kshapero
South Florida Man
I can not tell that much difference between a Nikkormat FTN & Nikkor 50/1.4 (paid $85 for the two):
And my ZI and ZM 50/1.5 (Paid over $2000 for the both)
Is it really over 20 times better? First shot with Tri-X and the second with Ilford XP-2. So not a perfect comparison. But something to think about.
And my ZI and ZM 50/1.5 (Paid over $2000 for the both)
Is it really over 20 times better? First shot with Tri-X and the second with Ilford XP-2. So not a perfect comparison. But something to think about.
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
The grass is greener in the ZI/ZM picture. 
Cheers,
Uwe
Cheers,
Uwe
back alley
IMAGES
apples and oranges
mike-s
Established
I'm not going to comment on the age aspect but it would take an exceptional lens to beat the Nikkor 50/1.4. The FTN and 50/1.4 was also my first Nikon set-up - also bought used.
binky
Established
The Nikkormat & 50 probably weren't $85 back in the day....
Beemermark
Veteran
The Nikon F and 50/1.4 were probably close to the cost of ZI and lens today. While the Nikormat was cheaper the lens is the same. So if you compare apples and apples you probably wouldn't see much difference in sharpness and contrast.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
How meaningful is this? I really like the first pic, but not the second. So? It's a question of how happy you are using the camera, not of how a small pic looks on a computer screen.
Both are above the 'quality threshold' (where your skill as a photographer means more than what the camera has to offer). This is probably true for an 8x12 inch/20x30cm pic on paper too, or even a 16x24 inch/40x60cm print. And...?
Cheers,
R.
Both are above the 'quality threshold' (where your skill as a photographer means more than what the camera has to offer). This is probably true for an 8x12 inch/20x30cm pic on paper too, or even a 16x24 inch/40x60cm print. And...?
Cheers,
R.
jmcd
Well-known
I wonder if the image were printed to 8x10 if you could tell a difference. I have a Summicron and a I61LD that both look good, but the differences show up in the print.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
join the club Akiva!
Dave.
Dave.
kshapero
South Florida Man
sweet, davejoin the club Akiva!
Dave.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Another thought on the subject - IMO build quality, materials, engineering - whatever! equals anything ever produced in Japan, Germany or Timbuctu!
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Pineapples and Watermelons
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Good question that I have asked myself on occasion but then ignore it because it could spoil my enjoyment.
Bob
Bob
barnwulf
Well-known
Wonderful comment, Uwe!!
Bob Michaels
nobody special
When someone else has said it better than I ever could, I just quote them.
jpa66
Jan as in "Jan and Dean"
Now you're really showing YOUR age! I haven't heard that expression in years ( Timbuctu, that is ), when I used to use it myself!
As for the OP, the older I get, the more I realize that the camera itself doesn't make all that much of a difference in a good photograph. Just my .02 worth.
As for the OP, the older I get, the more I realize that the camera itself doesn't make all that much of a difference in a good photograph. Just my .02 worth.
Another thought on the subject - IMO build quality, materials, engineering - whatever! equals anything ever produced in Japan, Germany or Timbuctu!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
antiquark
Derek Ross
Those pictures look fine for all their 0.1 megapixels of resolution.
jtzordon
clicking away
These days its BFE. Well, I don't think there's an update yet.
Frontman
Well-known
It's not really apples and oranges (or watermelons), both pictures were taken through a lens mounted to a camera. It's a case of perceived worth; something is worth what people believe it to be worth.
You're going to hurt a few feelings (egos) here if you show people that they needn't have spent thousands of dollars for a camera and a lens or two when they could have gotten the same (or possibly better) results from a camera and lens which cost $50.
But in the end, it's the picture that matters most, not the device which was used to take it. I've heard often enough that the good mechanic is the one who can perform repairs even if he doesn't have the correct tools for the job.
I think that this weekend I will leave my Leica kit at home and take out my old Canon FTb. The FTb is an old black-colored model that I found at a flea market for $10. The meter still works, and the shutter speeds seem accurate. I've been using it as a bookend for the last several months. Yesterday I found a very nice chrome-nose FD 50/1.4 lens with all it's accessories for $5. I just got done putting it back together after disassembling it to clean the elements. I'll mount it on the FTb and see what it can do.
Thanks for the inspiration.
You're going to hurt a few feelings (egos) here if you show people that they needn't have spent thousands of dollars for a camera and a lens or two when they could have gotten the same (or possibly better) results from a camera and lens which cost $50.
But in the end, it's the picture that matters most, not the device which was used to take it. I've heard often enough that the good mechanic is the one who can perform repairs even if he doesn't have the correct tools for the job.
I think that this weekend I will leave my Leica kit at home and take out my old Canon FTb. The FTb is an old black-colored model that I found at a flea market for $10. The meter still works, and the shutter speeds seem accurate. I've been using it as a bookend for the last several months. Yesterday I found a very nice chrome-nose FD 50/1.4 lens with all it's accessories for $5. I just got done putting it back together after disassembling it to clean the elements. I'll mount it on the FTb and see what it can do.
Thanks for the inspiration.