deskthority

Nice. But needs less space between the SHIF and T. Try again.

DSA/GN/SUPERSHIFT


BTW:
you uploaded the wrong one, that I already deleted!!!

I would buy a DSA/GN/SUPERSHIFT but I already scheduled a bank transfer for you today...

7bit wrote: BTW:
you uploaded the wrong one, that I already deleted!!!

You're Seebart, all of a sudden? Ungh…

Muirium wrote:

7bit wrote: BTW:
you uploaded the wrong one, that I already deleted!!!

You're Seebart, all of a sudden? Ungh…

What I mean: You included the test-image, not the final result to the header-image list!


------ Wrong ------ ------ Wrong ------ ------ Wrong ------ ------ Wrong ------ ----- Wrong ---- ----- Wrong



^^^^ Good ^^^^ ^^^^ Good ^^^^ ^^^^ Good ^^^^ ^^^^ Good ^^^^ ^^^^ Good ^^^^ ^^^^ Good ^^^^
2nd attempt:

edit:
OK., you have my clearance for upload!

.

I need a couple of those caps!

What about this one ?

Not straight, seems to be bent! That barrel distortion

A bit too dark for me.

Muirium wrote:

7bit wrote: BTW:
you uploaded the wrong one, that I already deleted!!!

You're Seebart, all of a sudden? Ungh…

Haha very good...

But that editing needs to be faster 7bit!

I prefer your 2nd header attempt.

idollar both nice. Good thing I don't have to decide!

Madhias wrote: Not straight, seems to be bent! That barrel distortion

This thread is the most demanding exam that I have ever taken
I do not know any better lens for a 35mm than the nikor 1.4 ! Perhaps the zeiss otux but I need crowdfunding to get one of these.

idollar wrote:

Madhias wrote: Not straight, seems to be bent! That barrel distortion

This thread is the most demanding exam that I have ever taken
I do not know any better lens for a 35mm than the nikor 1.4 ! Perhaps the zeiss otux but I need crowdfunding to get one of these.

What is a Nikkor 1.4?


If is comes to which lens to use:
15mm f/5.6
28mm f/2.8 Ai-S
105mm f/2.8 Ai-S


Ah, yes I used a wavy 20mm f/2.8 AF, focused at it's closest range, for this:

7bit wrote:

idollar wrote: What is a Nikkor 1.4?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/35mm-f14-afs.htm

Distortion performance top

The Nikon 35 1.4 G has the same barrel distortion as Nikon's original 1960 35mm f/1.4. I am not impressed. Nikon has made NO progress in 40 years, and this lens' distortion is slightly complex and more difficult to correct than the distortion from Nikon's better-made original 35/1.4.

This can be corrected for critical use by plugging these figures into Photoshop's lens distortion filter. These aren't facts or specifications, they are the results of my research that requires hours of photography and calculations on the resulting data.

It is my favourite lens appart from the 135mm 2.0 DC that one day I will own

Sorry, but I thought you mean 35mm photography, opposed to 6x6 or so.


Ken rightfully writes "The Nikon 35 1.4 G has the same barrel distortion as Nikon's original 1960 35mm f/1.4. I am not impressed."*


If you want an ultra-low distorting wide lens, that is sharp and whatnot, take the 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S!


As with any wide lens, avoid close ranges.



*)

I do have the 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S! ... but I was never impressed by it.
I will take it out for a walk to check it after so many years

Yes, I know that the 35mm 1.4 is not the perfect in distortion, but all in all, the other features compensate.
I posted an image with some rules to show the distortion level. It is not that much. I guess that the problem with the image is that the space bar was not 100% horizontal.

Anyhow, I failed the exam ... again

Hmm is this turning into a optical thread now? All my pictures were shot with this:



That must be why they turn out so good!

This is not an exam idollar!! Take it easy.

Technical perfection is not everything!


BTW: If you don't use your 28mm, I'd be interested.

seebart wrote: This is not an exam idollar!! Take it easy.

jajaja
I was just a way to say how demanding it is. That's why I like it so much

7bit wrote:Technical perfection is not everything!


BTW: If you don't use your 28mm, I'd be interested.

Very true, the camera itself will not get you those nice pictures. Did you mean my 28mm lens 7bit? I still need it.

seebart wrote:

7bit wrote:Technical perfection is not everything!


BTW: If you don't use your 28mm, I'd be interested.

Very true, the camera itself will not get you those nice pictures. Did you mean my 28mm lens 7bit? I still need it.

No, I mean the one idollar mentioned.

seebart wrote:

7bit wrote:Technical perfection is not everything!


BTW: If you don't use your 28mm, I'd be interested.

Very true, the camera itself will not get you those nice pictures. Did you mean my 28mm lens 7bit? I still need it.

I agree with the last sentence. The eye makes the pictures. The camera and lens capture the light

7bit ... this is the 28 that I mentioned, in a FM2.
Let me test it with the digital gear again. I have not used it since years.
I moved from the FM2 to the range finders and from there to the digital. It took some years.

I placed the 28mm objective looking the way arround with the following results:

D800
1600 ISO
Aperture priority with +0.7 to compensate the wrong metering.
f5.6
And a crop from it
And now focus at 20cm !
Sharp ! The texture of the keycaps is visible, indeed.

I prefer naturalistic looking shots like that. But don't let my different time zone mislead you about whether you're passing the grade or not. I like to tell people why they fail, when they do. I'm just on vacation!

That's a good lens, probably even better than my ASAHI. Nice test.

I couldn't resist to question (?) if this would be a good natural header
dedicated to 7bit who has rescued the 28mm from the drawer.

I like it, but it's got the logo problem again. Take the shot so that the area behind the logo is darker.

seebart wrote: I like it, but it's got the logo problem again. Take the shot so that the area behind the logo is darker.

Like this ?

Deleted - I like this crop more.

Yes much better. Of course Mu chooses the headers as you know.

Those are SHARP! I like the texture of that PBT.

I wish I could take shots like that! My photos never turn out that sharp. But then again, I should probably get myself a tripod to remove my shaky hands from the equation before I start complaining that my shots are a bit soft...