telenous
Well-known
A recent thread asked which is our favourite two lens combo. I voted for 35 + 50 leaving out the only other focal length available to me - the 90mm. My choice was easy since I am a compulsive 50mm shooter but I do use the 35mm focal length when the situation seems to call for it. But with the 90mm...zero, zilch, nada. Perhaps I have used it for 4-5 shots in the last six months, and then I had to force myself to use it in order to justify its existence.
I am not saying that this focal length is unjustifiable (because it so very obviously has a purpose and I 've seen some fantastic examples in the gallery) but I am merely wondering if I would have a better chance, or perhaps a better "yield", trying, ahem, an SLR for that focal length.
So, do you reach for your SLR when it comes to 85mm (or 90)? There are some familiar advantages on the SLR (as I understand it, mainly WYSIWYG) but how easy is to use a manual 85 f1.4 lens on an SLR for available light? In particular, is it easier than using the respective focal lenght for rangefinder?
I would also be really grateful for any user opinions on the Nikkor 85 f1.4 AIS or AF since these are my options in the used market. We all know about their stellar reputation but I 've read here and there on the web claims from purported users that they can be soft wide open.
Thanks very much in advance,
I am not saying that this focal length is unjustifiable (because it so very obviously has a purpose and I 've seen some fantastic examples in the gallery) but I am merely wondering if I would have a better chance, or perhaps a better "yield", trying, ahem, an SLR for that focal length.
So, do you reach for your SLR when it comes to 85mm (or 90)? There are some familiar advantages on the SLR (as I understand it, mainly WYSIWYG) but how easy is to use a manual 85 f1.4 lens on an SLR for available light? In particular, is it easier than using the respective focal lenght for rangefinder?
I would also be really grateful for any user opinions on the Nikkor 85 f1.4 AIS or AF since these are my options in the used market. We all know about their stellar reputation but I 've read here and there on the web claims from purported users that they can be soft wide open.
Thanks very much in advance,
back alley
IMAGES
i don't have a slr...and i rarely use the 90 also.
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
I use my 90 (elmarit) on my M2 relatively consistently.
I don't use a 90 on my 20D. Mainly because I don't have a 90 (or a 85 either) for my 20D.
Not sure if it helps, but not much else I can do.
I don't use a 90 on my 20D. Mainly because I don't have a 90 (or a 85 either) for my 20D.
Not sure if it helps, but not much else I can do.
lubitel
Well-known
I like to use a 50 on a DSLR, i never tried a 90 on RF, but would like to.
telenous
Well-known
Thanks Joe. I notice you have a predilection for (very) wide angles. My M2 cannot support wider than 35's but I do think, along with many others I 'm sure, that the specialty area of the rangefinders is indeed fast wide angle lenses and normals. Is it perhaps the reverse with longer lenses?
And thank you Eric. So, do you use your 90 Elmarit (which is the one I also have) for street photography?
And thank you Eric. So, do you use your 90 Elmarit (which is the one I also have) for street photography?
triplefinger
Well-known
i LOVE my nikkor 85/2 and summicron 90/2 on the RF I have an r6 but rarely pull it out.
telenous
Well-known
Thanks Roland. So, focusing the 85 (Nippon Kogaku I presume) on the M3 is easier (at least to you) to do than the Zuiko.
But we have all heard how SLRs are better to use for macro and zooms and, supposedly, teles? If focusing a manual 85 f1.4 on an SLR is a bit of a challenge, then SLRs have even less going for them than I thought.
But we have all heard how SLRs are better to use for macro and zooms and, supposedly, teles? If focusing a manual 85 f1.4 on an SLR is a bit of a challenge, then SLRs have even less going for them than I thought.
Talisker
Neil
Depends on what cameras I have out at the time, but I love my 135 tele-elmar and will happily use it even if my Pentax SLRs are available - its just a nice experience.
VinceC
Veteran
Focusing an 85 isn't really any easier on an SLR compared to an RF. An SLR makes tight framing a little easier. I do quite a lot of telephoto work with 85/105/135, and I franky haven't used an SLR in several years. One thing in favor of RFs is that, with a telephoto lens, the central focusing patch makes up a much larger portion of the image, so it's pretty easy to keep the focusing patch over the part of the subject you're trying to keep in focus. If you try doing that with wide angles, too many of the subjects are centered in the composition.
RdEoSg
Well-known
I have a 100mm f2 for my Canon 5D. It was actually the first autofocus lens I ever bought. I don't use it all the time, but I would never part with it. It's probably my favorite for people. Still, I find that it usually sits for about 11 months out of the year. Then every once in a while I decide to take it to church with me one day or take it to a party or whatever. I do that with most of my lenses though. I rarely use a bunch at once. I find one week I feel like a wide, one week I want the tele, etc.
The Nikon is suposed to be very nice but honestly I haven't shot one so I can't offer any tests. I've played with one on a body a few times.. Nice to focus but a pretty big lens!
I am sort of curious. I just picked up the 90mm voigtlander to use on my M6. Seeing as focus is so critical with the tele's wide open I am not sure how I will like it. I am so used to locking one focus square on the persons eye. Seems that is the way to go but we shall see!
The Nikon is suposed to be very nice but honestly I haven't shot one so I can't offer any tests. I've played with one on a body a few times.. Nice to focus but a pretty big lens!
I am sort of curious. I just picked up the 90mm voigtlander to use on my M6. Seeing as focus is so critical with the tele's wide open I am not sure how I will like it. I am so used to locking one focus square on the persons eye. Seems that is the way to go but we shall see!
nemjo
Avatar Challenge
OldNick
Well-known
I use an 85mm f/2.8 on my Leica IIIf RD from time to time, and find that it focuses as reliably as a similar focal length on my SLR. However, at f/2.0, it could be another story. I have nothing like that to experiment with. The flower shot is with the Leica, while the nose wheel lights were taken with one of my SLRs.
Jim N.
Jim N.
Attachments
anabasis
Established
While realtively new to the RF world after a 18 year absence, I don't see myself using RF's for anything longer then 50mm. I find the frame lines of the longer lenses in the RF window hard to use compared to the SLR's. I am sure its just a preference however.
Since you asked, I indeed have an 85 f1.4D Nikkor and it is a fantastic portrait lens on film. The sharpness and BOKEH at mid ranges is absolutely fantastic and the color redition and contrast is wonderful. The lens loses a bit at greater ranges and stopped down much beyond f8, but is still a great lens. I haven't used it against the AIS version, but apparently it is superior. When I get home and have some time, i intend to match it against my 90mm Summicron R lens, but I am sure both will prove to be fantastic.
JCA
Since you asked, I indeed have an 85 f1.4D Nikkor and it is a fantastic portrait lens on film. The sharpness and BOKEH at mid ranges is absolutely fantastic and the color redition and contrast is wonderful. The lens loses a bit at greater ranges and stopped down much beyond f8, but is still a great lens. I haven't used it against the AIS version, but apparently it is superior. When I get home and have some time, i intend to match it against my 90mm Summicron R lens, but I am sure both will prove to be fantastic.
JCA
jgeenen
Established
I like my Planar 1.4/85 for Contax - especially with a pure screen without focus aids. Focussing is a snap - regardless if the focus point is in the centre or in the edge. The finder magnification helps composition and the 100% finder is even more important than with 50 or 35mm lenses.
The only drawback: the RTS-II / Planar Combo is about 1.2kg - the Summicron 2/90 just some 400g in addition to the ZI 35/50 combo already in my bag.
The only drawback: the RTS-II / Planar Combo is about 1.2kg - the Summicron 2/90 just some 400g in addition to the ZI 35/50 combo already in my bag.
telenous
Well-known
Thanks to all for your input. Many wonderful photos too.
Performancewise both the Nikon 85 LTM and Elmarit 90 that I have tried, are impeccable. However I do find shooting with them difficult, especially when the subject is moving.
I am beginning to think that the key to my question is what Vince ("Focusing an 85 isn't really any easier on an SLR compared to an RF") and Anabassis say ("an 85 f1.4D Nikkor...is a fantastic portrait lens on film"), even although they seem to be pointing to different directions. You do not gain anything by using manual SLR lenses in the 85/90 focal length versus RFs - after all both have excellent lenses in the medium long domain - unless of course you use AF SLRs! Then critical focusing could be - should be - easier, even at the very difficult f1.4, which otherwise is so hard to tame.
These considerations make me think that perhaps I should stick with my Elmarit a little longer.
Performancewise both the Nikon 85 LTM and Elmarit 90 that I have tried, are impeccable. However I do find shooting with them difficult, especially when the subject is moving.
I am beginning to think that the key to my question is what Vince ("Focusing an 85 isn't really any easier on an SLR compared to an RF") and Anabassis say ("an 85 f1.4D Nikkor...is a fantastic portrait lens on film"), even although they seem to be pointing to different directions. You do not gain anything by using manual SLR lenses in the 85/90 focal length versus RFs - after all both have excellent lenses in the medium long domain - unless of course you use AF SLRs! Then critical focusing could be - should be - easier, even at the very difficult f1.4, which otherwise is so hard to tame.
These considerations make me think that perhaps I should stick with my Elmarit a little longer.
ampguy
Veteran
good question
good question
yes, I reach for an slr or lumix fz3 when going over 50mm, although I would like to try a 90mm on a RF. I doubt that I will use it much though.
With 90 on an RF, you lose the size factor, and in most cases focusing speed (for me), and often lens speed, and image stabilization that I get in the Lumix.
However, all that said, I still want to try out the 90 on an RF, who knows, maybe I'll like it.
good question
yes, I reach for an slr or lumix fz3 when going over 50mm, although I would like to try a 90mm on a RF. I doubt that I will use it much though.
With 90 on an RF, you lose the size factor, and in most cases focusing speed (for me), and often lens speed, and image stabilization that I get in the Lumix.
However, all that said, I still want to try out the 90 on an RF, who knows, maybe I'll like it.
telenous said:
JohnL
Very confused
I practically never carry both RF and SLR at the same time. I tend to choose before i go out according to the type of shots expected. When RF, I use my 90 (the only tele I have) maybe 20% of the time, or a little less.
oftheherd
Veteran
Well, I don't have a 35mm RF with interchangable lenses. Mine is a Super Press 23. The long lens I have is a 150mm, about like a 75mm in 35mm land. I don't use it often.
I think it is as has been said, you use what you like and for the situation as needed. When I got back into photography over 30 years ago, I thought it was neat that you could get different lenses, and just knew I had to have several telephoto lenses. Part of that was being in police work, but most of it was just the idea that I could take photos and people wouldn't know.
But as I began to take photos, I found that what I wanted to take was best done with wider lenses. I began to "see" more in wide that telephoto. Still true to this day. I do have telephotos for my SLRs but they don't get the use the normal and wide lenses get. And the shorter telephotos like the 135mm get more use that the 300mm which hasn't gotten much use at all. Now a 600mm Sigma mirror lens used to get a good workout.
Anyway, I think a person should pick lenses for what they like, stick with that, experiment with it to get better with it, and just be happy.
I think it is as has been said, you use what you like and for the situation as needed. When I got back into photography over 30 years ago, I thought it was neat that you could get different lenses, and just knew I had to have several telephoto lenses. Part of that was being in police work, but most of it was just the idea that I could take photos and people wouldn't know.
But as I began to take photos, I found that what I wanted to take was best done with wider lenses. I began to "see" more in wide that telephoto. Still true to this day. I do have telephotos for my SLRs but they don't get the use the normal and wide lenses get. And the shorter telephotos like the 135mm get more use that the 300mm which hasn't gotten much use at all. Now a 600mm Sigma mirror lens used to get a good workout.
Anyway, I think a person should pick lenses for what they like, stick with that, experiment with it to get better with it, and just be happy.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
telenous, don't overlook the older Nikkor 85/1.8, which is a fine lens. Many of them were AI'd.
Someone said above that he doesn't bring both an SLR and a rangefinder with him; it's one or the other. I'm in that camp as well. With an SLR, I tend to have with me either an 85 or a 135 -- I find if I want a short tele that either will serve well. If I'm planning to shoot some portraits, I will use the 85. Lately I have been enjoying the 85 Elmarit 2-cam with my Leicaflex SL -- a really good lens.
Someone said above that he doesn't bring both an SLR and a rangefinder with him; it's one or the other. I'm in that camp as well. With an SLR, I tend to have with me either an 85 or a 135 -- I find if I want a short tele that either will serve well. If I'm planning to shoot some portraits, I will use the 85. Lately I have been enjoying the 85 Elmarit 2-cam with my Leicaflex SL -- a really good lens.
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
telenous said:
I did, before I got my 50mm. The 90 was far to long for "normal" street photography, but I can get some nice portraits and longer-distance pictures out of it in use.
I much prefer DR Summicron for walking around.