A pity that it is not one of the ones which can be
converted, since I love the push-pull zoom with the same control as the
focus (rotate to focus, slice to zoom).

The rest live elsewhere except when needed. I'm not going to
carry those around as a regular thing.

7) 200mm f4 Medical Nikkor -- built in ring flash. Exposure
calculation is built into the lens, so I just set the camera to
manual mode and shoot. Good for evenly illuminated extreme
close-up -- down to 1:1 or a bit beyond.

8) 500mm f8 Reflex Nikkor. Not yet used on the D70, but I have on
the above-mentioned NC2000e/c.

Now -- of my stable of other, older, Nikor lenses, there are two
which I am considering modifying the aperture ring so I can use them
(but I have not yet modified them, so they will not yet mount).

9) 55 3.5 Micro (Macro) -- with the dedicated extension tube to go
beyond 1:1 ratio.

10) 300mm f4.5 -- nice long chunk of glass, once I can mount it.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
June 2, 2005 4:16:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
>
> The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
> Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at
> this crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense.
> That's a very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>
> My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
> useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
> on a most-of-the-time basis.
>
> The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>
> The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
> lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>
>


50/1.7 - indoor
135/2.8 STF - pretty people
200/2.8 APO - bad people
500/8 - bad people
2032/10 - really bad people

The big boys haven't spanked the tender new 7D yet.

The rest are walking zooms.


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
June 2, 2005 5:22:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:



50 F2 macro stays on the camera with the 11-22 close at hand..

--

Stacey
June 2, 2005 9:09:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <3g7jcgFaurvdU1@individual.net>, fotocord@yahoo.com says...
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>
>
> 50 F2 macro stays on the camera with the 11-22 close at hand..
>
>

I use:

135mm f2.8 Yashika (manual lens) with eos adapter

50mm f1.8 Yashika (manual Lens) with eos adapter

Along with a fully manual zoom 80-200 f4 made by Rokinon

These lenses are all more than 30 years old. The Rokinon has some ca and
doesn't focus as easily as the others.




--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 12:27:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>
> 300 is not -that- long, but on the 7D is like 450mm equiv. for 35mm. So
> it can be used for birds if close enough. Add the 1.4x or 2x and a pretty
> long lens is at hand...
>
> The problem with the 300 f/2.8 is its size and weight. Handhoding is a
> forget about it proposition. I use a Manfrotto 58 tripod (monster) with
> a Wimberly head (monster) with the 300... so it's definitely not a casual
> use lens. I'd like to try it an airshow, the Wimberley should be ideal
> for that. I'd like to find a smaller/lighter tripod to use with that
> lens. My 190 is to small, head is wrong. Monopod is okay.
>

I would have thought the 190 tripod would be okay, what head? 141?

> I'd sell the 300 f/2.8 if I had a reasonable offer. I just don't get
> enough use out of it.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>
>
> --
> -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
> -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
> -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
> -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 2:11:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

BC wrote:

>
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>Sheldon wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
>>
>>Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
>>(750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
>>
>>Post please (with highlights).
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Alan
>>
>
>
> Remember, Tony Polson has taught us that aperture shape does not
> matter. Therefore, you cannot see any donut-shaped defocused
> highlights in pictures takn with a 500/8 mirror lens.

All bow to the master. Facing the other way with pants down of course.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 2:37:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:

>
> I would have thought the 190 tripod would be okay, what head? 141?

Yeah, "okay" with the ctr column down, just not tall enough. A medium
ball head (252RC) and that is definitely too small. Also I have to
switch from the Kirk plate for the wimberley and the 252RC plate, so
easier to just use the 58. I discovered yesterday that my little golf
pull cart is ideal for lugging around large tripods and such. It has
wide wheels on it, so should be good in the woods.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
June 2, 2005 5:31:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:

>
> The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
> Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at
> this crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense.
> That's a very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>
> My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
> useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
> on a most-of-the-time basis.
>
> The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>
> The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
> lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>
>
I sold my 28mm, 50mm , 135mm, and 200mm nikkors. I was not using them
at all with a DSLR. I bought a 105mm macro with the proceeds, and use
that quite a lot. My complete lens kit is 18-70, 70-210, 105 macro.
Everything fits in a small bag. Nothing is on my wish list at present.
Something very wide would be nice, but not at current prices thanks.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 8:08:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
> lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>

Although I love the convenience of zooms and have to admit that
today's zooms perform much better than what I can ask for, there are
many situations where I continue to rely on my primes:

- low light situations: while constant F:2.8 zooms are great, there
are still too many times, I need to pull out my 85 F:1.8 (Nikkor AF).
I also carry a manual focus 35 F:1.4 which has saved me numerous times.
Compared to the 28-70 F:2.8, using this pair of fast 85 and 35 lenses
is like pushing the ISO from 800 to 3200 on my D2H with the 2.8 zoom.

- "street photography": there are many people who swear by the
combination of a Leica M and a 35mm Summicron and I have to admit that
there is something to be said about that "style" of photography.
In the past, on occasions, I used a Leica CL with the 40mm at events,
and the results were always very satisfactory. The only true
equivalent camera in the digital world is the Epson RD-1, but this is a
really expensive proposition. What I have done is replicate this
"street photography" experience with a Pentax *ist-DS and an old
Vivitar manual focus 24 F:2.8. This is definitely not the same as
using a rangefinder but it's almost there for me.

Anyway, there are always places for primes regardless how good zooms
are.

Comments? Thoughts? I would love to hear others.

Escaper.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 1:55:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 7l93e$1ai$2@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Sheldon wrote:
>
>
>> 500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
>
> Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
> (750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
>
> Post please (with highlights).
>
> Cheers,
> Alan

Used to shoot a lot of 35mm sports with the 500 with donuts in the
background. Otherwise, very sharp lens. So far the only thing I've shot
with the D70 is a window across the street (just an experiment - nobody in
the window) and some shots of the moon -- with no out of focus background no
donuts. I'll try to come up with something and post it. Unfortunately that
500 = 750 which is more lens than I need most of the time. Whatever I shoot
would have to have an out of focus background.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 3:09:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:

> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
> lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?

I'm shooting a 1.5x crop factor digital.

20mm f2.8 is commonly on as a "walking around" lens
17mm f3.5 is commonly on as my widest lens (not wide enough! I owned
it before I went digital, it was wide enough as my widest lens on
film)
58mm f1.2 for portraits
105mm f2.8 macro for...macro
I find my 135mm f2 is fairly rarely on in recent months, ditto my
300mm f2.8
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 6:51:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 7l93e$1ai$2@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Sheldon wrote:
>
>
> > 500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
>
> Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
> (750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
>
> Post please (with highlights).
>
> Cheers,
> Alan


I'm not Sheldon, but here's one of my 600mm f/8 shots (*1stDs) I'm rather
fond of:
http://faxmentis.org/html/moonbyjove.html

or
http://faxmentis.org/html/jpg/moon-by-jove-01.jpg (image w/o editorials)

--
Jeff R.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 6:51:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jeff R wrote:

> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:D 7l93e$1ai$2@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
>>Sheldon wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
>>
>>Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
>>(750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
>>
>>Post please (with highlights).
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Alan
>
>
>
> I'm not Sheldon, but here's one of my 600mm f/8 shots (*1stDs) I'm rather
> fond of:
> http://faxmentis.org/html/moonbyjove.html

In the context of image rendition, not all that useful... not bad shots,
BTW.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 6:51:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 02:51:27 +1000, Jeff R <contact.me@this.ng> wrote:
>
> I'm not Sheldon, but here's one of my 600mm f/8 shots (*1stDs) I'm rather
> fond of:
> http://faxmentis.org/html/moonbyjove.html

Hey, that's really neat. Thanks for sharing.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 8:56:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 7ngqc$14c$2@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Jeff R wrote:
>
> > http://faxmentis.org/html/moonbyjove.html
>
> In the context of image rendition, not all that useful... not bad shots,
> BTW.
>
>

Thanks.
I've only had the lens for a few weeks, and my terrestrial
"doughnut-infested" shots are not worth posting.
Yet.

Cheers.

--
Jeff R.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 2:11:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:
>
>
>>So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
>>lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>
>
> I'm shooting a 1.5x crop factor digital.
>
> 20mm f2.8 is commonly on as a "walking around" lens
> 17mm f3.5 is commonly on as my widest lens (not wide enough! I owned
> it before I went digital, it was wide enough as my widest lens on
> film)

I like my 20mm for film. On digital (1.5x) it's a bit of a lost soul.

> 58mm f1.2 for portraits
> 105mm f2.8 macro for...macro
> I find my 135mm f2 is fairly rarely on in recent months, ditto my
> 300mm f2.8

Hmm, we have spookily similar lens collections...

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 3:14:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:

> David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:
>>
>>>So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
>>>lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>> I'm shooting a 1.5x crop factor digital.
>> 20mm f2.8 is commonly on as a "walking around" lens
>> 17mm f3.5 is commonly on as my widest lens (not wide enough! I owned
>> it before I went digital, it was wide enough as my widest lens on
>> film)
>
> I like my 20mm for film. On digital (1.5x) it's a bit of a lost soul.

It's maybe a touch wide, but it's an AF, so for some things I prefer
it to my 24mm f2 (which I see I forgot to mention) which is manual
focus. I never did get to like 28mm, so it's strange that the
30mm-equiv I like decently.

>> 58mm f1.2 for portraits
>> 105mm f2.8 macro for...macro
>> I find my 135mm f2 is fairly rarely on in recent months, ditto my
>> 300mm f2.8
>
> Hmm, we have spookily similar lens collections...

I also didn't mention the 500mm f8; don't use it much, and of course
everyone has one, and mostly doesn't use it much :-).

On film I use a 28-105 f2.8 a fair amount. On digital I use an
earlier 28-70 f2.8 (smaller and lighter, and I don't need the long end
as much), but 28x1.5 is definitely too long for the wide end of a lot
of things. I really need to invest in some sort of ultra-wide, and in
some more-suitable walkaround lens. But I won't buy a walkaround lens
slower than f2.8, either, so they're just starting to appear, and my
budget isn't in good shape at the moment.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 4:19:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:
>
>
>> David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your
>>>> FFL lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for
>>>> which purpose?
>>>
>>> I'm shooting a 1.5x crop factor digital. 20mm f2.8 is commonly on
>>> as a "walking around" lens 17mm f3.5 is commonly on as my widest
>>> lens (not wide enough! I owned it before I went digital, it was
>>> wide enough as my widest lens on film)
>>
>> I like my 20mm for film. On digital (1.5x) it's a bit of a lost
>> soul.
>
>
> It's maybe a touch wide, but it's an AF, so for some things I prefer
> it to my 24mm f2 (which I see I forgot to mention) which is manual
> focus. I never did get to like 28mm, so it's strange that the
> 30mm-equiv I like decently.

Maybe I was so repulsed the first time that I need to
approach it again with a fresh outlook.

> I also didn't mention the 500mm f8; don't use it much, and of course
> everyone has one, and mostly doesn't use it much :-).

I use mine even less since I don't have one ...

> some more-suitable walkaround lens. But I won't buy a walkaround
> lens slower than f2.8, either, so they're just starting to appear,
> and my budget isn't in good shape at the moment.

.... the eternal war of lens desire and budgeting common sense...

Behind every great lens collection is a strained marriage.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 9:49:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 7kqig$jg1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
> The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
> Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at
> this crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense.
> That's a very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>
> My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
> useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9 now
> on a most-of-the-time basis.
>
> The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>
> The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>
> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
> lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>

I quite often use the cheap 50mm f/1.8 Canon lens on my Rebel XT. It's
light and works well for anything from medium range mtn bike action shots to
landscapes. Or the 35mm f/2 which is a little heavier. Other than the
100mm Macro those are my only primes.

Greg
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 5:22:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d7l93e$1ai$2@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>Sheldon wrote:
>
>
>> 500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
>
>Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
>(750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
>
>Post please (with highlights).

Here are some quick and dirty pictures from a D1 with an ancient
Nikkor 50cm/5:

A relatively long expsure with the closest street lights in focus:
<http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/mirror/mirror1.jpg&gt;

Exposed for the street lights:
<http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/mirror/mirror2.jpg&gt;

With the lens set at the minimal focus distance (15 meters)
<http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/mirror/mirror3.jpg&gt;


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 5:22:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Philip Homburg wrote:

> In article <d7l93e$1ai$2@inews.gazeta.pl>,
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>Sheldon wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
>>
>>Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
>>(750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
>>
>>Post please (with highlights).
>
>
> Here are some quick and dirty pictures from a D1 with an ancient
> Nikkor 50cm/5:
>
> A relatively long expsure with the closest street lights in focus:
> <http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/mirror/mirror1.jpg&gt;
>
> Exposed for the street lights:
> <http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/mirror/mirror2.jpg&gt;
>
> With the lens set at the minimal focus distance (15 meters)
> <http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/mirror/mirror3.jpg&gt;

Ugh?


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 2:36:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >Sheldon wrote:
> >
> >
> >> 500mm 8 mirror when you really have to reach out and touch someone.
> >
> >Providing there's enough light or enough ISO ... I suppose a 500 @ 1.5x
> >(750mm!) can really reach out..! How do the donuts look on digital?
> >
> >Post please (with highlights).


Here's a few more:
http://www.mendosus.com/bokeh.html

Nothing to write home to mother about.

600mm f/8 Sigma
Pentax DSLR
ISO 1600 - with grain to boot!

I like the juxtaposition of the gumnuts and the doughnuts, 'though.

--
Jeff R.
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:13:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:


> So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
> lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?



I shoot mostly primes:
24 f/1.4
35 f/2
50 f/1.4
85 f/1.2
135 f/2
200 f/2.8

With the crop factor on the 20D, the 24, 35 and 50 get the most use.

--

J

www.urbanvoyeur.com
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 9:19:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d7kqig$jg1$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes
>
>The lens that spends the most time on me Maxxum 7D is the magnificent
>Maxxum 100 f/2.8 macro. Very sharp and contrasty. Unfortunately at
>this crop factor it's effectively a 150mm in the 35mm fullframe sense.
>That's a very narrow 15° or thereabouts.
>
>My other primes are the 20mm f/2.8 (beautiful lens) which is a not too
>useful to me 30mm lens on the 7D... so, it's mounted to the Maxxum 9
>now on a most-of-the-time basis.
>
>The 50mm f/1.7 is finding renewed use for portraits.
>
>The 300mm f/2.8 hasn't been worked too hard yet, but that's coming...
>
>So, in a digital world that rewards good zooms, do you use your FFL
>lenses (often referred to as primes)? Which ones, for which purpose?
>
>Cheers,
>Alan.
>
>
On my EOS 10D (1.6x crop factor).

Most used:

24/3.5L TS-E - fantastic for building photography, not quite as useful
as it is on a full-frame body but still the best I have. This is
probably the most-used lens of all in towns, but of course hardly used
at all for landscapes.

100/2.8 Macro - I have the pre-USM version, but rapid focussing is
hardly a benefit for macro work, in fact it mostly gets used on manual
focus for that. Would be nice to have the USM for more general work
though. Fantastic for flower/insect shots.

Taken out when likely to be needed:

35/1.4L - Perfect for interior use where flash is not appropriate (i.e.
most museums) and the TS-E is not required for shift control. Overkill
for outside, two of the zooms in my normal kit cover this range.

50/1.4 - As above but with a bit more reach.

85/1.8 - A nice lens, but I never quite got the point - perhaps because
I do very little portrait work.

Most wanted:

A decent 14mm or shorter, preferably f/2.8 or better, of highest quality
and a price less than buttock-clenching. Oh, preferably not Sigma, as
the current 14mm I have is one of those and it doesn't work on my 10D. I
object to having to buy new lenses every time I buy a new body...

Most frustratingly, since I do like wide angle shots, I find myself
carrying a film body as well a lot of the time, just to use for those
times when a 17mm (17/35 f/2.8L) on a 1.6 crop body just doesn't do it.
More backache!

David
--
David Littlewood
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 9:19:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David Littlewood wrote:

> A decent 14mm or shorter, preferably f/2.8 or better, of highest quality
> and a price less than buttock-clenching. Oh, preferably not Sigma, as
> the current 14mm I have is one of those and it doesn't work on my 10D. I
> object to having to buy new lenses every time I buy a new body...

I thought Sigma would reprogram lenses that didn't work?


>
> Most frustratingly, since I do like wide angle shots, I find myself
> carrying a film body as well a lot of the time, just to use for those
> times when a 17mm (17/35 f/2.8L) on a 1.6 crop body just doesn't do it.
> More backache!

Hear ya ... same with my 20mm.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 10:57:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d877u4$mqu$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes
>David Littlewood wrote:
>
>> A decent 14mm or shorter, preferably f/2.8 or better, of highest
>>quality and a price less than buttock-clenching. Oh, preferably not
>>Sigma, as the current 14mm I have is one of those and it doesn't work
>>on my 10D. I object to having to buy new lenses every time I buy a
>>new body...
>
>I thought Sigma would reprogram lenses that didn't work?
>
Only for a certain period - and mine (bought in June 1995) was too old
in 2003 when I got the 10D. I don't plan on buying another one...
>
>> Most frustratingly, since I do like wide angle shots, I find myself
>>carrying a film body as well a lot of the time, just to use for those
>>times when a 17mm (17/35 f/2.8L) on a 1.6 crop body just doesn't do
>>it. More backache!
>
>Hear ya ... same with my 20mm.
>
>Cheers,
>Alan
>

--
David Littlewood
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 3:27:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David Littlewood wrote:

> In article <d877u4$mqu$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes

>>
>> I thought Sigma would reprogram lenses that didn't work?
>>
> Only for a certain period - and mine (bought in June 1995) was too old
> in 2003 when I got the 10D. I don't plan on buying another one...

Good.

I guess the message is very clear. Stop buying Sigma lenses if there is
a reasonable chance you'll upgrade bodies in the future.

Lens investments should be good for 20+ years. Unless the manufacturer
deploys the means to support for that time (even at some cost), it is
really a poor choice.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
!