| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Anyone using older, manual focus lenses in their bag?
Nic Coury, Photographer
 |
Monterey | CA | | Posted: 5:16 PM on 08.24.10 |
->> I just picked up a Nikkor AIS 55 f/3.5 macro on craigslist for $40 and it's super sharp and fun to play with, so it made it into my bag for food and close-up shots.
Anyone else have one or a few older lenses they use and why?
~ nic |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
| | | Posted: 5:28 PM on 08.24.10 |
->> In addition to my all Canon digital kit I keep a complete Nikon film kit with all Ai/Ai-S lenses.
Why? I prefer Nikon's older gear over all the gear I have. |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 5:41 PM on 08.24.10 |
->> I occasionally use an old Nikon MF 24mm f/2. Why? Because Nikon is lame and hasn't made any fast yet affordable wide-angle prime AF lenses.
I was interested in the 35mm 1.8 AF when it came out but was immediately turned off when I found out it was a DX lens.
Are you listening, Nikon? You really really need to make a standard (non-DX) 35mm 1.8 AF lens and a 24mm f/2 AF lens. Maybe even a 28mm 1.8 or f/2. Right now all you really offer in fast, wide-angle prime is the 24mm f/1.4, which besides costing $2,200 is also a behemoth of a lens.
The ideal wide-angle lens should be light and compact yet have a wide enough aperature to work in low-light, which is why a 24mm f/2 AF would be awesome. I don't use the 24 f/2 MF for much other than portraits because my eyesight sucks and it's hard enough to focus as it is. |
|
Nic Coury, Photographer
|
Monterey | CA | | Posted: 5:51 PM on 08.24.10 |
->> Yeah, I agree
a 24 f/2 or a 35 f/2 AF-s, would rarely leave my camera. |
|
Doug Holleman, Photographer
|
Temple | TX | USA | Posted: 6:09 PM on 08.24.10 |
->> I use a 24/2 and a 105/2.5 quite often. I used to use a 400mm/3.5 a lot until it got too hazy with fungus to be useable. I'd still like to get it fixed if I could afford it.
I never could understand Nikon's priorities in updating lenses. They go from mega cheap plastic slow zooms to ultra expensive fast glass and seem to forget about most of the practical middle ground affordable quality stuff. |
|
Doug Holleman, Photographer
|
Temple | TX | USA | Posted: 6:11 PM on 08.24.10 |
| ->> I would also love a 400/5.6, light weight for carrying around as an extra, like the old IF version they used to have. |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 6:22 PM on 08.24.10 |
| ->> I have a 135/f3.5 that's a sentimental favorite portrait lens and a 28/f2.8 AiS (the crazy-sharp, CRC lens) which is also nice for environmental portraits. |
|
John Froschauer, Photographer
 |
Seattle area | WA | USA | Posted: 12:02 AM on 08.25.10 |
| ->> I have an old Nikkor 180 I bought in the 70's that I stick on a 5d m2 for use as a remote sometimes. |
|
Chris Peterson, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbia Falls | MT | USA | Posted: 12:14 AM on 08.25.10 |
->> For day-to-day stuff I switched entirely to a Leica M9 and, of course, all my lenses are manual focus. I only use my Nikon for critters and sports. No one makes better glass than Leica. Even the old lenses (my oldest, a 90mm f2.8 elmarit, dates back to the early 1960s) are sharp and the new aspherical 21 mm is simply sick.
I have that 55 mm f3.5 macro Nikon, too. It's a sweet lens. I think I paid $35. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 12:55 AM on 08.25.10 |
->> 105 Micro
35 f/2 |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 1:21 AM on 08.25.10 |
| ->> I also use an m9 kit focusing a camera is a wonderful feeling. The Leica lenses are just great. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|