where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
NikoDoby said:
Thank you Exit for delivering your personal experience in a friendlier tone.Now welcome to the forum.
I wonder if that electric scooter could have a tripod mounted to it, I hate using reading glasses to look at my display, but I find that I can adjust my viewfinder
Pete
BTW where have Soap been for the last while, we need some used stuff inputs, but with AF
Last I saw of soap he was getting some "unfriendly" comments thrown at him in the comments section of the main page. I've seen him swing by here but no longer posts.
exit here said:
Hello Mr Apple Sir ...thanks for the welcomeIm not knowledgable on lens design but am a Zeiss owner and have been following many Zeiss topics for some time now. It is common knowledge in these circles that the size and number of elements that need to be shifted are beyond the capacity of any micro motor.
It's about tradeoffs, exit, but the tradeoff doesn't necessarily involve optical quality. That's what I was trying to say when I said it might take much longer to AF with a Zeiss. Pete mentioned that you could always gear it down—you sacrifice AF speed by putting more turns in the screw that the camera turns to gain mechanical advantage to move the elements since they're more resistive than the AF lenses. I shoot mostly portraits and wouldn't complain about slow AF.
exit here said:
I can certainly see this in the focus action, they are smooth and effortless and have a sensation much like the dampening from gears but are nothing like the zero resistance on one of my Nikon AF lenses in MF mode. I could rotate the focus using a pinkie but I could (almost) spin the barrel on my 50/1.4AF by blowing on it like a pinwheel ...mild exaggeration but you get the drift.
I know what you're talking about. It's why I rarely dare MF with a lens like the nikkor 50mm (I own the 1.8 and assume it's similar to the 1.4D). Even letting go of the focus ring can shift the focus. I'd love to get a real focus screen with split-screen focus—maybe someday I'll convert my D90 when I upgrade from it. When I do, I'd love to have a lens that is designed for MF but can still AF in a pinch (instead of the other way round).
edit: I thought of another tradeoff. It would require more battery to AF a lens with more resistance to movement. Also not a killer for me. I would consider one of these lenses if they would add AF. I think the CPU addition is a step in the right direction.
jonnyapple said:
It's about tradeoffs, exit, but the tradeoff doesn't necessarily involve optical quality.
I know what you're talking about. It's why I rarely dare MF with a lens like the nikkor 50mm (I own the 1.8 and assume it's similar to the 1.4D). Even letting go of the focus ring can shift the focus. I'd love to get a real focus screen with split-screen focus—maybe someday I'll convert my D90 when I upgrade from it. When I do, I'd love to have a lens that is designed for MF but can still AF in a pinch (instead of the other way round).
Right on the Money, the Zeiss could have the same great MF feel, but also incl maybe a bit slow AF setting, the fact is that our modern cameras just are not designed for MF unless you modify them. The thing is the Zeiss 50mm is not a lot more than the Nikon 50mm F1.4
BTW I just purchased that Nikon 50mm F1.8, not a bad lens for what it cost, if you try to compare to the Canon 50mm F1,8 wow that canon is just junk in comparison. I am going to try to do some macro this weekend, with my reverse adapter
Pete
bmxdad said:
BTW I just purchased that Nikon 50mm F1.8, not a bad lens for what it cost, if you try to compare to the Canon 50mm F1,8 wow that canon is just junk in comparison. I am going to try to do some macro this weekend, with my reverse adapterPete
I think the 50 1.8 is the best lens value available, and if they hadn't stripped the AF screw from the low-end bodies I think it would be the perfect starting place for new DSLR users. The 35 1.8DX isn't bad, either, though.
What does that adapter look like? Is it a bellows or something?
Hey exit here I think you are right about the optics changing if it became AF. I'd imagine it would be very slow and incredibly heavy worse than the 14-24mm and its only a prime! Can you imagine? Over 1kg for a prime? I bet the price would also be higher to boot. With my 35mm ZF I find it more annoying that you cannot change the aperature without adjusting on the lens. Just an inconvience and I still love mine optically. Have you heard of the new rumored 35mm F 1.4 ZF with a floating element? What focal lengths do you currently have?
kanuck said:
Hey exit here I think you are right about the optics changing if it became AF. I'd imagine it would be very slow and incredibly heavy worse than the 14-24mm and its only a prime! Can you imagine? Over 1kg for a prime? I bet the price would also be higher to boot. With my 35mm ZF I find it more annoying that you cannot change the aperature without adjusting on the lens. Just an inconvience and I still love mine optically. Have you heard of the new rumored 35mm F 1.4 ZF with a floating element? What focal lengths do you currently have?
The lens should not get hardly any heavier, I am not looking for HSM motorized focusing, only a simple geared pin drive, driven by the AF pin drive focus motor found in many Nikon DSLR incl D90 and above. That feature should be easy to implement in the lens design and should be geared to that the body can push the heavier focus action of theses lenses
Pete
I think Zeiss would only consider a motor gear as opposed to a simple pin drive because then the entire lens would be overhauled potentially leading to a new lineup for Nikon cameras. Its also easier to justify charging a higher price for these new lenses. If Zeiss did use the geared pin drive it would be 5 pins instead of 8 right? Nikon uses the 5 electrical contact pins to date.
kanuck said:
I think Zeiss would only consider a motor gear as opposed to a simple pin drive because then the entire lens would be overhauled potentially leading to a new lineup for Nikon cameras. Its also easier to justify charging a higher price for these new lenses. If Zeiss did use the geared pin drive it would be 5 pins instead of 8 right? Nikon uses the 5 electrical contact pins to date.
Yes on a AF lens with pin drives there are 5 contact pins and 8 on lenses with build in AF motors or SWM, I still think they could make lenses that are special for Nikon Cameras, I would consider a Zeiss 50mm only if it had AF, I simply prefer AF, I will MF only if I think a certain shot can be improved by it, or some BMX jump shots that are setup sometimes requires MF
Pete
...dont you lot go fiddling with my lenses now. I LOVE MF and will in each breath refer to it as SF (Selective focus).
What can I say, you are really missing out if you dont try. Of course I wouldnt use SF as a sports lens ...well maybe except for chess and mud wrestling.
I can turn around suddenly and before your AF lens can say "bzzzzzzrrrr iiiieeeeerrrr iiiieeeeerrrr bzzzr" I will have already gotten this (as I did today).
(D90)Zeiss zf100/2Makro @f2
The 100/2 is so much fun Ive not given the others a go ...all new all still in their boxes, voigtlanders 40 and 58 SLII(chipped) zf21 zf28 and zf35 and a Nikon180/2.8AF ED
The zf28 is special but will take me a bit of time to master, it has a 3D render like you have never seen. The zf35 has it but the 28 has in in bucketfulls and it also manages light much the same way as the zf100.
Hey Pete, I use my Zeiss mostly for landscapes, but sometimes portraits. It does focus very fast just like any Nikon prime. I wish I had a FX body to see the sharpness all through the entire shot. Overall I love mine, but other options are out there. I respect your opinion on the fine AF lenses offered by Nikkor^^
You know Exit Here we all have different lens needs, and I was in a market for a new 50mm lens after my old MF 50mm Nikon lens broke, and yes there is for portraits, objects, and other shots times when MF is needed, I just don't like to MF in general when AF works in my opinion better(with my eyes anyway). I might still get another MF lens, but I would newer buy a NEW lens that is only MF, and if that new 50mm Zeiss had been AF it would have been another option, in the mean time I just bought a plain 50mm F1,8. I know this is not a last your lifetime lens, but it is actual very sharp
BTW your pictures are great, but in AF on the above shot there should not have been any problem of using AF, right
Pete
exit here said:
What can I say, you are really missing out if you dont try. Of course I wouldnt use SF as a sports lens ...well maybe except for chess and mud wrestling.I can turn around suddenly and before your AF lens can say "bzzzzzzrrrr iiiieeeeerrrr iiiieeeeerrrr bzzzr" I will have already gotten this (as I did today).
You're a funny one, exit. Is this a self-portrait? It's nice whatever it is.
I'm wondering if you've used AF much. On some lenses it is a slow process, but others are very fast indeed. In that case, I think AF is more useful than MF. And I've used MF on some lenses I've loved (50mm 1.2 nikkor and a 50 1.8 on my old Olympus OM-1 and OM-2), and AF is just more useful to me. And for your sake, I'm hoping they don't put AF on these Zeiss lenses. ;-)
I'm curious—have you replaced your focusing screen with one of those Katz Eye focusing screens? I'm interested in doing it to my D90 at some point and I'm interested in knowing if you had trouble or anything.
Kanuck has a good point about the cost of redesigning only for one lens mount. Maybe Nikon would pay them for their trouble.
jonnyapple said:
You're a funny one, exit. Is this a self-portrait? It's nice whatever it is.I'm wondering if you've used AF much. On some lenses it is a slow process, but others are very fast indeed. In that case, I think AF is more useful than MF. And I've used MF on some lenses I've loved (50mm 1.2 nikkor and a 50 1.8 on my old Olympus OM-1 and OM-2), and AF is just more useful to me. And for your sake, I'm hoping they don't put AF on these Zeiss lenses. ;-)
I'm curious—have you replaced your focusing screen with one of those Katz Eye focusing screens? I'm interested in doing it to my D90 at some point and I'm interested in knowing if you had trouble or anything.
Kanuck has a good point about the cost of redesigning only for one lens mount. Maybe Nikon would pay them for their trouble.
Yes AF is indeed very fast, I would say it is simply amassing how fast my D300 with my better glass can snap into focus, he must be using a Focus Screen, I know on my D300 I find it slow to shoot in MF, I usually kind of focus front back and slowly finding the spot that looks sharpest to me, it was a lot easier on my old Nikon, Canon bodies with split focus screens
I would only change a back-up camera to split screen and I would prefer that to be FX also with a bigger viewfinder, so if we get that $1500 D90 size FX camera then it will get a Katz Eye focusing screens upgrade, then I could properly enjoy a MF lens
Pete
Perhaps we can all agree that MF/SF and AF(s) lenses are simply different to use. As I've read this thread, it really seems the tool (lens) we choose effects the way we approach the job (picture taking) in a way separate from optics and image. When I use a manual focus lens like an old AIS, I have a different relationship to the image as the plane of focus is adjusted. When I use a fast AF lens, I get instant focus. When I use a slow AF lens, I am instantly unhappy as it hunts around and just want to grab a good focusing ring.
Conclusions: I'm very happy with MF/SF lenses when I want to carefully compose and frame my shots, when I'm shooting deliberately. Fast AF works fine in this context too, but I feel less involved. When things are moving quickly, I prefer fast AF, but can make do with a fast MF/SF lens, but I have to work much harder. I'm never happy with slow AF.
ted2001 said:
Perhaps we can all agree that MF/SF and AF(s) lenses are simply different to use. As I've read this thread, it really seems the tool (lens) we choose effects the way we approach the job (picture taking) in a way separate from optics and image. When I use a manual focus lens like an old AIS, I have a different relationship to the image as the plane of focus is adjusted. When I use a fast AF lens, I get instant focus. When I use a slow AF lens, I am instantly unhappy as it hunts around and just want to grab a good focusing ring.Conclusions: I'm very happy with MF/SF lenses when I want to carefully compose and frame my shots, when I'm shooting deliberately. Fast AF works fine in this context too, but I feel less involved. When things are moving quickly, I prefer fast AF, but can make do with a fast MF/SF lens, but I have to work much harder. I'm never happy with slow AF.
Very well put.
jonnyapple said:
You're a funny one, exit. Is this a self-portrait? It's nice whatever it is.
she is nice isnt she ...no its a street pic, I turned around just as he was going for her cheek, as his face got closer to hers I was lifting the camera to my eye and focusing in sync. The look on her face is genuine, she was not even aware of me ...so much for the stealth of a rangefinder. I very rarely crop a pic if you look again you can see I am very close and didnt even have to take a step.
ted2001 said:
MF/SF and AF(s)
Ted ...you are a ripper, I got a big grin out of this.
I do have a katzeye on my D90 but it might be coming off. I am the newest beginner here on the forum ...my D90 and lenses have all just sat in their boxes so everything is new to me. I installed a katzeye but I think I might be taking it out again. I thought I would need it but on the zf100 the image screams at you when its in focus and I can be a bit old school too and enjoy even those that I miss ...
I ignore the katzeye for street, I just dont see it and even the focus confirm light is bang-on but I only look at it if Im unsure and again this only happens in some darker low contrast scenes. When I get around to using another lens or changing genre I'll see how useful it is then. This is my first time using MF/SF (insert stupid grin here) I even sold all AF's but my 180/2.8AF in a snap decision and am not regretting it. To make things more complicated I'm on a D90 so the only automation I have is the focus confirm light and AutoWB everything else is off because the zeiss (ver 1) are not chipped and I could upgrade them to ver2 the now chipped versions but I dont see the point if Im gettin the pics.
My own eyes, they are buggered so I dont know what going on ...I took this yesterday as well ...no disputing I can see and I rarely shop or crop.
..
bmxdad said:
but in AF on the above shot there should not have been any problem of using AF, right
But then I wouldnt be able to claim I took it, instead I would have to share credit with a plastic barrel with a motor in it.
...bit like saying I walked from Sydney to Melbourne but used an electric scooter.
exit here said:
But then I wouldnt be able to claim I took it, instead I would have to share credit with a plastic barrel with a motor in it....bit like saying I walked from Sydney to Melbourne but used an electric scooter.
I know Exit that we will newer agree on this one right, but you can not win that one my friend, were does stop, alright tape up your display, because truly you do not need to have any help in adjusting your exposure, Right So shoot in M, set the exposure to the best that you can without any help from your meter inside your camera, then remember not to use your computer to change anything either, I have been told by several that is really like cheating, right
Anyway I think you have a great eye for taking pictures but that does mean that your way is better than my way or the young mom taking pictures of her kids playing in the Park with her new D3000 set in full auto everything. But I have a felling that you think that you are
Pete
Thanks for the info on the Katz Eye, exit. I was also interested in knowing whether you can tell a difference in the brightness of the viewfinder with the Katz Eye compared to the normal Nikon screen, but it sounds like you may not have used the standard issue one much.
jonnyapple said:
Thanks for the info on the Katz Eye, exit. I was interested in knowing whether you can tell a difference in the brightness of the viewfinder with the Katz Eye compared to the normal Nikon screen.
No, no change in brightness. But I have the basic Katzeye ...there is an option called 'optibrite' which I believe is used with slower lenses.
Thanks again.
bmxdad said:
I know Exit that we will newer agree on this one right, but you can not win that one my friend, were does stop, alright tape up your display, because truly you do not need to have any help in adjusting your exposure, Right So shoot in M, set the exposure to the best that you can without any help from your meter inside your camera, then remember not to use your computer to change anything either, I have been told by several that is really like cheating, right
Not a matter of agreeing, just one of perceptions like the title of this thread ..lacking, it means somehow something is missing but its not. Am happy for AF lenses too but these mf zf's will always be my first love ...if they bring out AF version, I would likely buy them too.
Something you might have missed is that the ver.1 of these lenses are unchipped therefore I can only shoot in M (I'm on a D90) so I already have no metering, only automation I have is the focus confirm dot and autoWB.
bmxdad said:
Anyway I think you have a great eye for taking pictures but that does mean that your way is better than my way or the young mom taking pictures of her kids playing in the Park with her new D3000 set in full auto everything. But I have a felling that you think that you are
No, I just like things in balance, like night is a great time for sleeping but some are asleep during the day. Its not about better, I dont talk or type that way, also not into telling others what is right, just like to tell what is wrong.
exit here said:
...if they bring out AF version, I would likely buy them too.
My exact point of my post was to have them bring out a version with AF, not about what is better or worse, And a AF version could actual be beneficial for both Zeiss and Nikon. One of the reason for liking Nikon is the fact that with my D300 I have a much better lens choice that shooting Canon will ever give and AF is easier to implement in lenses incl Zeiss if they wanted to do it
sincerely Pete
Lets stop this war Exit, post more of your pictures in our Photo-a-day in whatever way you like, and view others pics for what they are and not how they were made
You must log in to post.
