Re: [Leica] Full circle with Nikons

["Paul" <lug@nrg666.com>]

Hi Mark,

Do we get to see some of your digi shots?

Regards,
Paul
- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Rabiner" <mark@rabinergroup.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 2:03 PM
Subject: [Leica] Full circle with Nikons


> Hi
>
> My name is mark Rabiner
>
> I am a Leicaholic.
>
> I've gone 37 days.
>
> The minute i got my first M6 3740 days ago (+ten years ago) I had little
> interest in my Nikons.
> I got the Leica for causal "street" work but ended up using it to shoot
> jobs of every sort.
> Over the past ten years once or twice I'd pull out the Nikon box and
> grab the 105 macro with a body and do some copy work or shoot mushrooms.
>
> So now this year we have digital bodies going for a grand and a half.
> I think that makes 2003 the official kick off year for the whole digital
thing.
> This is the year swarms of photographers get one of these cameras to add
> to their Nikon or Canon systems.
> The glass case at Pro Photo is filled with used F5's and Hasselblad gear,
>
> With my very modest assortment of Nikon glass it would've been a good
> time to switch to Canon as many have done.
> Not on your life baby.
> But my Nikon glass is really very very modest. So I've had to finance
> getting a whole bunch more up to date and good stuff.
>
> I also got a cheap Analog camera to check out the technology ahead of
> the time it took me to get the guts to get the D100. An N80 for 400
> bucks. Has all the gizmos the D100 has. Maybe I didnt like having my
> metering done in 3D?
> But the N80 is an Analog camera. Analog cameras are interesting because
> you cant just hook them up to your computer and download all the stuff
> yo shot that day.
> Instead there is "film" in there which you have to take out of the
> camera and develop with chemicals and water and wait for it to dry.  ...
> then scan it. Then breath free you're back to your digital workflow. In
> the old days of course they'd not even scan it but put it into a thing
> they called an "enlarger."
> by the way i've quickly learned love the darn N80.
>
> The lens on my D100 right now is interesting. I love 50's the best
> usually. This is a 50. It's the 50 1.8 D. It cost $99. It widely has the
> reputation as being one of the best Nikon lenes made. Sharper than the
> 60 macro. Certainly sharper than the 50 1.4 Sharper than lots of glass
> which cost over a grand and has the grey pebbled finish like microscopes
> in the 30's.
> The front element of this lens is nicely recessed so really doesn't need
> a lens shade. It's as light as a feather, much lighter than any other
> lens I'm sure. With the D100 it gives me 75mm's. Love that. Never had
> that in Leica M. With the N80 it gives me 50mm. Wide when it needs to be
> wide. Tele when it needs to be tele. F22 and be there. When it gets
> dirty I'll just throw it away and get a new one.
>
> My first lens which I got with the camera was the 60 macro. I'm already
> shooting with the 100 on the Hasselblad.
> The 60 weights a ton and is long. Weights quite a bit more than the 85
> 1.8 by the way. It will not be my kick around lens. Anyway god knows how
> many elements are floating aound inside the thimg. Tantalum, Ununbium.
>
> Most my existing Nikon glass was old for ten years ago. They do fit on
> the D100 or N80 but there is no metering. None.
> Which is OK if I'm shooting on the white backdrop. But not so great of
> the model takes a cigarette break outside in the back and looks great
> sitting there. I have to run and get my Gossen which is great with
> brightness but doesnt know from Hue or Saturation let alone whitepoint.
>
> All the new ones "D" lenses which means the metering is done in 3D.
> "Is that a flashlight or is it Venus? Ask your Nikon, it knows"
> "its not Venus because you're holding it in your hand!"
> "Also it's only 4 feet away!"
> the Nikon thinks "Ah that much be the headlight of a Maserati Spyder
> bearing down on us at 97.3 mph, lets see we'll just aim ahead by 2.4
feet...)
>
> CRC
> Close range correction. You don't loose your sharpness close in because
> of a train of moving elements which come rushing towards you. I also
> assume this means if you smashed you lens agonist something you would
> jar these elements off their track out of place. This gives a different
> meaning to the therm "SLR")
>
> DC
> Defocus control. Nikon is into bokeh like no other company it would
> seem. It mentioned the term by name in it's description of many of it's
> lenses talking about how it uses 9 aperture blades and each blade is
> curved. I think Leica worries more about the optical formula itself. For
> aperture blades it uses a hole punched through a pice of Reynolds Wrap.
> But DC stands not for DC Comics but Defocus control which is a collar on
> your lens where you can tune in the bokeh of your choice. As Nikon says"
> we don't USE bokeh we OWN it"
>
> IF
> Internal focusing. Which enables the silent wave focusing (AF-S). which
> enables the lenses to not sound like a little robot which makes the
> Canon users giggle. I'm sure some Leica R glass is IF it's been around a
> while. But with Nikon it has become as part of it's silent wave
> approach. Also part of that concept is to have the focusing done with
> the rear elements which is pretty usual and I like it. This helps the
> waves move more silently.
>
> ED
> Low dispersion "glass" Remember the beginning of Superman when we have
> Joral, Supermans Dad, played by Marlon Brando in which he made 8 million
> dollars for 12 minutes work? And Marlon was in a sea of crystals which
> as it turns out was Marlons idea in the first place. But where myths
> come from who cares all i know is when i think of low dispersion glass i
> think of the planet Krypton. I'm sure that's where it's mined.
>
> Noct
> Nikon has it's own Noctilux, manual focusing although it's a 1.2 a half
> stop slower than the Noctilux. It uses the previous standard 52mm
> filters and coast about $500. Its not that big of a lens in more ways
> then one as it's largely dismissed by just about everybody. But hey
> shoots better at 1.2 then any other Nikon lens.
> But buy some non AF lens!!!!??? Not on your life!!!!
>
> VR
> means vibrating reduction. Or very religious.
> It supposedly gives you 3 extra F stops - 2 would be very OK with me.
> Imagine shooting a 135mm lens at a 15th with impunity? I cant! I bet the
> reality of the situation will be a 30th. Which is science fiction enough
> for me.
>
> So yesterday i shot a bunch of well not film and downloaded it into my
> computer. The camera came with a CD you see. That went into my computer.
> To say that this might not take me away from my Leicas for awhile, till
> i come up for air would certainly not be true. It will.
>
> Some of my glass i expect will be a bit glamorous. Like the 28 1.4 I
> might get which gives me a 42 mm 1.4 lens on the D100. A 42 1.4 that
> would be alright by me. By the way the filter size on Nikon is no longer
> standardized at 52.
> I remember Canon was 55 and Olympus was 49.
> Nikon is now standardized I kid you not at 77 mm!! That's bigger than my
kitchen!
> It's because of the zooms.
> The ED-IF, AF-S Zooms.
> We thought we could control them.
> We pulled the plug August 27, 2002. But they fought back.
>
> What do 77 mm filters cost say at Central? would you believe $77!? How
> much for 39mm? A skylight filter is $38.95.
> 77 mm is three inches. That's not a filter that's a picture window.
> I may not get the zooms. By "the" zooms i mean the 2.8 zooms one for
> wide, normal and tele.
>
>
> 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