Nikon Bob said:
Shhh, some day he will play with an M3 and understand. 😱
Just joking, Nikon stuff is of course wonderful and enthusiasm is always welcome.
Nikon buff!!!????
- Thread starter NIKON KIU
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 23
- Views 3K
Shhh, some day he will play with an M3 and understand. 😱
Just joking, Nikon stuff is of course wonderful and enthusiasm is always welcome.
VinceC
Veteran
I too shoot only Nikon RF for film. I'm not sure my feelings about it are as strong as yours. For example, I tend to look through Canon and Leica and Kiev threads because these people are often real photographers discussing photography and asthetic situations. Because Nikons are so expensive and collectible (or, more properly, perceived to that way) hardly any one who owns one or two or three seems to use them much.
Glass case trophies. A shame.
I get puzzled by all the Leica terms that get thrown around. Cron and Lux and so forth. They're fairly meaningless to me. Nikon hasn't got the variety. It made one lens per focal-length/aperature combo, and made it so well but for so short a time that there are few meaningful variations from the point of view of a user. I do somethings agitate the Leica forum, as when they're discussing one of their "king of bokeh" lenses and I go ahead and toss in an image from a Nikkor.
I'm very much a user-collector and shot with the cameras professionally for several years and semi-professionally up to several months ago when I left newspapering. I'm now in public relations, so there's a chance I'll use them again for professionally.
I do use also use a point-and-shoot Canon Powershot G1 (which, with its screen folded away, sort of works like a rangefinder with a center focus are but really crummy framing). I also use some non-Nikon lenses -- a Zeiss Biogon 21mm f/4.5; a newly acquired CV 25/f4; an Orion 28/f6. I also just received a Jupiter 35mm f/2.8 in trade and have liked previous versions of it.
When I started looking into Nikon RFs in the last 1980s, it was purely from the point of view of a working photojournalist who had been bitten by the rangefinder bug. I didn't know much at all about Leicas. I bought a Soviet-era Kiev, which gave me a platform for a few Nikkor lenses, and they were of such a quality that I could use them for daily newspaper assignments despite their age, so I started doing this. It was also an odd time when collectors were suddenly starting to drive the prices way up fast. In the course of a year, Nikon SPs went from reasonable -- in the $500 range -- to over $1,500. So mine weren't overpriced compared to Leicas. And the lenses were very good buys for the quality.
Glass case trophies. A shame.
I get puzzled by all the Leica terms that get thrown around. Cron and Lux and so forth. They're fairly meaningless to me. Nikon hasn't got the variety. It made one lens per focal-length/aperature combo, and made it so well but for so short a time that there are few meaningful variations from the point of view of a user. I do somethings agitate the Leica forum, as when they're discussing one of their "king of bokeh" lenses and I go ahead and toss in an image from a Nikkor.
I'm very much a user-collector and shot with the cameras professionally for several years and semi-professionally up to several months ago when I left newspapering. I'm now in public relations, so there's a chance I'll use them again for professionally.
I do use also use a point-and-shoot Canon Powershot G1 (which, with its screen folded away, sort of works like a rangefinder with a center focus are but really crummy framing). I also use some non-Nikon lenses -- a Zeiss Biogon 21mm f/4.5; a newly acquired CV 25/f4; an Orion 28/f6. I also just received a Jupiter 35mm f/2.8 in trade and have liked previous versions of it.
When I started looking into Nikon RFs in the last 1980s, it was purely from the point of view of a working photojournalist who had been bitten by the rangefinder bug. I didn't know much at all about Leicas. I bought a Soviet-era Kiev, which gave me a platform for a few Nikkor lenses, and they were of such a quality that I could use them for daily newspaper assignments despite their age, so I started doing this. It was also an odd time when collectors were suddenly starting to drive the prices way up fast. In the course of a year, Nikon SPs went from reasonable -- in the $500 range -- to over $1,500. So mine weren't overpriced compared to Leicas. And the lenses were very good buys for the quality.
P
peptonio
Guest
pwnewport said:
Well, he said it. He came here to tell us that he's a Nikon idiot. And obviously he's looking for other idiots to talk to.
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku?
Nikkors
Nikkors
1) 105mm f2.5 and 10.5cm f2.5 in SLR and RF mounts respectivly, I own the 105 f2.0 DC and it DOES not fare as well
2) AF 20-35mm F2.8
3) 35mm f1.4 in AIS mount
4) last but not least the Old 5cm f1.4 in Nikon Rangefinder or screw mount
Surprisingly the 5.8cm f1.4 SLR mount was not as good(although is very collectible), I have never had the pleasure of the AF28mm 1.4D but I have heard others swear by it.
Nikkors
Once past F4 there is nothing out there that comes close....Unless you pay tons of money for a newer Leica normal. I have 4 Nikkors I swear by:aizan said:
1) 105mm f2.5 and 10.5cm f2.5 in SLR and RF mounts respectivly, I own the 105 f2.0 DC and it DOES not fare as well
2) AF 20-35mm F2.8
3) 35mm f1.4 in AIS mount
4) last but not least the Old 5cm f1.4 in Nikon Rangefinder or screw mount
Surprisingly the 5.8cm f1.4 SLR mount was not as good(although is very collectible), I have never had the pleasure of the AF28mm 1.4D but I have heard others swear by it.
