MF Adapted Lens Image Samples - Post Your Best!

[ZeissFan]

Welcome!

Let's Post Image Samples From Our Favorite Manual Focus Lenses We've Used On Our dSLR's.

I Personally LOVE The Lens Image Sample Section On POTN And The Ability To Get A Sense Of The Imaging Potential Various Lenses Have. I HOPE To Share The Potential Of A Zeiss Lens I Own & Use and Learn More About Other Lenses I Might Like To Try Or Experiment With. Large Numbers Of High Quality Lenses Were Made And Continue To Be Made That Never Had AF Motors Or Electronic Diaphragms! Our Beloved 'L' Image Quality Is Available In Potentia' From Lenses That Never Had A Red Ring. Let's Show Each Other That Here On POTN.

Please Include:
~ An Image From A NON-EF Lens
~ A 100% Crop From The Image
~ A Quick Synapsis Of The Lens, Camera, & Adapter, Involved

ie:
- A Wowser Shot
- A Wowser Detail from the Shot
- A Bio On The Equipment Used

In my case: A Zeiss Pancolar 50mm f1.8, 20D, AF Chipped M42toEOS Adapter

Other Contextual & Equipment Information Would Be Cool, But Just Bringing The Image Is The Most Important.

Let's Make This Thread bw!


My First Image Post Follows This One!

Wish Me Luck!
Richard

[ZeissFan]

My First Image Post Attempt!
Wish Me Luck!

Zeiss Pancolar 50mm f1.8 M42 Mount Lens
20D Camera Via Generic AF Confirm Adapter
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3522/3267824103_9f55579064_b.jpg
100% In Photoshop Screen Shot
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3496/3267931239_4283a05273_o.jpg

I Punted The Plane Of Focus, It's only maximimally sharp at the Catcher! Max in camera Sharpness JPEG and I had the Saturation Bumped Up as well to see what that would do in the dreary overcast and drizzly light. I prefer RAW in all applications except shooting action to boost maximum frames per second through put. I shoot in an attempt to get those special moments that capture the action in a visually communicative way. Images that stand up beyond simply recording an interesting moment in time - if that makes any sense! JPEG's Help a LOT getting them in this situation.

ISO 200 and Shutter Speed of 1/4000th If I recall Correctly.

Pretty Sure I'm Pretty Exclusive Shooting Action With A Zeiss 50! in the USA in 2008!
Subset of One... Maybe!:cool:

Lens Mini Bio:
Made in East Germany in the Universal/Pentax Screw Mount/M42 mount. (The mount with many names!). Mine came off eBay awhile back on my Practica SLR out of Eastern Europe. Pancolars seem to have a Cult Like following, a friend from my film days had slides from one that knocked my socks off, and that's why I bought it. I try not to be 'cult-ish' in my Love for the Lens, but it is capable of wonderful images.

[khnordeen]

I love using alternative lenses, and basically use them exclusively. I don't have 100% crops of these currently uploaded, but I figured I would just share them anyway. They were all used on my 1D and I used the "Consumer" grade Fotodiox adapters.

Leica 35-70/4 ROM @ f4

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3241/3157358342_9a8b350d87.jpg?v=0

Nikon 50/1.4 Ai-S @ f1.4

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3505/3194704529_eac789c824.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3104/3195548156_e2aa72f8f4.jpg?v=0

Nikon 85/1.4 Ai-S @ f1.4

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3087/3198732882_48ce9f437a.jpg?v=0

Sorry I don't have the little bio's or 100% crops like you posted, but I just wanted to contribute something. Good idea for a thread.

Just waiting for a Zeiss F-Distagon 16/2.8 to come in. I'm going to go crazy when it finally comes in :D

-Kyle

[TheHoff]

http://i42.tinypic.com/2s64t4k.jpg

http://i40.tinypic.com/2upfzbm.jpg

SMC-Takumar 55mm f/2.0 on 5D Classic @ f/2.0

[440roadrunner]

Most of my MF lenses are pretty budget, no exotics, but here we go

Many on my Flickr page are mf

http://www.flickr.com/photos/18786943@N03/

Taken with Olympus Zuiko OM mount on 40D, 28mm 2.8, stopped down to about f16


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3186/2834527369_16462edfb3_b.jpg




Some fireworks, taken with the Tamron SP 17mm Adaptall-2

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3069/2656458395_5f4c9c6b51_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3224/2657267620_14527999f7_b.jpg



Taken with Nikkor 180mm 2.8. Don't know the f stop for this frame

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2159/2268336335_5eaebe61d2_o.jpg

Taken with one of my cheapest lenses, an old Sears/ Mamiya Sekor 50mm 1.8, which had to have the skirt filed off to fit an M42 mount. I have zero dollars into this lens

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2415/2269089278_bda8c616dc_b.jpg

Forgot to document which lens. May have been the Nikkor 180mm 2.8

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2227/2268264605_7c98773d75_b.jpg


Taken with Tamron Adaptall-2 90mm. This lens is afflicted with a "purple spot" on the sensor (flare) when stopped down

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2171/2170530922_a9a01e73bd_o.jpg

[Psychobiker]

And a very large test image at f5.6 on 5D
http://liammartin.com/twaddle/ZeissTest/f5.6.jpg

Wide open on 400D.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3131/3159726427_de884bac66_o.jpg

[kitacanon]

Well I haven't been out much lately but I've a few oldies to share...nice summer shots for you northerners...with my 300mm Nikkor...@ 5.6 typically @ ISO 400
the 1st two on the XT...
http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/8903/hawkffemjx0.jpg

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/8337/hwk2wlu23jzk4.jpg

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/747/gabkidjft1.jpg

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/9716/gabkidwcu22yq0.jpg

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/7753/gabkidhndsdy6.jpg

and with my 10D...
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9941/adrcrw5998u44ffjgj3.jpg

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/4503/adrcrw5998u44cjjb3.jpg

thought I'd add another 100% crop

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/2977/adrjac1crw5999u34dcbf2.jpg

[argyle]

Various lenses, all shot on a 5D:

Schneider Xenar 105mm/f3.5 on Novoflex bellows, 1/60 @ f16:
http://northlake.smugmug.com/photos/371487487_nHYrg-XL.jpg

Minolta Rokkor 58mm/f1.2, 1/4000 @ f2:
http://northlake.smugmug.com/photos/460772811_aBqw4-XL.jpg

Leica 35mm/f2.8, 1/500 @f16:
http://northlake.smugmug.com/photos/381216421_QZuc6-XL.jpg

Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 35-70/f3.4, 1/90 @ f16:
http://northlake.smugmug.com/photos/324389425_FNJwk-XL.jpg

[ZeissFan]

Thanks Everyone!
The Posts so far are looking pretty wonderful.
The Moderator of the Lens Sample Photo Archive says this thread will get linked in on that archive.
My Intent was to get a thread going to show off the Potential of the Old and Not So Old lenses we put on our Canon Cameras.
Please Keep The Posts Coming!
If you know another MF Adapting POTNer please let em know about the thread, if you wouldn't mind.
NOTE:
If The Opportunity & Possibility is there for some of our Posters to add a 'review' kind of post of a 'Gem' of a lens you use including a great shot, a 100% crop, and a picture of your lens in some fashion so readers can have a visual sense of the lens you use. A few words about what makes it a Gem in your eyes would be pretty cool, too. Attractive Out Of Focus Areas, Gorgeous Sharpness, Delicate Colors, Snappy Contrast, or Whatever.

I'm working to get some more 'genealogical' info on my lens and a 'product shot' to show it's overly loved exterior that belies the loving way it passes images back to the sensor in my 20D.

Thanks Everyone!
Richard

[kitacanon]

Well here's a few shots of MF lenses on my Canons...
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/1102/400canheres9.jpg

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/6246/10dnikzb9.jpg

http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/8497/sers50ezk4.jpg

here's the original full frame of the heron above....
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/8081/her2ff44jsdv4.jpg

[Perry Ge]

SMC Takumar 55 1.8, wide open:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=339293&stc=1&d=1233568175

[khnordeen]

Just a quick shot with my Zeiss F-Distagon 16/2.8 that just came in today...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3317/3273689560_cb5f581c76.jpg?v=0

[KenjiS]

Just a quick shot with my Zeiss F-Distagon 16/2.8 that just came in today...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3317/3273689560_cb5f581c76.jpg?v=0


Thats cool!

Man im seriously lusting to convert some stuff now..

[khnordeen]

Thats cool!

Man im seriously lusting to convert some stuff now..

Thanks!

I'd say go for it, but it is way worse than "L" fever. :D

I started off with my Leica 35-70/4 ROM, and then sold off my 16-35L and Sigma 70-200 to fund my Zeiss 16/2.8 and Nikon 85/1.4 Ai-S. Luckily my dad still has his old Nikon FE, as well as his 50/1.4 Ai-S, so I get to use that as well.

I'm still eyeing a few other lenses (especially a Vivitar 90/2.5 since I need a macro lens), but I'm sure my Zeiss will suffice for a long time.

If you are willing to work without AF, I'd definitely try it out.

But before just diving in, if you are still on the fence, try out something that is relatively inexpensive. Is there any particular focal length of lens you want to try out?

-Kyle

[KenjiS]

Thanks!

I'd say go for it, but it is way worse than "L" fever. :D

I started off with my Leica 35-70/4 ROM, and then sold off my 16-35L and Sigma 70-200 to fund my Zeiss 16/2.8 and Nikon 85/1.4 Ai-S. Luckily my dad still has his old Nikon FE, as well as his 50/1.4 Ai-S, so I get to use that as well.

I'm still eyeing a few other lenses (especially a Vivitar 90/2.5 since I need a macro lens), but I'm sure my Zeiss will suffice for a long time.

If you are willing to work without AF, I'd definitely try it out.

But before just diving in, if you are still on the fence, try out something that is relatively inexpensive. Is there any particular focal length of lens you want to try out?

-Kyle

Oh i dont mind MF/Manual aperture and all that, I'm actually very heavily giving a consideration to the 50mm f/1.7 Zeiss because I'm not a huge fan of the Nifty [I'm only really holding off till after PMA to make sure theres no good update to the Nifty or the 50mm f/1.4, then again, neither will be as affordable or as optically stunning as a Zeiss I bet]

I'm really only holding off till my birthday in march to lump together a good chunk of money and decide on the lenses i want to get at the moment..spring is coming, id love a good long lens [But I want that to be AF..I think...some of those old Nikkors are really appealing however..] and id love a new camera body [Actually considering an original 1D]

[foxbat]

After trying out a few adapted Leica/Contax Zeiss lenses a few years ago the slippery slope was well and truly hit and now my entire sub-135mm kit is Leica & Zeiss.

Here's a selection from the archives:

450D + Contax Zeiss 28mm Distagon
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/9_900.jpg

1DMk2 + Leica 90mm f/2.8 Elmarit
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Nature/bluebell-90.jpg

450D + Contax Zeiss 28mm Distagon
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/austria/lech/_MG_0244-copy.jpg

1DMK2 + Leica 35-70mm f/4
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Italy/10_1000-1.jpg

1DMk2 + Leica 35mm f/2.8 Elmarit
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/austria/neustift/1_900.jpg

[watchtherocks]

Set-up in my avvy. FD 500mm f/4.5 with a cheap adapter on a 20D.

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/2508/100crop1fg7.jpg

100%:

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/4919/100cropyw1.jpg

[khnordeen]

Gotta keep this thread updated 8)

1D + Zeiss 16/2.8

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3498/3274809843_e419af4345.jpg?v=0

[kitacanon]

50/F1.4 Nikkor on 30D....1/5th of full frame

http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/4716/rdflycsu23jkq4.jpg

[KenjiS]

50/F1.4 Nikkor on 30D....1/5th of full frame

http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/4716/rdflycsu23jkq4.jpg

NICE shot!

[kitacanon]

NICE shot!

Thanx Kenji...of course the timing is 100% luck...but I really like the tonal quality of the palm trees, the fronds and the trunk too...

[mayt444]

Great Thread! I hope it keeps going. Have experimented a little with a Chinon 35mm F2.8 M42 mount on my 30D. Here is a shot with natural sunlight coming through a window. Taken in AV mode,1/50 sec, F8 with a little sharpening in PS.

[mayt444]

Sorry It's so small. I am a newb. Here it is a little larger.

[KenjiS]

Thats really cool man :D Great work!

[Laramie]

Olympus Zuiko 24mm 2.8 on a 5D. Generic OM to EOS adapter.

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/tylerpebley/20081229-IMG_6611.jpg

[mayt444]

Anyone else out there using adapted M42 screw mount lenses on there Canon bodies? I am thinking of getting a screw mount macro.

[foxbat]

You can do some funky stuff with M42 lenses adapted to macro with a little imagination.

These are all taken with a Pentax Takumar 50mm f/1.4 reversed on to the end of a 105mm Pentax Takumar using a macro reversing ring. The 50 is focused on infinity and must be wide open at f/1.4 (otherwise you get vignetting from the aperture blades) and the 105 is used to focus and stop down. Magnification is about 2:1. Camera is 1DMK2 here.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/macro/21_750.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/macro/24_750.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/macro/15_700.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/macro/16_700.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/macro/22_750.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/macro/2.jpg

[Cotmweasel]

wow, this thread turned into a discussion thread :lol:

anyway back on track :P

not that great of a pic, but whatever :lol:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3410/3277588637_8670f24ab0_b.jpg

Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.7 (at 1.7), ISO 100, no flash.

Crop of the full size

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3520/3305335030_65dcf9745d_o.jpg

Took this shot the day I got this lens (feb 13th). was working at a valentines banquet so I took a quick shot of this cheese cake to see what it would do wide open. needless to say, I'm quite happy with this lens.

[KenjiS]

wow, this thread turned into a discussion thread :lol:

anyway back on track :P

not that great of a pic, but whatever :lol:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3410/3277588637_8670f24ab0_b.jpg

Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.7 (at 1.7), ISO 100, no flash.

Crop of the full size

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3520/3305335030_65dcf9745d_o.jpg

Took this shot the day I got this lens (feb 13th). was working at a valentines banquet so I took a quick shot of this cheese cake to see what it would do wide open. needless to say, I'm quite happy with this lens.

I'm hungry and i want to order the Zeiss 1.4 i found

Thanks >.>

[rdenney]

I'm at home, and on dialup, so I can't see the whole thread to see if I'm repeating something. But no matter. This image (of our cat) was made with a:

Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm/3.5

using a $35 unidentified adapter with a focus-confirm chip that I bought off ebay. I think I paid $80 for the lens off ebay a couple of years ago.

I've included the full image and a 100% crop of the eye, though I think the ear might actually be a little closer to the focus plane.

The image was made with a 5D, using Av, and the lens was wide open. Shutter speed was 1/125, at ISO 400, with light from a bank of windows (which you can see reflected in the eye if you look closely--there's even a bit of my outline visible in the eye reflection). White Balance was 5500K, and I notched the exposure up a stop during the RAW conversion (I'd forgotten and left the exposure compensation dial a stop down). The image is cropped on the sides but it's full frame top to bottom.

Here's a picture of the lens, next to its big brother--a medium-format Zeiss Jena 180/2.8.

http://www.rickdenney.com/images/CRW_2834.jpg

My conclusion: It's probably hard to find a really bad 135, but I still put this one in the world-class category. It has the old-school Sonnar design, the creamy-smooth bokeh, and incredible sharpness even wide open. It ranks right up their on my all-time sleeper list.

Rick "this one is ALWAYS in the bag--for 'wildlife'" Denney

[rdenney]

Here's something a bit out of the ordinary. Recently, I acquired a tilting adapter for Pentacon Six lenses to fit the EF mount. As you can see from my list, I have a LOT of Pentacon Six-mount lenses. For this picture, I chose:

Carl Zeiss Jena Biometar 80mm/2.8, Pentacon Six

which was made as the normal lens for the medium-format Pentacon Six camera. That camera was later reincarnated as the Exakta 66, and came with Schneider lenses. The normal lenses supplied with that camera were reskinned versions of this lens until Schneider retasked one of its Xenotar lenses for the duty. This lens is a five-element Planar design, and the design is rather old, though this lens dates from 1983. The build quality and styling of the lens is similar to the Zeiss Jena Sonnars pictured in my previous post.

As a medium-format lens, it has an 80mm+ image circle and can thus take the 8-degree tilt of the adapter in stride. The tilting adapter maintains infinity focus and when not tilted works fine as a conventional adapter, though it does not have a focus-confirm chip. I do have a P6-EF adapter with a focus-confirm chip, and one without. I can even adapt these lenses to my Pentax 645.

The adapter sells for $129 from Kiev Camera. It is described and can be bought here. (http://kievcamera.net/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=55&products_id=174)

In the image, the lens was tilted to the left 8 degrees to turn the focus plane to run along the fence. The effect cannot be duplicated in Photoshop, and it would take an unacceptably (or infeasibly) small aperture to achieve the needed depth of field in any case. The lens was set to f/5.6, the white balance was 5000K, and there was no exposure compensation in the conversion from raw. The camera was a 5D, in Av mode. The shutter speed was 1/4000 at ISO400, and I really stretched my technique by hand-holding it at that speed.

The Biometar is a simply outstanding lens. Other images from the same session show critical sharpness at f/8 on a par with any of my other lenses.

More on the adapter: I have a Hartblei PCS lens in 45mm, based on Ukrainian glass. That shift lens has rotation, and on this adapter, would provide independent rotation for the shift and the tilt. I have not yet experimented with that combination. That lens is available used in the coupla-hundred range. Need a cheap alternative to the Canon 45 and 90mm TS/E lenses? Here you go.

Rick "thinking the artistic possibilities here take me back to my view camera days" Denney

[Perry Ge]

^ That is REALLY COOL.

[Permagrin]

my gosh Rick, those posts were informative and interesting...I say keep posting until you get to the end of your "list" :)

[Perry Ge]

my gosh Rick, those posts were informative and interesting...I say keep posting until you get to the end of your "list" :)

Yes! And show us shots from the Jupiter 85 2 Rick! No Helios-44, no bokeh monster in the gear list? :p [And WHY do you have that Phoenix 100-400 zoom?]

[rdenney]

Yes! And show us shots from the Jupiter 85 2 Rick! No Helios-44, no bokeh monster in the gear list? :p [And WHY do you have that Phoenix 100-400 zoom?]

The Sonnar is the bokeh-monster. (The 180/2.8, that is. And the 300/4 Sonnar is also nothing to sneeze at.)

I have been consistently disappointed with the Jupiter--the focus ring on it is so stiff it keeps unscrewing itself out of the adapter when I try to focus it. I suppose I'll need to take it apart and relube it, which is a little annoying given that it is not at all old.

I think I'll drop by the Photorama show on Sunday and see what's out there.

The Phoenix? What can I say? It seemed like a good idea at the time. But even it is not without it's artistic possibilities. (I'll link an image here (http://www.rickdenney.com/images/pinnacle_in_last_light_lores.jpg) instead of displaying it, since that would violate the intent of the thread.) You just can't make very big prints. It is a LOT lighter than the 500mm Prakticar, however. I'll make some images with it for this thread, when I get my truck fixed (so I can haul it around).

Rick "for whom the Phoenix is not the only lens with an unresolved question mark next to it" Denney

[Permagrin]

from a couple of days ago with the 50

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=7398130&postcount=4239

[Cotmweasel]

haha Rick, you are so funny XD

Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.7 Planar T*
at f/1.7, Rebel XTi, Exposure: 0.008 sec (1/125), ISO 400 (no flash).


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3356/3308518346_07277e7e5a_b.jpg

100% crop

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3098/3311912283_d3ef4bbdab_o.jpg
Sorry if its a little big but I wanted you to be able to see the details.

These roses were sitting on someones desk, so I desided to take some photos of them. :)

[kitacanon]

Do any of you actually use these lenses? All I see is talk about how sharp they are, then occasional snapshots with 100% crops, showing how sharp they are. There are only a few posts at the beginning that have photos with any thought put into them and the thread is 10 pages long...

I've used my nikkors for birding and such....

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/4009/babes2dr2.jpg

some 100% crops from a series I shot of a redheaded pecker just for fun...

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/6325/grub3wclu12r.jpg

http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/5717/grubcu13eh9.jpg

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/8804/rdhd12c175pjd2.jpg

and this is about a 50% crop...
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/5482/hwk2wlfused5.jpg

this is near full frame with the 300...
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/1618/bensonu13reduxp6.jpg

[In2Photos]

I can't believe this thread has this many posts. :shock: Oh, it has no pictures! Now that makes sense! ;)

I am going to do some pruning. I will move the "chit chat" over to a new thread so you folks can continue discussions about MF lenses in general, but I would prefer to keep this thread focussed (no pun intended) on pictures. Of course feel free to discuss the pictures or add things about a lens like Rick did.

[In2Photos]

Please continue the discussion here:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=653759

[justincase724]

I'm surprised how many different lenses are showing up in here so quick. Here's mine - Mamiya 50mm f1.4, first shot is as f1.4, second at (or near) f16, third shot is a mirror shot showing the lens on camera (kind of) all on a 5dmk2. To make it work, I actually cut up a Canon body cap and siliconed the attachement part onto the lens itself. Then, to test the manual aperture of the lens, here's (http://www.flickr.com/photos/justinkerr/3223988201/in/set-72157613716461792/) a video shot on the 5dmk2. Still kinda playing with the whole thing.

1.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3332/3302582326_785d8fb72a_o.jpg


2.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3377/3302582898_765fd49fa3_o.jpg


3.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3302344349_3890848f25_o.jpg

[versedmb]

I'm surprised how many different lenses are showing up in here so quick. Here's mine - Mamiya 50mm f1.4, first shot is as f1.4, second ...
1.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3332/3302582326_785d8fb72a_o.jpg





Wow, that bokeh is just amazing - that is some of the coolest 50mm bokeh I've seen.

Can you elaborate on how on how you attached that Mamiya to EOS?

[justincase724]

Can you elaborate on how on how you attached that Mamiya to EOS?

I'll have to get a few pictures of it this weekend and get back to you on it, cause it'll really help to have something to show with the explaination.

Okay, here we go. First, you've got your standard Canon body cap as shown in picture #1. From how it is shown there, I basically cut it in half, using only the part that secures onto the camera body. Then, I used some standard black silicon to "glue" the piece of body cap to the base of the lens. Pictures 2 and 3 (try to) show how it looks on the lens.

1.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3455/3314789923_35da39eb80_o.jpg

2.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3314789279_31dc31479b_o.jpg

3.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3360/3314789797_3a1318e72e_o.jpg

[rdenney]

I'm surprised how many different lenses are showing up in here so quick. Here's mine - Mamiya 50mm f1.4, first shot is as f1.4, second at (or near) f16, third shot is a mirror shot showing the lens on camera (kind of) all on a 5dmk2. To make it work, I actually cut up a Canon body cap and siliconed the attachement part onto the lens itself.

This confuses me. That Mamiya/Sekor lens looks like the normal lens for the old 1000DTL camera, which was made back in the late 60's/early 70's. I had one of those. The lenses were conventional M42 lenses that Mamiya called "Universal Screw Mount" to keep from having to utter the P word (either Pentacon, who invented the mount, or Pentax, who made it famous). Is this something different?

RIck "who mounted an old barrel-mounted Tessar in a body cap and then put it on a bellows to use as a focuser for use on medium format" Denney

[justincase724]

This confuses me. That Mamiya/Sekor lens looks like the normal lens for the old 1000DTL camera, which was made back in the late 60's/early 70's. I had one of those. The lenses were conventional M42 lenses that Mamiya called "Universal Screw Mount" to keep from having to utter the P word (either Pentacon, who invented the mount, or Pentax, who made it famous). Is this something different?

I had to go dig out the camera a took it from, and sure enough, it is the 1000DTL. That's kinda crazy that you could tell what that was by the lens.

[khnordeen]

Couple more from the Zeiss. I really love this lens. :D

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3298/3316886837_d69c3d5c5b.jpg?v=0 http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3332/3317713242_119f17c083.jpg?v=0

-Kyle

[Perry Ge]

Great shots Kyle, I love the second one.

I got a chance to bust out the Nikkor 105 2.5 today while playing with my new 50L. Here's its christening duck - cropped a little to show how bloody good this thing is.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=345979&d=1235869596

[Permagrin]

very nice Perry!

That's even better than I expected...I can't wait for some good weather to try mine.


Kyle, cool processing on those shots too.

[Perry Ge]

Yeah it's AWESOME. The noink is up there with the 135L IMO....I like how ducks are such a great indicator of quality on POTN :lol:.

But the 50L is somethin' else, (though off topic) :lol:.

[khnordeen]

Thanks for the compliments you two. :)

Nice shot Perry - Nikon's Ai-S lenses really are something. I am hoping to pick up a 135/2 Ai-S at some point.

[Lars Finkelstein]

Thanks for the duck perry, but please please give us some portraits :)

[Perry Ge]

Thanks for the duck perry, but please please give us some portraits :)

I'll try. It's hard to get the 85L off the camera when shooting portraits though :p.

[khnordeen]

Some more...

Zeiss 16/2.8

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3627/3317620808_e93a776ece.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3373/3316889791_187ccf4ace.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3558/3317708788_59f88851de.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3465/3317709382_9664312f60.jpg?v=0

Nikon 85/1.4 Ai-S

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3126/3316889127_b17ca9f433.jpg?v=0

-Kyle

[Dorman]

Damn this thread is intriguing!

Maybe some of you adapted lens guys can help me out. I am currently working with two 30D's and I'm looking to add some speed to my bag. I'm mostly using zoom lenses today and want to try a minimalist approach for walking around - force myself to slow down. Ideally I would pick up the 24mm F/1.4L and the 50mm F/1.4 but funds are limited. As such I was looking at just grabbing the 50mm now, then I got looking into some of the alternative lenses...

I'm a bit hesitant to jump fully into the MF arena, but I'm drawn to the simple, vintage optics that are out there. I'm hesitant about the MF due to the difficulty factor (I'm sure practice makes perfect) along with the small viewfinder on my 30D.

The interesting part is.... I could pick up a very nice Olympus 24mm F/2.8 and Takumar or Minolta Rokkor 50mm for not much more than the EF 50mm F/1.4 goes for here in Canada. Would I be nuts to give up AF and go with these MF lenses, or would I be crazy to pass up those quality optics at that price point?

Cheers.

[Perry Ge]

Not much more? Unless you're getting the Rokkor 58 1.2 you should be able to get them for quite a bit less...

[Permagrin]

I decided to do some shots over the course of the next few weeks with these mf lenses. It's still raining here so you get pets indoors..

this is with the nikon 200 F4 ai mf (for the price...avg. $80 usd...it's a nice sharp lens worth having)

These are on F4 and with the 100% crop. This lens is very sharp but (for inside) the minimum focus distance can be a pain. For walk around though it's nice. I was going to get rid of it, but it's so sharp wide open I'm keeping it.

inside with fill flash, iso 200 no editing, just converting to jpeg in lightroom

1.
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p999277701-4.jpg

crop
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p944861311-4.jpg

2.
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p719001616-4.jpg

crop
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p697374077-4.jpg

3.
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p1073443878-4.jpg

crop
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p972729677-4.jpg

4. (oops just ignore the stuff on the floor...)
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p859712229-4.jpg

crop
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p590964872-4.jpg

[Perry Ge]

Nice shots Permie :D. Your pets are very cooperative :lol:.

[Dorman]

Not much more? Unless you're getting the Rokkor 58 1.2 you should be able to get them for quite a bit less...

Not with the exchange rate from the US. :( It would work out to be about the same all said and done. Just not sure if the MF is the way to go or not. I don't want to drop the coin and not enjoy using them. I've been playing around with my 17-40 MF to see, but it's hard to tell since F/4 really dims out the viewfinder.

[Permagrin]

Nice shots Permie :D. Your pets are very cooperative :lol:.

lol, the dog is trained to stay still until he hears the shutter sound (then he gets a treat) :lol:

[Perry Ge]

Not with the exchange rate from the US. :( It would work out to be about the same all said and done. Just not sure if the MF is the way to go or not. I don't want to drop the coin and not enjoy using them. I've been playing around with my 17-40 MF to see, but it's hard to tell since F/4 really dims out the viewfinder.

There's an SMC Tak 55 1.8 on sale here in Toronto for CAD$25, and you should be able to find a 24 2.8 for about $100, I got my 28 3.5 for $70. The Rokkor isn't worth it unless you get the 58 1.2 (there's one here for $500) but I got a Rokkor 50 1.7 for $12, which I sold to a local forum member to dismantle.

[Dorman]

There's an SMC Tak 55 1.8 on sale here in Toronto for CAD$25, and you should be able to find a 24 2.8 for about $100, I got my 28 3.5 for $70. The Rokkor isn't worth it unless you get the 58 1.2 (there's one here for $500) but I got a Rokkor 50 1.7 for $12, which I sold to a local forum member to dismantle.

Good to know - I hadn't considered looking at what's available around Toronto and the like. My first inclination is to just go for the EF 50mm f/1.4 and then save up for and find something in the 24mm range...

[Perry Ge]

Yeah I ended up with the 50L and a MF 28mm prime, but if you want to try out some MF glass, if you can find an OM->EOS adapter (I only have one and need it), I could ship you my Zuiko 50 1.8 (VERY nice lens) for you to try, and then if you like it you can have it for pretty cheap. PM me if you're interested.

[Dorman]

Yeah I ended up with the 50L and a MF 28mm prime, but if you want to try out some MF glass, if you can find an OM->EOS adapter (I only have one and need it), I could ship you my Zuiko 50 1.8 (VERY nice lens) for you to try, and then if you like it you can have it for pretty cheap. PM me if you're interested.

Thanks dude, I'll give it some thought. I think AF on the 50mm might be the way to go since there are some decent AF 50's available at a reasonable cost (of course I'd love to 50L, someday!). The 24 is the challenge since there aren't many GOOD reasonably priced alternatives w/ AF.

[Perry Ge]

Thanks dude, I'll give it some thought. I think AF on the 50mm might be the way to go since there are some decent AF 50's available at a reasonable cost (of course I'd love to 50L, someday!). The 24 is the challenge since there aren't many GOOD reasonably priced alternatives w/ AF.

Yeah and even the Canon wide angles aren't as good from corner to corner as some of these MF lenses. Anyway we should move the discussion to the "General MF lens thread" (see a few pages back) before we get kicked out again.

[Electric Shepherd]

I picked up a bargain Zeiss Jena Sonnar f3.5/135 last week on eBay so I've had a quick play with it over the last couple of days.

Loving the bokeh on it so far but lots to learn about using MF lenses on my 450D using a focus confirm M42 adaptor.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3440/3320454112_00307921ca_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3551/3320924934_c940570d1e_b.jpg

Both shot at f3.5. I'll try to figure out some 100% crops later.

[rdenney]

I went to a (lousy) camera show, and to my surprise found a couple of goodies.

Okay, one was a goodie and the other one was, well, interesting.

I'll start with the interesting one, a

Schneider Kreuznach Curtagon 28mm f/4, M42 mount

I figure this was probably a high-end 28 back in the 50's, when Schneider made these for the Retina Reflex. This one is an M42 lens, but with a stop-down arrangement that is unlike any M42 lens I've seen. I don't know what camera it was originally intended for--most of the M42 cameras of that era used the push-pin stop-down control. But it does have a very convenient Auto-Manual slide control, which will switch it from full-aperture viewing and focusing to stopped down for metering and exposing, and for use on a Canon the funky auto diaphragm isn't an issue.

The lens proved to be a problem on the 5D. When focused further away than 15 feet, the mirror would get hung up on the back of the lens. There is a ring that screws into the lens back that I thought was a retainer, so I removed it to file it down. Ooops! It held in five tiny ball bearings on which the auto diaphragm actuation ring runs. That caused the actuation ring to fall slack, which caused the aperture blades to fall out of their tracks. Three hours later (GRRRR!), the lens was back in one piece and everything was fine (and now it's all cleaned and lubed, too). I'm amazed by the number of tiny screws those post-war Germans were willing to tolerate. But the disassembly let me know that I could file away the interference with no risk of damage, and in the end I took off about a millimeter from the upper edge of the rear barrel. It now works fine on the 5D.

Was it worth the effort? Possibly not. This image was made at f/11, which was not enough to ensure adequate depth of field. I used an AF-chipped adapter (the same one I use for my Jena Sonnar) and focused on the pine needles on the ground in the center of the image. The color is pretty good, and there is not even a hint of chromatic aberration in this lens, which is quite remarkable for a 50-year-old wide-angle design. The lens is coated but not extremely contrasty, though that is also useful for taming some of those ultra-contrasty scenes. It is very sharp in the middle of the frame (as shown in the 100% detail), but it loses it in the corners, even stopped down to f/11 (though the bush in the foreground of this picture is out of focus, and there are sharper details behind the bush). There's a pronounced field curvature. If you focus on 10 feet, the corners will be focused on infinity (and not 10 feet). This isn't that uncommon for the day, but in my experience the curvature goes the other way (focusing closer than the focus plane). The sharpness of the center is characteristic of early retrofocus wides, including the Flektogon and even the early Distagons.

I paid $75, which is too much. Might be a reasonable buy at $25, unless you are trying to complete a Schneider lens collection for a 50's Praktica. Will I use it? Maybe, when I want an old-world look. I'll have to experiment some more to see if there is a special character that I've so far missed. My first impression, though, is that it's no match for a Pentax lens from a dozen years later.

Rick "who probably should have passed" Denney

[rdenney]

And now for the good find in my camera show adventure.

Based on this thread, I decided I needed a legendary Nikkor 105/2.5. I was impressed with the Nikon Series E 75-150, which was a budget lens for the Nikon EM (though it has also apparently attained mythic status), and I know that the Noink boys know how to make a lens with pretty rendering.

As it turns out, sitting right next to the Schneider was a very battered

Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, AI mount

By "battered", I mean that the wartime photog that used it once mistakenly threw it at the enemy, thinking it was a hand grenade. Or something like that. It's heavily brassed, the rubber has been worn down to hard nubs, the glass has a couple of marks on the coating on the front element, and the lens was full of dust and haze. I paid for it what I should have paid for the Schneider.

One problem was that the mount lock-pin slot was so worn that my Nikon-EF adapter wouldn't grab it reliably. I made a new sharp edge with a Dremel tool and a tiny burr grinder. I then found the little set screw that held on the front guard ring, and removing that, was able to remove the front lens cell. (You can also remove the label ring to get to it, but the filter threads on this beast need a bit of straightening before attempting that. That let me clean the interior surfaces of the lens, which gave me very clean and clear optics but for the bit of damage on the front element.

About that damage: It's rather amazing how much damage it takes to make a visible effect on an image, so I never let a slight coating flaw or a tiny scratch deter me, especially since it forces the price down into the play-money range.

And I like battered lenses, because that means they were used. A well-used lens that was part of a professional line often means a professional used it and loved it.

This AI lens does not have the integral slide-out lens shade, which is a convenient feature of the later AI-S version. I'm thinking this lens dates from about 1977--the serial number is very early in the series after the introduction of AI-mount lenses. This one would look just dandy on an F2 Photomic.

And it makes dandy images. The bokeh is outstanding, based on my early look, and the lens is sharp corner to corner even wide open. In this image, the lens was stopped down to f/11. Color is wonderful and contrast excellent. This one will definitely ride in my bag at least for a while. I'm grateful for the peek into this lens in this thread, which is the only reason I would have paid even chump change for a battered example.

Rick "noting similarities of design with vintage Sonnars" Denney

[Perry Ge]

I totally agree about the well used lenses Rick. But what do you mean design similarities with old Sonnars? The big appeal of the later Nikon 105 2.5 lenses is that they moved away from a Sonnar design to a Gauss-type 5 elements in 4 groups design, but I'm probably misunderstanding you since you know way more than I do :p.

Regardless, I have the same lens, and it's one of the best. It's excellent. Mine is in mint condition though :lol:.

[rdenney]

I totally agree about the well used lenses Rick. But what do you mean design similarities with old Sonnars? The big appeal of the later Nikon 105 2.5 lenses is that they moved away from a Sonnar design to a Gauss-type 5 elements in 4 groups design, but I'm probably misunderstanding you since you know way more than I do :p.

Regardless, I have the same lens, and it's one of the best. It's excellent. Mine is in mint condition though :lol:.

I don't know about the Sonnar design in terms of which elements are negative and positive, etc. But what I did see in the optical plan was the use of very thick elements in front of the optical center. The bokeh is much more Sonnar-like than Planar-like to my eye, and that's a good thing.

But looking at the optical plan, the Nikkor looks a whole lot more like a Sonnar than a Planar (which is a symmetrical lens with 6 elements in 4 groups.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/late70nikkor/telephoto/105mmf25.pdf

http://www.commiecameras.com/ddr/p6/lenses/images/s180con.gif

The upper link is a 62K PDF that shows the Nikkor in AI trim (same glass as the AIS, and probably the same as the Nikkor-P that preceded it). The lower link is from Nathan Dayton's Commiecamers site, and shows the Zeiss Jena Sonnar 180/2.8. The forward negative element in the Nikkor is the main difference that I see.

Rick "not willing to go any further than that" Denney

[kitacanon]

Here are a couple of my standard test shots:
RAW files converted by DPP to Adobe PhShop-6
After opening you can left click to enlarge...

The 85/2 @ F4...full frame @ 175dpi, USM @ 100/.3/0
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3463/85ff175pu13.jpg

The 50/1.4 @ F4 full frame @ 175dpi USM @ 200/.2/0
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/5319/1440ff175pu22.jpg

here's the same shot taken with the Canon 50/F1.8 Compact Macro @ F4...
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/9108/cm40ff175pu33.jpg

...it's focused a bit farther back than the Nikkor so the grass isn't as sharp but also note the warmer tones, especially in the large bush in the middle...of course tones can be adjusted, but I thought it noteworthy that Nikkor is cooler than the canon, something noted even in the images taken with Nikon DLSRs...must be something in the glass...

Hope they give you some idea...

[Permagrin]

Picked up the nikon 180 ais ed today. It was half raining most of the day so I just took some quick landscapes with it. It's huge for a mf lens...72mm filter size (all my other mf lenses have 52mm filters).

LINK (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=7441916&postcount=7037)

I'll do some test shots to show the bokeh/sharpness etc when the weather gets better, but from preliminary shots, it seems pretty sharp.

[Perry Ge]

Looks nice Permie. Any crop of the GBH?

[Permagrin]

Looks nice Permie. Any crop of the GBH?

I'll pull it off of my gallery (I'm on the wrong computer atm) and crop it. He moved his head when I was shooting so it's slightly soft.

[Permagrin]

okay Perry, here's a crop...it could be better

http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p978430613-4.jpg

[Perry Ge]

^ That's really impressive all things considered.

[Permagrin]

it's a very nice lens...my shots today did not do it justice. I took a shot that I will never show (of my lamp...had no idea how much dust was on it) and it's incredibly sharp...

[rdenney]

Picked up the nikon 180 ais ed today. It was half raining most of the day so I just took some quick landscapes with it. It's huge for a mf lens...72mm filter size (all my other mf lenses have 52mm filters).

I seem to recall there was a time when Nikon designed all their lenses up to 200mm to have 52mm filter rings. The 105 I just bought comes, I think, from that era.

But there are some realities to be observed. The Zeiss Jena Sonnar 180/2.8 uses an 86mm filter. Of course, at f/2.8, the front element must be at least 65mm in diameter. I need to get that lens mounted on the camera and make some images.

Meanwhile, the fixit roll I've been on since the camera show yesterday kept going, and I finally disassembled and properly lubed the Jupiter 85/2. It now focuses without unscrewing itself off the camera, and the preset ring is now loose so that it doesn't carry the aperture ring with it. Now, if I can just figure out how to make a sharp image with that lens. The next lens one puts on the camera after the Nikkor 105 has a tough act to follow.

So, how to you make those MF lenses work on your Nikons? I was worried that I would have to share the 105 with my wife, but no, it won't work on her D100. It will stop down if I press the button, but I can't make it stay stopped down to take the picture. I already knew the meter would not work. Silly--I get full use from the lens, and she has to shoot wide open and meter externally.

Rick "who resisted the temptation to buy a Tamron Adaptall 300/2.8 yesterday" Denney

[Permagrin]

The D300 and D700 (& D3, D3x) have a new feature that allows the proper metering with the old lenses. They can be used essentially like any other lens (in M or Av) just using manual focusing.

And nice buy on that 105. I own that and like it a lot.

[Permagrin]

with the nikkor 55 3.5 micro at 3.5
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v0/p524705345-4.jpg

[Perry Ge]

:shock: Regardless of what lens or body that was shot with Permie, it's BEAUTIFUL! [Check out that funky bokeh in the bottom right though :D]

[Permagrin]

yeah, I've noticed with these older lenses that bokeh can have some weird oof highlights.

[binlerne]

I'm usually pretty shy about sharing my photos, but here's one I took with a Takumar 70-200 for a Pentax adapted to my XT. Film grain was added in.
http://jerrin.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=296&g2_serialNumber=2

[Permagrin]

some examples of the nikon 180 2.8 ais ed with 100% crops. Not great shots but I hope instructive samples of what it's capable of. The exif is in tact.

http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p306141317-4.jpg

100% crop shows minimal CA on this lens, though a slight ghosting.
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v4/p28940926-4.jpg

100% crop showing the bokeh. It's pretty nice & smooth.
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p336519274-4.jpg

http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p497996091-4.jpg

100% crop seems pretty sharp to me (for a 100% crop :) ).
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p206244138-4.jpg

it's not one of the cheaper mf lenses but I think it's one that has IQ to rival current lenses.

[Permagrin]

these shots (and the ones in the last post) aren't processed...just cropped and saved to jpeg in lightroom with the auto sharpening turned back to 0.

and one last with the nikon 55 f3.5 micro with the 1:1 tube on it.
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p53283913-4.jpg

100% crop
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p42224287-4.jpg

[Permagrin]

I'm usually pretty shy about sharing my photos, but here's one I took with a Takumar 70-200 for a Pentax adapted to my XT. Film grain was added in.
http://jerrin.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=296&g2_serialNumber=2

nice. I like the processing too.

[rdenney]

The D300 and D700 (& D3, D3x) have a new feature that allows the proper metering with the old lenses. They can be used essentially like any other lens (in M or Av) just using manual focusing.

That's bad news. My wife is already drawn to the D700, and I'm to stave off that inevitability a couple of years, so that the price will go down (as I did with the 5D).

Rick "she likes the big LCD--sigh" Denney

[rdenney]

and one last with the nikon 55 f3.5 micro with the 1:1 tube on it.

I have always admired the 55 Micro-Nikkor, and it really does have legendary status. I'm not sure it's any sharper than the Canon Compact Macro (which is quite under-rated), but I'm always on the lookout for one in my (ridiculous) price range. There were several at the camera show, but they had not be used for grenade-throwing practice and were therefore too expensive.

Rick "wondering if the targeted copy work is the reason for the funky foreground bokeh" Denney

[Lars Finkelstein]

I just picked up a Nikon Ai 105 2.5 four hours ago. A lovely little portrait lens. Here's the second photo I took with it. It's shot raw.

Zero pp, no cropping.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3391/3333214978_ef13e5931e_b.jpg

[rslv]

Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135/2.8 @ 2.8 on 40D @ ISO1600:

http://img.r2cph.com/0040.jpg

[rslv]

Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 @ 1.4 on 40D @ ISO1600:

http://img.r2cph.com/0041.jpg

[Permagrin]

wow, rslv, I REALLY like those and the processing you did on them.

That sonnar seems like a really nice lens.

[KenjiS]

wow, rslv, I REALLY like those and the processing you did on them.

That sonnar seems like a really nice lens.

Agreed! Makes me want a Zeiss for my system specifically for portraits

[kitacanon]

a Norman Rockwell/Gordon Parks portrait...85/2 MF Nikkor on 30D, ISO 1000, 100/F4 100% crop reduced to 236ppi...
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/6553/brkfstgrl5022u22p236.jpg

[advaitin]

One of these shots belongs here. And I've posted it before, but it remains a favorite: A yellow-rumped warbler on a bird-of-paradise, shot with a 1DM3 and a 500mm Nikon F4.
The other is an Osprey taken with a 20D and an FD 800mm lens with the rare 1.26x Canon pro fd-eos lens adapter

[rslv]

wow, rslv, I REALLY like those and the processing you did on them.

That sonnar seems like a really nice lens.

Thanks. Both are really nice lenses. With a bit of patience they can be had for a quite reasonable price. Got mine off E-bay for ~$100-140 each in mint condition.

[rdenney]

Post 1 of 3. I have spent more time with:

Schneider Kreuznach Curtagon 28mm f/4, M42

And I'm starting to appreciate it more. The previous picture was standing on my front porch when it was 21 degrees and with snow on the ground. Things change fast in the early Spring. I made these in the same yard, with temps in the 70's. The target du jour is a birch tree in our side yard. It will take a couple of posts, because I want to show a detail and also an image that shows the rather strange bokeh of this lens. The images attached to this post show the color reproduction of the lens. White balance was at 5000 degrees K with about 15 points of magenta. I did manipulate tone curves and burn in the sky a bit to increase contrast. The lens fit the entire histogram, even on a moderately sunny day, in the image. Some would call that a low-contrast lens, but it really doesn't seem that way. I didn't have to jack up the contrast any more than I do with any lens (I leave the setting quite low in the camera), but the lens is great for controlling contrasty scenes. And that is an old-world aspect that I admire. But the price one pays for that feature is some flare when pointed into the sun.

Both images made with a 5D, set in Av, with the lens set to f/8 or f/11, with evaluative metering. The first image (by mistake) used ISO1600 at 1/1600. The second used ISO400 at 1/250. Both required minus 1-2/3 stops compensation to avoid clipping the histogram.

Rick "not giving up on this one" Denney

[rdenney]

Post 2 of 3 for the Curtagon.

Here is an image that shows the closeup performance of the lens. The subject is at the minimum focus distance of 11 inches. 5D, ISO400, Av, 1/100 at f/11, -1/3 stop compensation. I did play with tone curves and sharpen for the displayed resolution as always. The 100% detail is straight out of the camera with no sharpening other than what the camera does. Bokeh in this image works pretty well.

[rdenney]

Post 3 of 3, Curtagon.

Finally, an image showing the bokeh of the lens. 5D, ISO400, 1/2000 at f/4, -1/3 compensation. At this wide aperture, I see lots of double-line bokeh and other false details, so this isn't the sort of image for which I would choose this lens first.

Rick "done with the Curtagon experiment for now" Denney

[kitacanon]

Tonight I just picked up one of the early 105/2.5 Nikkors...with no metric numbers...along with a couple of 50/2.0 Nikkors and 2 Nikkormats...unfortunately the body with the meter doesn't work but the other one withOUT the meter, the Nikkormat FS, does...it was my first SLR back in 1967, bought with the same 50 and 105...can't wait to put them to use and test the 105 against the 85...I might have to change my sig :)

Here's a shot with the 105 taken the other afternoon under a canopy...the 4+ stop brighter background is real tough for a lens to deal with, but this lens seems to have handled it quite well...shot @ F4, ISO 640 this is near full frame, just cropped at the sides to fit...
http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/8290/tm1.jpg

[khnordeen]

Couple with the Rokkor 58/1.2 wide open.

Also, I relisted my Leica 35-70/4 in the Marketplace for those interested...

-Kyle

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3575/3353446501_36f6e5a338.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3637/3352469568_fd9d73ee06.jpg?v=0

[kwu]

I'm usually pretty shy about sharing my photos, but here's one I took with a Takumar 70-200 for a Pentax adapted to my XT. Film grain was added in.
http://jerrin.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=296&g2_serialNumber=2

Share more, I like it.

Okay, I have some questions before I can fully jump into this realm.
I have my moms old Pentax SLR camera.
There's two lenses with it.
1. SMC Pentax-M 50mm f1.4
2. SMC Pentax-M 28mm f2.8

All Pentax lenses are M42 mounts, right? So if I were to find a M42 -> Canon EOS adapter, (AF or no AF Confirm?) I'd be golden for use on my Canon 30D. Right?
So like this one from ebay would work.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110361056417

Anywhere in Vancouver, Canada I can get it from?

[rdenney]

All Pentax lenses are M42 mounts, right?

No. Starting with the Pentax KX, they changed the mount from the universal screw mount to the Pentax K mount. All their early screw-mount lenses are M42, just like a lot of other cameras up through that time. The M-series cameras were smaller, and were competing with the ultra-compact Olympus OM-1. The lenses for the M-series Pentaxes are all K mount.

You can adapt the K-mount, but the aperture control ring and maybe some other stuff poking out the back of the lens will interfere with the mirror on some Canons (including all the full-frame models). I don't know about the 30D, but someone will.

It was possible to get an adapter for the screw-mount lenses to fit K-mount cameras but not the other way around.

Rick "who owned a KX in the day, and still has an M-something-or-other floating around somewhere" Denney

[Permagrin]

with the Zeiss 85 f1.4 planar (nikon mount, also available in canon mounts). What I like about this lens is the bokeh, the color renditions (much warmer than the nikon lenses and less red than the canon lenses), it's not too heavy but very solidly made.

What I don't like: it's a tad soft at 1.4. Usable but not as sharp as I'd like for a lens of this price range. Sharpens up nicely at f2...very usable though. Also it does have some light fringing in high contrast situations. The last photo had it (both purple and cyan) but it was easily removed in photoshop.

at 1.4
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p463277792-4.jpg

cropped
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p258691480-4.jpg

at f2
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p303846651-4.jpg

cropped
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p470779101-4.jpg

at f5.6
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p126056807-4.jpg

cropped
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p103265470-4.jpg

high contrast shot with fringing removed
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p823929023-4.jpg

[ajayclicks]

Olympus 28/3.5, 350D, generic ebay adapter

1)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3235/3053583046_1cdcd1e2c8_o.jpg

2)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3022/3053585284_b425853e6d_o.jpg

3)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3290/3050670352_9982cd2535_o.jpg

Sigma 600mm Mirror FD mount, 350D, generic ebay adapter (with glass)

4)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3547/3347554460_8d947f47df_o.jpg

5)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3404/3328988306_09d6160d94_b.jpg

6)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3390/3341073612_98d396d032_o.jpg

Cheers
Ajay

[foxbat]

Olympus 28/3.5, 350D, generic ebay adapter

Probably the best bargain alternative lens out there. Sharper than the Zeiss Distagon in the corners. Everyone should have one!

[ajayclicks]

Probably the best bargain alternative lens out there. Sharper than the Zeiss Distagon in the corners. Everyone should have one!

I agree. I paid something like 20USD for a used lens on ebay US

Cheers

[scepticswe]

Long time reader, first time poster...

EOS 400D (Rebel XTi) with Nikon 85 mm f/1.4 AI-S @ f/4:

http://i40.tinypic.com/29o0bnr.jpg

Curves and USM in PS, cloned away a little green "patch" in the bottom right corner

[Permagrin]

beauty shot Scepticswe! and welcome to potn!

[S.Horton]

beauty shot Scepticswe! and welcome to potn!

+1
Welcome!

[kwu]

No. Starting with the Pentax KX, they changed the mount from the universal screw mount to the Pentax K mount. All their early screw-mount lenses are M42, just like a lot of other cameras up through that time. The M-series cameras were smaller, and were competing with the ultra-compact Olympus OM-1. The lenses for the M-series Pentaxes are all K mount.

You can adapt the K-mount, but the aperture control ring and maybe some other stuff poking out the back of the lens will interfere with the mirror on some Canons (including all the full-frame models). I don't know about the 30D, but someone will.

It was possible to get an adapter for the screw-mount lenses to fit K-mount cameras but not the other way around.

Rick "who owned a KX in the day, and still has an M-something-or-other floating around somewhere" Denney
Thanks. I'll look for a K > EOS adapter.

[Photon Phil]

Good timing!

Just got my K mount adaptor and tried on my no-so-fancy Sears 50mm f2.o MF lens. On the 40D she mounts well but only stops down to about f5.6 by my estimation. On the 1D, a 1.3 crop, she mounts ok but clearly needs to have the "stuff poking our of the back" cut off.

So, I now have to decide if I ever want to use the lens again on a film body. If not I shave off what appears to be a plasic protective "hump" and the thin wafer of an aperture arm behind it.

Oh, and anyone have a suggested focusing screen for the 40D and one for the 1D Classic?

[Permagrin]

I purchased the katz eye screens (they aren't here yet) here's a page for the canon models. They have the 40D but not the 1D

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/cat--Canon-DSLRs--cat_canon.html

[Photon Phil]

Here's some from my newly Adapted MF...... Sears (Ricoh) 50mm f2. Not bad for no nice focus screen yet.

First at f2.0 second at f4

[Photon Phil]

Full view of above.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/1-bright-idea/100percent.jpg

[Photon Phil]

More....

100% crop f2
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/1-bright-idea/lego2.jpg

Full view
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/1-bright-idea/Img_4525.jpg

100% crop f2
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/1-bright-idea/dude2.jpg

crop f2
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/1-bright-idea/light2.jpg

crop f4
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/1-bright-idea/light5.jpg

[Photon Phil]

Maybe I'm a dunce but the live view on the 40D is a great substitute for a focus screen when I use this Manual glass! My keepers just went way up.

[Permagrin]

Maybe I'm a dunce but the live view on the 40D is a great substitute for a focus screen when I uses this Manual glass! My keepers just went way up.

good grief...I never thought of that...just ordered 2 katz eye screens too :rolleyes:

[Photon Phil]

If you mean it, I feel honored.

But seriously... I can focus very well in live view, with it's zoom feature as well to make it even easier. You can literally see the plane of focus move across an object as you barely move the focus ring.

[Permagrin]

If you mean it, I feel honored.

But seriously... I can focus very well in live view, with it's zoom feature as well to make it even easier. You can literally see the plane of focus move across an object as you barely move the focus ring.

I do mean it...I feel like a complete idiot :lol: I just tested it with live view and it works every time!! GAH! I just spent quite a bit on two of those screens...:lol:

[440roadrunner]

I do mean it...I feel like a complete idiot :lol: I just tested it with live view and it works every time!! GAH! I just spent quite a bit on two of those screens...:lol:


But of course there are situations where using live view just doesn't work, thought.

Here's something for you on your Katz eye screens---MAKE SURE you set it up correctly with the diopter. The diopter adjustment affects the split prism adjustment to a great degree

I took mine, my 100-400L at short distance , tripod, on a high contrast target. Allowed the camera to AF, switched to manual focus, live view, and confirmed that the focus was dead on.

THEN I discovered that the split prism screen was off and found that the diopter corrected it.

[Permagrin]

But of course there are situations where using live view just doesn't work, thought.

Here's something for you on your Katz eye screens---MAKE SURE you set it up correctly with the diopter. The diopter adjustment affects the split prism adjustment to a great degree

I took mine, my 100-400L at short distance , tripod, on a high contrast target. Allowed the camera to AF, switched to manual focus, live view, and confirmed that the focus was dead on.

THEN I discovered that the split prism screen was off and found that the diopter corrected it.

wow, had no idea re: this...I hope it's not going to be an issue. Someone else told me they had major frustrations with the metering. I thought it would be negligible.

[recrisp]

I have an XSi/450D, and I was wondering if anyone here would be so kind as to let me know a few things before I screw up and buy something that I can't use...?:)

I need a wide-angle lens pretty bad, I have the 18-55mm Canon kit lens, (I know, I know!) and it leaves me wanting. heheh
Anyway, I would REALLY like to try what you guys are doing, but to make a wide-angle lens actually be a "wide-angle lens on a 450D is not an easy task.
Or is it?
(For instance, I can't stitch any of my panoramic shots together, they won't work in any of my programs I use)

Can someone please let me/us know what adapter would be good, I have seen the glassed ones on e-Bay, and they mention that it will allow the lens to go to infinity, but I don't trust the glass, I mean, it looks like a cheap, VERY cheap piece.

I am sorry to interrupt, but this may help more than just me, I can't be the only one that is wondering about the glassed adapter, or needing a wide-angle lens.

Thank you a LOT, even if I don't get help, this is a really fun and informative thread!
If I am talking about stuff that needs to be somewhere else, please let me know, I get so easily confused... heh

Randy 8-)

[rdenney]

Can someone please let me/us know what adapter would be good, I have seen the glassed ones on e-Bay, and they mention that it will allow the lens to go to infinity, but I don't trust the glass, I mean, it looks like a cheap, VERY cheap piece.

I am sorry to interrupt, but this may help more than just me, I can't be the only one that is wondering about the glassed adapter, or needing a wide-angle lens.

Don't buy a wide-angle conversion lens that goes on the front of a regular lens. If you are disappointed with the kit lens (and you should not be--really), you'll really be disappointed with a conversion lens.

But the conversion lenses are fisheye lenses, and you can do MUCH better with a 16mm/2.8 Zenitar fisheye. That Russian lens costs about $150, and you can get them with EF mounts, though they are all-manual lenses including manual focus and manual apertures. Stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8, they are excellent. It will give you about the same coverage as a 14mm rectilinear lens on a small sensor, without the most extreme fisheye effects that normally sit in the corners of a full-frame image. It is quite usable.

Rick "just don't expect miracles at f/2.8" Denney

[mehran.mo]

I present to you the buttery bokeh of the Helios 44-2 58mm f2.

The thing about this lens is that sooo many were produced and soooo many were crap, quality control was non existent. But I believe I have one of the best copies of this lens.

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/6183/mg0004v.jpg

[recrisp]

Rick,

Thanks for the really quick reply, I appreciate that.
By "glassed" lenses, I really meant the conversion adapters that e-Bay sells that have the glass in it, so it will focus to infinity, not the add-on filter type lens that you 'may be' referring to, I know they're junk, I bought one years ago for my camcorder. heh
Heck, ANY lens that isn't really that expensive would be good, adapter or not, I can't get a good wide-angel shot, not the way I like to anyway.
I realize this is crossing over into wide-angle/panoramic territory, and I apologize, but I'd really like to get one that was quality like you guys are using, but as a wide-angle, if that makes sense.
This is the adapter I was referring to... http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-OM-Canon-Adapter-Rebel/dp/B001G4NBNC/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1237862405&sr=1-7

Thanks, and I hope (again) this isn't against any rules, I usually follow rules rather than break them! :lol:

So the 16mm/2.8 Zenitar fisheye would be a good one for a XSi?
I ask that because my 18-55mm does a really bad job as far as connecting each shot as a pano.
I guess it's either that, or nothing though, one can't get too much lower than that, I do have an 8-24mm on my Nikon 990, that worked fine, buit we're talking different format cameras too.
I'm just talking out loud, this thread has got me to salivating at the thought that it would work, I had already convinced myself a year ago not to try this route, I had no idea that shots could look as good as these.

I'll check into the Zenitar though, I'd much prefer a cheaper alternative though, I just spend my savings on a couple of lenses and a flash, so I'm kind'a broke. heh
Thank you!

Randy

Don't buy a wide-angle conversion lens that goes on the front of a regular lens. If you are disappointed with the kit lens (and you should not be--really), you'll really be disappointed with a conversion lens.

But the conversion lenses are fisheye lenses, and you can do MUCH better with a 16mm/2.8 Zenitar fisheye. That Russian lens costs about $150, and you can get them with EF mounts, though they are all-manual lenses including manual focus and manual apertures. Stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8, they are excellent. It will give you about the same coverage as a 14mm rectilinear lens on a small sensor, without the most extreme fisheye effects that normally sit in the corners of a full-frame image. It is quite usable.

Rick "just don't expect miracles at f/2.8" Denney

[khnordeen]

Vivitar 90/2.5 with 1:1 Adapter @ 2.5

Let me know what you guys think :)

-Kyle

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3652/3380003910_21e827715d.jpg?v=0 http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3544/3379658533_7fefbb6b2f.jpg?v=0

[rdenney]

So the 16mm/2.8 Zenitar fisheye would be a good one for a XSi?
I ask that because my 18-55mm does a really bad job as far as connecting each shot as a pano.

If you want to stitch panos, then I would suggest trying your kit lens again, but not at the widest setting. Stitching panos is difficult with a lens that suffers from barrel distortion, and most wide-to-tele zooms have barrel distortion on the wide end and pincushion distortion on the long end. There may be a workable sweet spot.

You won't want to use Zenitar images for that--fisheye images have to be defished before stitching, and that's just too much manipulation. But it's wide enough so that you may not feel that need.

As to the cost, you get what you pay for. The Zenitar is a low-cost solution of known quality (meaning, it works fine if you stop it down). Going lower-cost than that might not provide acceptable results for you even stopped down.

Waiting is always an option.

Rick "also not good at waiting" Denney

[recrisp]

Ohhhh, that is probably what the problem is, barrel distortion, I'll try that the next time I am taking a pano shot.
I know what that is, and all, but I took a lot of shots at the widest setting like you said, thinking that would be better, but it made them unusable.
Now that I know this, I'll do what you said and give it another try, that ought to work.

Thank you Rick for that option, that was the first time I tried taking a pano shot with this camera and that lens, hence my "Doh!" moment. :)
(Now I'll shut up and read and quit butting in... heheh)

Randy

[airbutchie]

Vivitar 90/2.5 with 1:1 Adapter @ 2.5

Let me know what you guys think :)

-Kyle

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3652/3380003910_21e827715d.jpg?v=0 http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3544/3379658533_7fefbb6b2f.jpg?v=0

Beautiful stuff Kyle... Love the colors and the bokeh is phenomenal... Keep'em coming...

- airbutchie :D

[Permagrin]

I present to you the buttery bokeh of the Helios 44-2 58mm f2.

The thing about this lens is that sooo many were produced and soooo many were crap, quality control was non existent. But I believe I have one of the best copies of this lens.

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/6183/mg0004v.jpg

never heard of this one but it does have lovely bokeh...seems quite sharp wide open too. That's nice.

Vivitar 90/2.5 with 1:1 Adapter @ 2.5

Let me know what you guys think :)

-Kyle

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3652/3380003910_21e827715d.jpg?v=0 http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3544/3379658533_7fefbb6b2f.jpg?v=0

think it looks great. very pretty colors/bokeh and there doesn't seem to be CA on on the high contrast sections. Looks like a good find.

[mehran.mo]

another shot with the Helios 44-2 w/ bellows

http://fc88.deviantart.com/fs45/f/2009/076/f/6/f6a1af365ee7d13886b66f9b6e9d856e.jpg

[Cotmweasel]

Figured I might as well post another picture from my Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.7 Planar T*.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3421/3372255336_3c12d319bd_b.jpg

100% crop

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3445/3384035398_79f54bb4e0_o.jpg

Camera: Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi
Exposure: 0.025 sec (1/40)
ISO Speed: 400

A photo of my new (kind of) camera. Shot taken at f/1.7 (I think XD)

[Permagrin]

well, here's some test shots with the CZ 100 F2 Planar macro (I believe this is also available in canon mount)...nothing special since it's raining, I have no fleurs and I'm trying to photograph some of the other mf lenses FS.

Pachie's being difficult

at f2
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p19898263-4.jpg

http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v4/p162599229-4.jpg

and f5.6
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p384265822-4.jpg

nice bokeh and separation from background even at 5.6
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p514308365-4.jpg


and wow can I get pretty close...I like that (since it's not a 1:1 macro)
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v0/p22407661-4.jpg

[Lars Finkelstein]

The lens has really great bokeh :) ! How easy/difficult is focusing on the D700.

[Permagrin]

The lens has really great bokeh :) ! How easy/difficult is focusing on the D700.

well before I installed the katz eye screens it was easier to obtain focus on the D700 than on the D300. The large viewfinder and the (left/right) arrows worked well but it took me some time to achieve focus and then I'd say 1 of 4x, I'd have missed focus and not known.

Now that I have the screens, it's extremely simple on both. I'm amazed at the ease. Thus far I've had 1 OOF shot with the new screens...and it was of a laval lamp's innards :lol: I was having a bit of trouble tracking it.

[Perry Ge]

Probably the best bargain alternative lens out there. Sharper than the Zeiss Distagon in the corners. Everyone should have one!
Agreed! I really like my OM 28 3.5.
I present to you the buttery bokeh of the Helios 44-2 58mm f2.

The thing about this lens is that sooo many were produced and soooo many were crap, quality control was non existent. But I believe I have one of the best copies of this lens.


Hahaha I almost bought one of these the other day. Show us a shot wide open with a busy background. The bokeh on these helios lenses is hilarious.

[rehype]

Heres a shot i took when i still had my Zeiss 50 1.4.Very sharp lens

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3185/3077572653_533599a628_b.jpg

[Permagrin]

That CZ may have the best IQ I have ever seen. So insanely good.

it really is incredible. I viewed sample after sample of it (just because of the expense for a mf lens) before I decided that it consistently produced incredible results (enough to purchase it, I mean :) ).

[Perry Ge]

The 100f2 Makro Planar you have is absolutely legendary, Permie.

[Permagrin]

The 100f2 Makro Planar you have is absolutely legendary, Permie.

I can see why (it just came today)...I hope to do it some justice when the weather gets better.

[Lisa]

Moved

[khnordeen]

Gotta keep this thread up. 8)

Zeiss 16/2.8

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3543/3394186976_6407c899af.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3458/3393371675_dc0663bae5.jpg?v=0

-Kyle

[mehran.mo]

Hahaha I almost bought one of these the other day. Show us a shot wide open with a busy background. The bokeh on these helios lenses is hilarious.

Here is one that's wide open. It's shot directly at a window, I kinda wanted to show off the flare it gets when at f2. It has a painting-esk look too it.

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/4624/f22c.jpg

This one is at f2.8. As you can see it's much better.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/5708/f28v.jpg

Be the judge.

[condyk]

The Helios is a terrific lens. I paid around £8 delivered for mine. Was really nice to use as well ... tho' I can't use it anymore since going Nikon :-( Same with all my MF lenses other than the ZF Zeiss I have. Shame.

[Lisa]

These are just test shots :)

Mamiya/Sekor 50mm f/2.0 Just got it today
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c71/LisaRae82/NewImage03-1.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c71/LisaRae82/NewImage001.jpg

Sigma Zoom-k 100-200mm f/4.5 in macro mode
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c71/LisaRae82/NewImage01-1.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c71/LisaRae82/NewImage02.jpg
100mm @ f4.5 Just arrived today as well paid $20 USD for both (m42 lens)

[Permagrin]

I don't see the shots...

[_aravena]

This thread is sickening in that it makes L fever look like a cold. I keep thinking about these lenses as I've been playing with LV so much. For the heck of it it's all I used the other day with Nifty #2 and I'm falling more and more in love with MF. My g/f learned to MF 'cause of the camera she has but is converting 'cause she keeps using the 70-200 and I told her to let it AF.

I think I will still AF with longer lense but under 100, MF is awesome! Now to get one of these lenses.

[Permagrin]

they can be addicting...the more I us MF the more I appreciate it. While it's not my choice at all for any kind of action, I love being able to pinpoint where I want the focus exactly, especially on super narrow dof shots. When I had my 1dm3, I was very frustrated that I'd ever so slightly miss focus when I was trying to nail the eyes etc. (probably needed to micro adjust my lenses and never did) So this has been a whole new world for me. And while I'd never trade AF (just for ease of use) the mf has re-taught me creative license that I normally wouldn't have taken the time to search out with my AF lenses. If that makes sense.

I'm hoping eventually that I'll get good enough with MF to feel confident to use them for paid jobs. Some of these lenses (the cz 100 for example) have such wondeful color and bokeh that I'd love to incorporate it in my work. But I'm still so slow at mf...

from last weekend with the cz 100:
http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p844943640-4.jpg

http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p683904951-5.jpg

[Lisa]

Fixed links
See above. :)

[AngryCorgi]

http://lcimages.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p683904951-5.jpg

This one should be titled "Can't see the Forest for the Trees!" :D

Nice shots, but that watermark seems a little chaotic, no? ;)