Duckie

Lives in Australia Australia
Works as a Dabbling
Joined on Feb 6, 2006
About me:

401s->801s->Coolpix 950->D50->D90 D7000 D610 SB-26 SB-600 Coolpix A, Q, LX3

25/2.8 ZF.2
35/1.4 AIS
45p
50/1.4 AI S.C.
55/1.2 S.C. AI
105/1.8 AIS
180/2.8 AIS ED
28/2 AIS

Sigma 10-20mm
20/2.8 AIS
24/2.8 AIS
28/2 N.C. AI'd
35/2 AIS
50/1.8S AIS
50/1.8 AF
85/1.8 AI'D
105/2.5 AI
25-50/4 AIS
TC-14A
Sigma AFD 17-35/2.8-4
55-200 AFS DX
105/2.8 AIS Micro
55/2.8 AIS Micro
Sigma 24/2.8 AIS Macro Superwide II
Tamron 35-105/2.8 AF SP
Sigma AFG DC 18-50/2.8
Tamron 2X MC7 TC - Sluggish AF
135/2.8 AI
85/1.4 AIS Polar
16-85 AFS

Tokina 20-35 F3.5-4.5 still beats nikon AFD 20,24,28
18-55dx I & II
Tamron Adaptall: Bad coating
- 28/2.5
- 135/2.5
- 200/3.5
- 300/5.6 SP
Kenko Macro Tube - electronically unreliable

Comments

Total: 173, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Tamron 85/1.8 is much heavier than the Nikon one. Weight is important too (increasingly for me)

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2018 at 09:43 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

BeaverTerror: Too little, too late. Nobody thought Kodak could go bankrupt, yet here we are.

Canon and Nikon's mirrorless offerings are disgracefully cynical. As a former Nikon shooter, I doubt I'll get a camera from either company in the rest of my lifetime.

Both companies seem to produce mirrorless camera to deliberately prove to their own installed base that it's a bad idea. They correctly estimated that their existing customers are more like to try same brand first.

And in this instance Canon seems to have beaten Nikon. Such image quality from reasonably sized APC-C sensors? It is active sabotage. Nikon produced image quality OK relative to an unnecessarily small sensor size but why such a tiny sensor to start with.

Canon has produced quite many models by now without significant leaps in image quality.

Light cameras are a necessity. But we need credible products please.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 09:06 UTC

RIP

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 10:27 UTC as 2nd comment

Good video

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2018 at 10:46 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Yongnuo announces YN 14mm F2.8 in Canon mount (153 comments in total)

Oh I pray that they will extend the privilege to Nikon users, like in the case of the 100/F2.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2017 at 09:40 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Slouch Hooligan: CEO’s are required by law to maximize ROI for shareholders. Through a series of connections not mentioned in the marketing this results in maximum environmental degradation. New phones, cameras, cars, boats, planes must be produced at an increasing rate to feed the Machine.
Sell THAT to the natives.

When one gets caught one gets sued.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2017 at 21:19 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: That tripod support look incredibly light for the mass on top of it (to me, at least). Anyone else notice it? - It looks like it would be very prone to flex or vibration. I really don't now why manufacturers keep making tripod supports ever taller..... There was a time when they used to make them neat and close-fitting to the lens and they never had the flex and vibration problems you sometimes get today.

Bouncy is the word that came to my mind at first sight......

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 07:25 UTC

At long last mid roll film change for 135! But a bit late I'm off film for donkey years.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 08:43 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

TN Args: I think I need to play it in reverse to unwind my mind.

LOL!

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 08:39 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Uschold: Its very interesting and quite stunning for the first 20-30 seconds when it is new and interesting and not so fast that it makes you dizzy. Then it gets old, goes too fast and makes me dizzy. It became unwatchable - which is a shame. Too much of the same thing. Perhaps would work better to integrate with a variety of other techniques for an interesting whole.

Me too. Good we all learn something out of it!

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 08:39 UTC
In reply to:

TMHKR: Well, as long as there are no "light leak emulation" and similar hipster "artistic" cr4p...

LOL!

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 08:34 UTC

Wondering if my Pentax Q would appreciate.....

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 08:32 UTC as 34th comment | 1 reply

Good to keep digging up new topics, be it agreeable or not.

Everyday people visit your web site in the hope of seeing something new. This insatiable demand for news is very hard to satisfy.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 10:57 UTC as 27th comment
In reply to:

nathantw: If Nikon cameras had focusing screens that were conductive to accurate focus with manual focus lenses, then these would be great. However, last I looked Nikon doesn't manufacture split image rangefinders or microprisms into their focusing screens. There may be third parties that do it, but the vast majority of people aren't going to change their screen out. So, here you have a $2400 lens that you may or may not have the eyes to focus accurately with.

Focusing screens used to be changeable.... until they decided to have a pretentious manual focus friendly body for sale......

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 11:17 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: Does anyone actually use MF lenses on DSLRs? How do you focus accurately without a rangefinder? Green dot?

You are absolutely right about view finders today. However if one is really keen even a D50's tiny view finder unmodified was good. a D610 is not bad. Nowadays the green dot is very fast, unlike before. In a way the harder cases (large aperture or close distance or long FL) gets harder with too much pixels available. Besides, old Nikon manual prime lenses are mostly (including even the 50/1.2) surpassed by modern models if you really pixel peek. Thankfully there is Zeiss.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 11:11 UTC

OMG I don't need it but i WANT it!

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 11:01 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply

They are better off creating non failing mobile phones. We have two phone with identical model and identical failures.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 11:00 UTC as 6th comment
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (68 comments in total)
In reply to:

mahonj: What is the big deal here. I had a 28mm F2.8 in 1979 (Tamron).

I got a 28mm Adaptall F2.5. Liked it a lot even in early days (6MP) of digital.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 09:39 UTC
On article Nikon's official D850 lens recommendation list (308 comments in total)

By this logic, you won't even have a basic 50mm lens! (58 and 45 instead) from Nikon. 3rd party manufacturers will be thankful.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 09:10 UTC as 18th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

McArchive: The DXO dog ate the review.

Since dogs are human's best friends, they better "kick the cat".

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 22:45 UTC
Total: 173, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »