Reading mode: Light Dark

DP1 and DMW-LW46

Go to last post
Some varying data on-line, but Nikon minus hood etc. 340 gm., 12 oz.; Panny 230 gm., 8 oz. (Sorry to have got a higher figure from somewhere, must have been packaged weight).

There's no mention anywhere of a hood for the Panny, but this is part of the deal with the Nikon.

--
'To see, not with, but through the eye.' [William Blake]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22905474@N06/
 
Gens, those are SMALLER apertures. The Nikon needed the lens stopping down for best results. A real comparison would be wide open or a bit smaller.

--
'To see, not with, but through the eye.' [William Blake]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22905474@N06/
 
Those are pretty good at F8.0! Wonder if you have some hires posted at F4.0

For those who are considering a Nikon WC-75, here's a photo I took with F4.0 aperture:



Still not cheap though for an LX3 converter...

All the best,

L

--

'I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman!'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/khays/sets/72157618985445243/
 
LW46 doesn't come with a hood. Just lens and a small lens bag.
 
Just SPP. I didn't touch sharpness. Saved with Jpeg Quality = 12.
 
Thanks for the comments. I posted a pic taken with F4.0 as a follow up to PRISCILLA TURNER's posting. I'm including it here, too.

 
I assume that you are interested in the barrel distortion. I took a shot of a wall which was about 3 feet away and with straight horizontal lines with straight vertical pillars. This is also shot at F4.0. Does this help?

 
If you don't know, barrel distortion can be easily removed in Photoshop using the Filter/Distort/Lens Correction command (top control).
 
EasyClick said:
For those who are considering a Nikon WC-75, here's a photo I took with F4.0 aperture:

Click to expand...
Richard Franiec's tests showed fringing results like that at full or nearly full aperture. I get the same. And to get a clean result at any aperture, one must cut out extra layers in the shape of filters or rings, and stick the Nikon straight onto his 52mm DP1/2 adaptor.

If the Panny produces a fringe-free image when the lens is wide or nearly wide open, then it is not only cheaper and lighter, but more flexible. Assuming equal definition and no softening.

Naturally there are large amounts of distortion with such a setup, compounding the small amount inherent in the DPx camera lens. That's another matter, and unless very complex can be corrected. Myself if the subject is geometrically sensitive I would correct with PTLens, which will pick up the Sigma info, then move on to CS4's distortion filter.

--
'To see, not with, but through the eye.' [William Blake]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22905474@N06/
 
.... to have the knowledge, efforts and risk of a few, flow to others who can now acquire and use such a low-cost tool with confidence.
A Nikon solution may still be the choice for some, but not realistic for others.
Information offered here is most helpful and appreciated.

Many thanks,
Tom B
 
You're welcome, and thanks for acknowledgement. Glad to hear that it was helpful.

I'd love to see what others take with the conversion lens!

-Gen
 
I just found this another Nikon lens adapter (Nikon WC-E68) that work w/ Sigma DP-1.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kongjak1/3952274689/

It should be another option than Nikon WC-E75 which is the price tend to hike and need special adapter w/ 52mm thread.

Cheers,
RTogog
TMacaw said:
.... to have the knowledge, efforts and risk of a few, flow to others who can now acquire and use such a low-cost tool with confidence.
A Nikon solution may still be the choice for some, but not realistic for others.
Information offered here is most helpful and appreciated.

Many thanks,
Tom B
Click to expand...
 
Great work. Love the detail and dynamic range.
Did your post processing include local contrast enhancement?

I've got to get out to a place with canyons like that some day.
Thanks for sharing.
--
Obscura
Join the GRAY CARD ARMY!
 
....... comment and link. Was not aware of RF's review, but a couple very negative ones on Amazon site raised flags.

Regards,
Tom B
 
Thanks for the comments!

I did adjust contrast, shadow, saturation, and color balance a bit, but not much. For your reference, I uploaded one of the photos without any adjustment below. This was just converted from raw to jpeg.



And here is the adjusted one again for comparison.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top