Reading mode: Light Dark

My reasons for HATING the FT1 !!!

Go to last post
Billx08 said:
Jared Huntr said:
that Nikon forced an artificial limitation of having it only focus with the center point.

For example,

Suppose you want to setup a tripod shot with your significant other. You set the timer only to find out that the camera focused on the background instead of you because the AF point often falls exactly between two people.
Click to expand...
So someone that doesn't know as much about the camera as you might miss that shot, but you, being aware, would have used one of several methods to make sure that the camera was properly focused, right? How many can you name? By the way, the reason that you gave for getting stuck with an out of focus shot is incorrect. It couldn't happen as you described it unless you've figured out a way to have the camera focus after the timer times out. Focusing occurs when you press the shutter button unless you deviously brought along a remote release but forgot to use the Delayed Remote option. With an ML-L3 you have to know what you're doing and you need to be quick, but you can get by even without a remote, so there aren't really any good excuses for why anyone would have to end up with out of focus photos. :)
Click to expand...
While the example with the self timer isn't holding, the limitations is a real one and should not be there. Face detect would be nice to have in the situation Jared is mentioning to avoid focus recompose and run. It is not easy to focus and recompose on a tripod if you also have to watch the timer and loch the tripod head.
 
jl22182 said:
I have noticed that my FT-1 runs quite hot - well the whole camera runs hot actually, but the FT-1 is particularly noticeable. I wonder if some of the restrictions are due to power handling and heat control rather than a willful decision by Nikon to handicap the 1 series. Can anyone cast some light on this?
Click to expand...
This is the first time I hear something like that. What do you mean by this? What would get hot in the FT-1? It is black metal, so of course, on the sun it will be heated fast, but otherwise...?
 
magneto shot said:
alright, and here comes a hijacker...
Click to expand...
Right.
SunsetMagnet said:
seriously...the FT1 is only good for tripod + birding/zoo shooting.
Click to expand...
Come on, the FT1 is especially difficult to use on tripod BECAUSE you have to focus/recompose so often. At least, I find it difficult to use for BIF, and especially on tripod. For static images tripod is OK but not if you must move around a lot.
SunsetMagnet said:
The illusion of it being a cheap telezoom is way overrated, a beautiful 50mm 1.4 is turned to an unwanted 135 mm. The fastest lens is only 2.8 on the 10 mm.
Click to expand...
The 50/1.4 becomes and EXCELLENT classical portrait lens with it since 135 is the old school portrait focal length. It also turns the 60/2.8 into a very nice macro lens with great working distance.













No tripod used, hand held only. Also, if you find the 50 to be too long
SunsetMagnet said:
I notice carrying the FT-1, makes the whole system the emperor's new clothes. The entry level nikon DSLR is not any much bigger (once u put on the FT1 on v1) and functions without such severe small sensor cropping and when it comes to low light, sweeps the floor with V1.

A beautiful prime lens like 50mm and 35 mm brings smiling faces to a normal dslr Nikon with beautiful bokeh and handheld shooting, using those on a near mobile-phone Nokia 808 sensor size glorified P&S along with a tripod...is a pain.
Click to expand...
Are you smoking something illegal?
SunsetMagnet said:
Stick with the 30-110 lens for the 1 system and use the nikkor lens for what its designed for..their dslrs.
Click to expand...
Good idea if that's enough, but rather poor idea if not.
SunsetMagnet said:
But if Nikon does release the f0.7 len that was submitted for patent, well, i got a long apology to make...until then...we are just beta testers, laughed at by 4/3 users and entry level dslrs smarties.
Click to expand...
So, let them laugh. Idiots who have no clue.

While I was shooting with the Oly system the same idiots always chanted about how little difference it makes between the APS-C and the FT system because it is only 0.7 stops advantage in DOF between the FT and the APS-C. Now that Nikon made a system with a sensor which is a tiny bit smaller than the FT suddenly the 0.7 stop advantage the FourThirds system have is a big deal for them...

They always claimed that full swivel screen is a must and every manufacturer is going to have one, yet no MFT body has it. They always laughed about the the Nikon implementation of it... yet, the OMD adopted something similar, no more swivel screen for Olympus, now suddenly no longer necessary...

They always been laughing about the Sony sensors used in Nikon cameras. Now, cheers of joy over on the Olympus forum because it seems like the OMD is using Sony sensor and they hope for the same sensor or better, from Sony in the E-7 as well...

So, guess who is laughing... they can't seem to be able to make up their mind in that camp so let them laugh, they are laughing in agony and are afraid of competition like they always have been, that's why they are trolling so much on this forum.

:P :P :P :P
 
Jared Huntr said:
The DOF at f1.4 with a theoretical N1 lens is incomparable to the DOF at the same aperture on a DX/FX lens. If you are using the FT1, obviously you are subject to the more shallow DOF that DX/FX lenses offer over a N1 lens at the same aperture. Whether you are using a J1/V1 or an APS-C/FX body doesn't change the effective DOF. The V1/J1 bodies are simply cropping out the edges of the image formed by the lens by virtue of their smaller sensors. e.g. you don't get the benefit of tolerating more sloppy focusing since you aren't using an N1 format lens.
Click to expand...
That is not the correct way to see DOF. The idea is to take the same image, so if you take the same image you need a faster lens on the N1 than on another system with larger sensor. You can't just crop the image because that gives you a different image, so if you take an image with the 50/1.4 on the D300s and on the V1 you must move backwards when you have the lens on the V1 to get the same image. If you keep the same aperture you will get much more DOF in the image taken with the V1 compared with the image taken with the D300s. The 50/1.4 behaves like a 75/2.1 on the DX and a 135/3.8 on the V1 and the DOF will increase accordingly, assuming you want to frame the same image. If Nikon would make a 50/1.4 for the N1 it would behave exactly like the 50/1.4G FX lens does, it would still be a 135/3.8 equivalent.
 
they aren't really mistakes if that is the photo this person took, or they wouldn't be there. also.. with longer heavier lenses you shouldn't really be holding the adapter...

but the lens, just like how you are meant to use the tripod mount on the lens not the adapter, same thing.

But anyway, I use a non-oem Ft-1 so must shoot full manual. Considering I use aperture ring lenses and manual focus anyway, it was worth the $17.

It would help if the N1 J1 had the ability to program in non-cpu lenses like in the D7000, but try rationalizing that to Nikon when the only reason is being non-OEM...

are there any reasons you find while using the real FT1 that you'd want to be able to program in lenses like the D7000?
 
Darklings2 said:
they aren't really mistakes if that is the photo this person took, or they wouldn't be there.
Click to expand...
...but I think that chopped off limbs are not nice, so I prefer calling it a mistake, and not a deliberate composition error. Most people are not concerned by this, but I think any person posting an image should be entiteled for feedback, positive or negative, and my feedback is that chopped off limbs are not nice unless it is done with care. The two images are off balance, in the top image there is too much green above and to the left and at the same times half the cat is outside the image for no reason. The bottom one would look better in portrait orientation and moving the bird a tiny bit more up would have improved the image even more.
Darklings2 said:
also.. with longer heavier lenses you shouldn't really be holding the adapter...
Click to expand...
...that's what I am saying when I am saying "This is not a big issue with longer lenses", perhaps that was unclear to you. Anyway, I know how to hold lenses, but thaks for the help.
Darklings2 said:
but the lens, just like how you are meant to use the tripod mount on the lens not the adapter, same thing.
Click to expand...
...that's a bit confusing to me... Sorry about that. Anyway, like I said, I know perfectly well how to hold a lens, that's why I am saying that the adapter is NOT ergonomically right. It is meant for tripod use and to hand hold the camera with a small lens on it, like the 35/1.8G, the 50/1.4G or the 60/2.8G I have. I have no way to avoid the adapter, but perhaps you have considerably smaller hands, or hod it differently. Never the less, it is NOT comfortable to hold because it is not round like a lens.
Darklings2 said:
But anyway, I use a non-oem Ft-1 so must shoot full manual.
Click to expand...
...which explains why you don't understand what I am talking about.
Darklings2 said:
Considering I use aperture ring lenses and manual focus anyway, it was worth the $17.
Click to expand...
I am thinking the other way round... the ability to use the meter is worth the extra.
Darklings2 said:
It would help if the N1 J1 had the ability to program in non-cpu lenses like in the D7000, but try rationalizing that to Nikon when the only reason is being non-OEM...

are there any reasons you find while using the real FT1 that you'd want to be able to program in lenses like the D7000?
Click to expand...
I only have CPU lenses (all my lenses are "G") so I don't care. Anyway, what difference would that make other than for the EXIF? The metering is more important. BTW, did you know that you can chip your lenses? That way anyone with the FT-1 could get all the lens data plus the metering working.
 
Perhaps hot was a bad choice of words, but I have several times noticed that the V1/FT1 combination is distinctly warm, especially the FT1. I have never noticed this with the D90, or with the D40 when I had that body. My thought is that it's a small camera that is doing a lot of processing, so there must be quite a bit of heat to dissipate.
 
jl22182 said:
Perhaps hot was a bad choice of words, but I have several times noticed that the V1/FT1 combination is distinctly warm, especially the FT1. I have never noticed this with the D90, or with the D40 when I had that body. My thought is that it's a small camera that is doing a lot of processing, so there must be quite a bit of heat to dissipate.
Click to expand...
If you're shooting high speed continuous photos, the V1 is doing an immense amount of processing. At 60 frames/sec. for full resolution photos its bandwidth exceeds most (and probably all) of Nikon's "pro" DSLRs. High bandwidth and camera CPUs working at very high speeds consumes a lot of battery energy. At a guess, at least 10 times more than the D40 uses, and maybe a lot more. That's one of the reasons why the V1 uses the same large battery that's used by the D800 and why the V1 was designed to shoot twice as many continuous photos as the J1. If the FT-1 is getting warm or hot, that's a good thing. It's acting as a heat sink, reducing if only a little, the temperature of the camera that's the source of most of the heat.
 
olyflyer said:
Jared Huntr said:
The DOF at f1.4 with a theoretical N1 lens is incomparable to the DOF at the same aperture on a DX/FX lens. If you are using the FT1, obviously you are subject to the more shallow DOF that DX/FX lenses offer over a N1 lens at the same aperture. Whether you are using a J1/V1 or an APS-C/FX body doesn't change the effective DOF. The V1/J1 bodies are simply cropping out the edges of the image formed by the lens by virtue of their smaller sensors. e.g. you don't get the benefit of tolerating more sloppy focusing since you aren't using an N1 format lens.
Click to expand...
That is not the correct way to see DOF. The idea is to take the same image, so if you take the same image you need a faster lens on the N1 than on another system with larger sensor. You can't just crop the image because that gives you a different image, so if you take an image with the 50/1.4 on the D300s and on the V1 you must move backwards when you have the lens on the V1 to get the same image. If you keep the same aperture you will get much more DOF in the image taken with the V1 compared with the image taken with the D300s. The 50/1.4 behaves like a 75/2.1 on the DX and a 135/3.8 on the V1 and the DOF will increase accordingly, assuming you want to frame the same image. If Nikon would make a 50/1.4 for the N1 it would behave exactly like the 50/1.4G FX lens does, it would still be a 135/3.8 equivalent.
Click to expand...
Point taken, but the fact remains that one still has to deal with DOF related AF issues when using shorter focal length, fast lenses even with the V1's crop factor.

It's presumptuous to say that one is always stepping back to re-frame with the FT1. Try flipping around the perspective. With the shorter reach of medium wide primes, we would in fact want to stand in the same place as we would with a DX body, allowing the crop factor to 'zoom' in to frame the portrait. One doesn't necessarily stand closer to the subject with the DX body using the same lens because such lenses typically introduce undesirable distortion when you get too close. With DX, we might find it more desirable to purposely stand farther back to minimize distortion and crop in post when using this lens.

Before the 'lens police' steps in to dismiss the use of shorter lenses for portraits, consider that most 'classical' portrait focal lengths (in DX/FX terms) would be rendered unusably long in smaller spaces and indoors when used with the FT1.
 
Billx08 said:
Jared Huntr said:
Billx08 said:
Jared Huntr said:
Billx08 said:
Have you ever really used the FT-1 for portraits? The 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor might be a reasonable choice, but that's the last camera/lens I'd consider using for narrow DoF portraiture. I get the feeling that your arguments are mainly theoretical, more for forum fodder than anything else. I wouldn't use the 35mm f/1.8 lens for that purpose even if the FT-1 allowed more flexible focusing options unless I had absolutely no alternative.
Click to expand...
Since when does your opinion on what lens is suitable or not suitable for portraits have any relevance to the point of discussion? Who are you to dictate to others what is the appropriate lens they should use for their art? Have you considered that not everyone has such a narrow-minded view of how they can utilize their tools?
Click to expand...
Are you really such an arrogant fool? Show me where I dictated what is right and appropriate for anyone other than myself? For narrow minds, you'd be first in show.
Click to expand...
You hijacked this thread with a discussion on DOF equivalency. This was completely irrelevant to the topic. It is presumptuous to dictate that DOF focus errors with the FT1 are a non issue unless you know what lens is being used and how the shots are being setup. Perhaps you are not aware of just how patronizing you sound.
Click to expand...
Congratulations. I thought that you wouldn't even attempt to show (because you couldn't) where I dictated anything. You also underscored your cluelessness by writing that I "hijacked this thread with a discussion on DOF equivalency". In fact I was the one that pointed out that other well known "equivalency highjackers" might get wind of our discussion and really mess up the thread. I recognize that equivalency is a valid topic, but it's too often used by a small band of proselytizers to disrupt threads, so I try to avoid those discussions. Good show, though.
Click to expand...
I guess my jab at your blatant hypocrisy about hijacking the thread was too subtle. Review your numerous postings in this thread discussing various lenses and your personal assessment of lens suitability that no one asked for and was off topic. If it were only one post we might let it slide. But to make multiple posts and then have the gall to declare that no one else should hijack as you did really takes the cake.
Billx08 said:
Billx08 said:
Why do you keep dodging the question? Why are you defending the FT-1's arbitrary limitations on forcing center AF and nothing else? You are simply being a contrarian and I am taking the bait (for fun).
Click to expand...
I'm defending nothing. I'd prefer an FT-1 without those limitations but it is what it is. You entered this thread with a silly, immature title change ("my genuine reason for hating it"). I neither love it nor hate it. I use it for what it can do well. If you really think that's being a contrarian you don't understand the term but think that it sounds nice or effective when used as an insult.
Click to expand...
You expect others to respect your opinion while at the same time describing the opinions of others as silly or immature? Not quite - you haven't earned it.
Billx08 said:
Billx08 said:
Are you so thick to STILL miss my point? Just because you find (imperfect) workarounds to a problem doesn't mean that you can't hate the fact that the problem exists in the first place because it is most likely a conscious limitation designed into the product.
Click to expand...
Don't you have anything better to do that stew in your hatreds? What else to you hate. I'll bet that they are legion.
Billx08 said:
I'm not angry at all . . .
Click to expand...
Right. And you probably have some bridges to sell, too.
Click to expand...
Why the obsession with being angry? I've been posting in dpreview too long to get angry about anything. More often, it's just annoyance with those with patronizing tones that have nothing better to do but to make hit-and-run posts questioning the integrity of other posters.
 
Sorry for some reason I thought you had said:
"This becomes an issue when using longer lenses".
and I was thinking "well not really".
And I meant, if the lens has a tripod mount this should be used over the ft1.
But again same misinterpretation.

On the D7000, you have 9 places to program in your minimum focal length and aperture, but you're right this does just change the EXIF in the D7000 as it meters old lenses anyway, but uses a different standardized scale of figures.

I was more suggesting the ability to meter light with manual lenses on the J1 might be an option if one could program in this information if needed to do so.
But maybe something else is required, more than just firmware addition.

I thought though as there is no use of metering manual lenses on the J1 apart from with the FT1 it would maybe have been left out of firmware but the hardware is capable.
The amount of money to chip all my lenses wouldn't be worth the metering...

I am capable of doing this myself, it would just be neat in some circumstances to be able to Aperture priority some things.

So I mean.. I set the Aperture on the aperture ring and the speed is altered in camera. But chipping doesn't help me, as I'm sticking with my non-oem Ft1. Which has no metering anyway. Whether it is a 18-55mm afs or 135mm 2.8.
 
Ah, thank you, this is what I suspected.

In fact yesterday evening I was shooting time-lapse with the 10-30 lens, one frame every 5 seconds for about 600 frames at basic jpeg quality. Ambient temperature was about 75 and the camera was not in the sun. When I turned it off, the back panel was definitely warm.

Maybe the V2 will need a heat sink ;-)
 
magneto shot said:
olyflyer said:
magneto shot said:
excellent images oly....
Click to expand...
Thanks.
SunsetMagnet said:
handheld at f8 ? hmm....
Click to expand...
What has "hand held" with the aperture to do? I mean, it is the shutter speed that says no, not the aperture. The aperture is only for the DOF, not for freezing the motion.
Click to expand...
at f8 i am surprised u can get a shutter speed and bright pictures. shutter, aperture, iso are all related.
Click to expand...
...of course the shutter speed is related to ISO and aperture, but mostly it depends on the available light. I don't know where you live, but anywhere I do, f/8 often results in shutter speeds like these, even at ISO100 at this time of year if the sky is clear and sunny, but it can quickly change, like in between the first and the third image, which are just taken minutes apart with totally different settings. I also often shoot in manual mode and have the ISO set to Auto 3200, like in the first and the third image in this thread. In these, one ended up with ISO125 and the other ISO500.
 
magneto shot said:
olyflyer said:
magneto shot said:
excellent images oly....
Click to expand...
Thanks.
SunsetMagnet said:
handheld at f8 ? hmm....
Click to expand...
What has "hand held" with the aperture to do? I mean, it is the shutter speed that says no, not the aperture. The aperture is only for the DOF, not for freezing the motion.
Click to expand...
at f8 i am surprised u can get a shutter speed and bright pictures. shutter, aperture, iso are all related.
Click to expand...
Hmm... sounds like you are implying that olyflyer is falsifying his EXIF; not nice.
SunsetMagnet said:
--
http://www.marcuslowphotos.com
Click to expand...
--
Regards, Paul

Lili's Dad
 
Paul Pasco said:
magneto shot said:
olyflyer said:
magneto shot said:
excellent images oly....
Click to expand...
Thanks.
Paul Pasco said:
handheld at f8 ? hmm....
Click to expand...
What has "hand held" with the aperture to do? I mean, it is the shutter speed that says no, not the aperture. The aperture is only for the DOF, not for freezing the motion.
Click to expand...
at f8 i am surprised u can get a shutter speed and bright pictures. shutter, aperture, iso are all related.
Click to expand...
Hmm... sounds like you are implying that olyflyer is falsifying his EXIF; not nice.
Click to expand...
I don't know, my interpretation is his inexperience otherwise there is no reaso for "handheld at f8 ? hmm...." question because like I said, aperture has nothing to do with wheter you can hand hold or not. The shutter speed is the only one parameter beside weight, which can prevent one from shooting hand held and the shutter speed was high enough for me with that lens in that situation and I believe anyone with similar experience as I have could have done the same.

Anyway, what would be the point of altering the aperture in the EXIF? The only EXIF item I normally change is the copyright info and change the owner data from my real name to "OlyFlyer". Everything else is untouched as far as I am concerned.
 
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