Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Wow - everybody calm down --- way down... stop watching so much CNN... I like my leicas - Ok? I Pledge Allegiance to my M7 (hand over heart). I just like the micro Nikkor for the occasional close up face shots. And yes, I was weaned on a Spotmatic and don't require AF. I was just curious about the nikon AF lineup.. If it would make you all happier, I'll go back to my 50 summicron and be quiet.. Eric - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Rabiner" <mark@rabinergroup.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 11:11 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] OT: cheap Nikon AF body? .. for one lens only > Don Dory wrote: > > > > I would suggest a new AF Nikon. The N80 or F80 is going for around $400 new > > after rebate. If offers a great smallish, light body that is easy to use. > > 8008's go for the $300 range, don't focus as fast as the newer bodies and > > also don't have the really cool grid screen at the touch of a CF button. > > N90's are big, heavy camera's relatively speaking. > > > > If you will almost never use AF then look at a 2020. Very intuitive > > controls, just really slow AF. Prices can be below $100 for a "user". > > Whatever you do, stay away from the 4004, 4004s, or the 5005. This series > > had only one thing going for them, the F mount. > > > > Don > > dorysrus@mindspring.com > > > > It's not that it's Nikon. And Nikon on a or "the" Leica list but it's > gotta be Nikon "AF." > > So we get lists and lists of endless comparative tupperware. > > Would you get much more focussed and better received answers from a huge > client base if you asked this on the Nikon list? > They can give you the clock speed of every micromotor in every > Tupperware Nikon ever made! > > Most of us are just not in the auto-focus mentality over here. We're > just not all freaked out that the Leica R system didn't go AF. > > The older pre AF Nikkor macros are said to be better than the AF's. > By "said" i mean I've heard that from more than one local friend of > mine. We all started out with Nikons. > The urban legend is that Micro Nikors used to be optimized at macro > distances (close) but they became general purpose lenses so they knocked > it to infinity. Ah the road to mediocrity is all downhill! I've always > believed that but its just the kind of thing which would turn out to not > be true. > If I were using a macro lens I'd want it optimized macro. Close. > I'd plan to not shoot too many clouds with it but how sharp does a cloud > need to be? > Jim Brick by the way was just telling me yesterday how well his 120 CFE > worked shooting bridges. The results didn't appear to be able to get any > sharper! I had some reticence traveling across Texas a couple of years > back with my 120 CFi macro as my only tele for my Hasselblad. But I've > gotten over that. I also got a 180. > But we're talking Nikkor not Zeiss here. > > I shoot 35mm macro every once in a blue moon and I've kept my Nikons for > the occasion as I'm not going to insult them by selling them for chump > change to some kid who'd rather have AF but cant afford it. They created > the major part of my body of work. Medium format had a long time > catching on with me. > > So I still have a 105 2.8 micro Nikkor and for making slides of my > prints although a 55 or 60 might be a bit better ergonomically. > I put it on a FM2 or FM body. Sometimes I'll even put it on my early > tupperware 8008! Love that motorized rewind! And love the fact that > everything works on 4 AA batteries, meter and all. No chips! > But I'm embarrassed being seen in public with it and embarrassed to even > mention it. > > I could pick up a 60 Nikkor now for the price of a Leica UV filter and > an end cap but I'm not going to waste another dime on Nikon. > > A 60mm would very possibly give me what is becoming my favorite focal > length as I'm shooting the famous 100 on my Hasselblad most of all. > A cropped normal. Ultra highly corrected. > > I understand a MACRO-ELMARIT-R f/2.8/60 mm can be picked up used for the > price of two new Leica UV filters plus one back cap!. > A lens which, like the Zeiss Planar CFI 3.5/100 would send shivers down > your back it's so sharp. And that's a back used to the high quality it > usually gets from Zeica. (I just made that up! Sounds Russian!) Would > love to say "Leitz and Zeiss". > > You would need AF for macro? Is it going to follow a little bumble be > going from flower to flower better then you could? Why not stick to the > Leica frame of mind a bit more and pick up a used FM2 for chump change > they are built like tanks and they are even making more of them but they > are calling them something similar. I like my FE2 with it's A setting > though and easy to get to override. And it's borderline hockypuck feel. > The last hockypuck Nikon was the F2. The F3 is an elegant classic. The > F4 and 5 awesome monsters I'm sure up to anything but I've not gone that route. > > Why not stick to Leica? > > > Mark Rabiner > Portland, Oregon USA > http://www.rabinergroup.com > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html