This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you.

 Moderated by: chrisbet, Page:    1  2  3  4  Next Page Last Page  
Lenses   -   Page   1
Old Glass vs. New  Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost



Posted: Sun Apr 21st, 2013 17:26
 
1st Post
novicius



Joined: Sun Aug 12th, 2012
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 445
Status: 
Offline
Just been reading some old threads , where it´s been mentioned that by having old glass , it´s no use of investing in high resolution camera´s ,....hmm.... odd that , in the good ol´ days when ammo was supplied by Ilford/Kodak/Agfa etc, no photog would say that his lenses were not good enough t´ be used with Kodachrome 25 , ( the highest -resolution -wise color slide film in the world ) on the contrary , Ye want it t´be sharp as possible..?..  get kc25 !.. no matter what lens Ye have .
Actually , I find that my old lenses produce much  Better  results on my D1 - D1x - slrN , than with film , some even much better  , like the 55 f1.2 , always a bit of a dud with film , on the aforementioned camera`s especially the slrN (FF ) , I love t` shoot wide-open , the only gripe is that there`s no metercoupling , as the great yellow father in Rochester in his wisdom omitted the meter lever ( grumble ) but that`s where Gossen steps in , as it is , All of my Ol` glass perform Well , certainly compared with the 20-35 f2.8 afd / 35-70 2.8 afd which can be considered fine examples of lensmaking , and even the 43-86 f3.5 ( I think from first serie ) which is considered by many t`be the worst lens ever made , and the 28-45 f4.5 ( the first true wide-angle zoom ) is a lens that was very particular to film choice , it would draw a cold harsh image with some films as would the 55f1.2 , all perform Fine with the digital stuff , now , the really great lenses like PC Nikkors 28mm f3.5 / 35mm f2.8 turn out astounding results , tecnically speaking that is , it`s a win-win situation really .
Actually I was considering all that before I purchased the slrN ( unlike others I stubbornly held out until an affordable FF camera came about , for I refused to give up on the wide-angles ) , for I realised when studying the digital world , that the biggest difference between old & new , is the Developing , before it was Durst laborator , Agfa / Kodachrome/ FP4 / tri-X  ,  Cibachrome , ID 11 , D76 etc. mixing chemicals , hiding under a green light , peering through a loupe , lot of work
(  yet seeing an image appear in front of my very eyes is something I do miss at times ) yet there was n`t much manipulation , other than some precision , like keeping temperatures steady , and tilting the enlarging easel to correct for converging lines , and that was about it .. compare that to PS - LR - Photodesk ,..yes , even that simple Photoscape offers possibillities undreamed of in the good ol` days , the in-camera chips corrects many lensflaws , on the slrN it`s even user selectable.
There are many reasons why Ol` glass can/will perform better on the latest/newest of camera`s,  When that D3X comes into my price range , all my Ol`glass will be projecting images onto its sensor ;-)
I  joined digital shooting only a few yrs. ago , I firmly believed that quality could only be done with film , boy , have I been put to shame .



____________________
Back in Danmark

I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment

The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets.
 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 06:08
 
2nd Post
richw



Joined: Tue Apr 10th, 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 525
Status: 
Offline
It'll depend somewhat on the conditions you shoot in. I have a 50mm f1.8 AF-D. Inside, at night, or other low light conditions and it's wonderful, but on my D3s outside it has a horrible hot spot even in overcast weather.

A lot of modern lenses have been 'Optimised' for digital, and this does make a difference.

But thats of course not to say that the old lenses are not of use.

 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 07:40
 
3rd Post
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline
Vic, you raise several points. Digital has now surpassed film, at least in the SLR range. I don't think many will take issue with that.

However, In order to benefit from the very highest resolution sensors, modern glass IS needed. The ultra high resolving power of the modern top end lenses which have been designed for digital are needed to get the full benefit from the modern high resolution sensors.

Rich mentions optimised for digital; the biggest optical difference between film and sensor is that the sensor usually has two thin sheets of glass in front of the sensor, the Low-Pass filter and a clear protective glass which is bonded to the sensor body which seals and protects the actual sensor photocells. Those two sheets of glass have an effect on the light passing from the rear element of your lens to the sensor photocells. Modern (optimised) lenses are designed to work with these extra layers of glass in front of the sensor, they do affect the light path, if only slightly.

With DX bodies and old, therefore full frame 35mm film lenses the sensor is only recording the centre 'sweet spot' of the image circle. Most lenses perform well in the centre DX area.

As for the exposure issues using non coupled, non chipped lenses, the histogram is your best friend here, I guess a manual exposure, make a test exposure and look at the histogram. I adjust the exposure untii the image data is just reaching the right hand (white) side. That should give you your best exposure.



____________________
Robert.

 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 08:57
 
4th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
As Robert has said the old lenses no matter how good are not up to the high megapixel sensors in todays cameras.

The Nikon D1X that I still have sitting on my shelf produces very nice images but the D800 out resolves it.
When you look at the results from D800 with new glass v. old glass it becomes obvious especially towards the edges/corners.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 10:31
 
5th Post
novicius



Joined: Sun Aug 12th, 2012
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 445
Status: 
Offline
richw wrote: It'll depend somewhat on the conditions you shoot in. I have a 50mm f1.8 AF-D. Inside, at night, or other low light conditions and it's wonderful, but on my D3s outside it has a horrible hot spot even in overcast weather.

A lot of modern lenses have been 'Optimised' for digital, and this does make a difference.

But thats of course not to say that the old lenses are not of use.
Odd tho` is n`t it , does n`t AF-D mean Auto Focus Digital , that lens should be corrected for digital , has it something t` do with inter-action Lens / Camera / 5000Kelvin ..?
I thought that " hot spot " would only occur with Infra Red shooting and only with some old glass , according to Bj¸rn R¸rslet , I have n`t encountered that phenomina , but I have no I R kit , thinkin´ about converting either the D1 or the D1x , have n`t decided yet ,



____________________
Back in Danmark

I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment

The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets.
 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 10:46
 
6th Post
novicius



Joined: Sun Aug 12th, 2012
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 445
Status: 
Offline
Robert ,
Interestin Ye mentioning sensor resolution being higher than Lens resolution , I thought Glass stil being unsurpassed in that respect , reading a histogram is not my forte ( yet ), I still rely on my Gossen Lunasix - Lunasix F - or Vivitar 283 LX , each is as big as a pack of smokes , but there`s always one in the bag.
I have n`t encountered any problems with my old glass , I find they perform better on the digital equipment compared to film ,especially the wide -angles , since they can be corrected for lens light fall of , corrected for barrel / pin cushion distortion so obvious with wides ,  I gather that new lenses should be better ,altho` I suspect that much of it is marketing hullabaloo , I`ve noticed that You yerself still employ old glass , have Ye encountered probs. like Rich has ?



____________________
Back in Danmark

I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment

The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets.
 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 10:55
 
7th Post
novicius



Joined: Sun Aug 12th, 2012
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 445
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote: As Robert has said the old lenses no matter how good are not up to the high megapixel sensors in todays cameras.

The Nikon D1X that I still have sitting on my shelf produces very nice images but the D800 out resolves it.
When you look at the results from D800 with new glass v. old glass it becomes obvious especially towards the edges/corners.
Sure , I see that with the slrN , see that with film too , as I still catch myself leaving space around the subject ( left over from magazine shooting days ) required by  editors so they could place captions , it `s not much of an issue for me , I just zoom out using my legs , but I am surprised to learn that others observed problems with their old glass.:baffled:



____________________
Back in Danmark

I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment

The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets.
 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 12:09
 
8th Post
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline
novicius wrote:
I thought that " hot spot " would only occur with Infra Red shooting and only with some old glass , according to Bj¸rn R¸rslet , I have n`t encountered that phenomina , but I have no I R kit , thinkin´ about converting either the D1 or the D1x , have n`t decided yet ,


Hotspots can occur in normal photography in the wrong conditions for exactly the same reasons as for IR.

The light reflects from the glass sensor cover/hot mirror filter onto the rear element of the lens, and back, repeatedly, if you are familiar with audio you will have heard of feedback squeal, lens hotspots might be described as an optical equivalent.

There are several of us here on the forum who take IR photographs, if you do decide to have a go, I am sure we can give you some guidance.



____________________
Robert.

 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 13:19
 
9th Post
novicius



Joined: Sun Aug 12th, 2012
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 445
Status: 
Offline
Robert wrote: novicius wrote:
I thought that " hot spot " would only occur with Infra Red shooting and only with some old glass , according to Bj¸rn R¸rslet , I have n`t encountered that phenomina , but I have no I R kit , thinkin´ about converting either the D1 or the D1x , have n`t decided yet ,


Hotspots can occur in normal photography in the wrong conditions for exactly the same reasons as for IR.

The light reflects from the glass sensor cover/hot mirror filter onto the rear element of the lens, and back, repeatedly, if you are familiar with audio you will have heard of feedback squeal, lens hotspots might be described as an optical equivalent.

There are several of us here on the forum who take IR photographs, if you do decide to have a go, I am sure we can give you some guidance.
Ah that explains it , so then when the rear element is very close to the sensor there should be a hot spot , do not have that with the 55 f1.2 which has a rather large rear element very close to the sensor , have n`t noticed anything sofar , but then the slrN has no AA filter , which makes it susceptible to moir¨ tho`.
I definitely want to get on with IR , there `s a company in the USA that offers several kits , incl. a tutorial how to install in both the D1.. D1x ,..can n`t decide which camera t` rebuild , as the D1 has that nifty shutter , the D1x has more resolution , and which filter kit , or maybe the UV kit ,.. any recommendations ?



____________________
Back in Danmark

I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment

The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets.
 




Posted: Mon Apr 22nd, 2013 14:38
 
10th Post
Robert



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: South Lakeland, UK
Posts: 4066
Status: 
Offline
I have a D1-IR, in my opinion it's rather lacking in resolution. I have a spare D1x body, it depends how good you are with your fingers, I have opened up D1 and D1x with no difficulty. There are two companies in US who do the conversions or sell the filters. The 'standard' IR filter is 720nM, from memory. You can go as weak as 650Nm or as hard as 800nM I think, It's a while since I was checking these figures.

I have a good friend, Dr. Klaus Schmitt, ( http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.co.uk ) in Germany who may be able to help you and there is also a company in the UK who fit the filters.

The toughest part is getting the filter in in perfectly clean conditions, if you trap a dust bunny behind the filter you may have to pull it out, clean it and re-assemble. The D1x and D1 both have the same filter size. I would like to convert a D200, I already have a D200-UV version, I feel the D200 is a very suitable body for conversion but it's not a DIY job on the D200. Eric had a D200 converted and it took quite a bit of work to get it right.

Please forgive my ignorance but what is a "slrN" ? I have seen you mention it several times but I don't recognise the term.

This Rudbeckia was taken with my D1-IR and (probably) Nikkor 55mm f2.8 Micro.

Attachment: Rudbeckia IR a 4829.jpg (Downloaded 18 times)



____________________
Robert.

 

Reply
1st new
This is topic ID = 604     Current time is 08:22 Page:    1  2  3  4  Next Page Last Page    
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Lenses > Lenses Top

Users viewing this topic

Post quick reply

Go to top
Go to end
Messages
Home
Recent topics
Unread posts
Last posts
Splash

Current theme is Modern editor



A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you.


Hosted by Octarine Services

UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0633 seconds (66% database + 34% PHP). 86 queries executed.