haha.. No.. 50mm 1.4 AI Nikkor.. the data is only 'right' when I use my only fuji lens.. I hate AF and REALLY GOOD Nikkor lenses are cheap.. and Fuji X lenses are NOT.. LoL..
ohh No worries.. I understand the curiosity.. and if I ever score a 50 f1.. ill let you know ;) the 55mm f 1.2 fuji its a monster of a lens from what I can see.. but 1000$USD DAMN.. I loose 1f-stop and lose nothing in sharpness colour or clarity.. and I gave 35$ for my nikkor.. purchased a camera that had it on it for 125$ and resold the camera body for 90.. I LOVE my lens adapter.. supposedly a 200$ -.5 adapter is coming to the market.. gives you a 35mm FOV and adds a stop to the brightness..
If indeed, this somehow ADDS a stop of brightness, optically, I would love to hear anything, and everything about it. As, I have no concept how that would be possible. :-)
Ok.. have you ever had a teleconverter? a 2x makes your 200mm f4 into a 400mm f8 because of inverse square.. it spreads the light out to cover 2x the space.. making 4x the area.. two stops.. if you have a micro 4/3 or fujix APS sensor.. you can generally get adaptors to use classic glass.. the cheap ones that are just adaptors you get no magnification..they just let a major brand 35mm film lens (nikon/cannon/Pk/oly... ect...) onto whatever camera, Xmount or Micro 4/3's, and you get a 50/25% crop factor.. making a 50mm a 35mm equivalent of a 100mm on micro or 75ish mm on Xmount.. but if you make a .75 adaptor.. You use the image circle of the 35mm film lens.. and focus it on an aps-4/3 sensor.. making a 105mm nikkor 2.8 into a 80ish MM f2 equivalent... its a pretty cool trick optically.. and a nice thing to have for an Xpro1 because REALLY NICE lenses are CHEAP if you don't mind focusing.. and I HaTE AF... If you have a question about anything no matter technical/camera,lens,focus.. or artistic, post processing ect.. please feel free to ask.. It really is no trouble.
the current ones are 'REALLY VERY good'.. but 500ish USD.. so a 'very good' one at 200 would be a great buy.. so long as they dont get to the 39$ 2x converter 'off brand' of the 70s/80s that make most people think of them as crap.. the good ones are very good, but also quite expensive..
Oopsi, I was thinking the reverse. A negative extender to fill a lager format with a lens from the smaller film size.
Me Bad! Yes, I have worked with 2X and 3X "tele-converters". Some abysmal, and others, not so bad, aways with an f-stop penalty. Some horrible, and some not all that bad...
the ones meant for small format cameras use the light falloff of a 2-3x and flip it on its ear and get a full stop back and get a similar view you would if using a full frame sensor or 35mm film...
I cannot pretend to be as competent as you or Oshi Shikigami but If I listen to my inner, not educated critique, it says that the higher level of highlights might have made this composition more... "playful". May be I'd try lighting the shadows a little to show the textures more clearly.This same voice suggests that he does not necessarily like how the horizontal board is cut off. MIVO (my inner voice opinion)
"50mm f-1 lens"? Really? which one? Those are very rare... :-)
ReplyDeleteNot that I doubt you. I am just very curious. LOL
ReplyDeletehaha.. No.. 50mm 1.4 AI Nikkor.. the data is only 'right' when I use my only fuji lens.. I hate AF and REALLY GOOD Nikkor lenses are cheap.. and Fuji X lenses are NOT.. LoL..
ReplyDeleteI need to set my Xpro1 to have the option of 16mm f2 50mm 1.4 and 200 f4
ReplyDeleteI own no zooms.. I love the 'look' of primes..
Is all good. not a problem. I am too curious for my own good. ;-)
ReplyDeleteohh No worries.. I understand the curiosity.. and if I ever score a 50 f1.. ill let you know ;) the 55mm f 1.2 fuji its a monster of a lens from what I can see.. but 1000$USD DAMN.. I loose 1f-stop and lose nothing in sharpness colour or clarity.. and I gave 35$ for my nikkor.. purchased a camera that had it on it for 125$ and resold the camera body for 90.. I LOVE my lens adapter.. supposedly a 200$ -.5 adapter is coming to the market.. gives you a 35mm FOV and adds a stop to the brightness..
ReplyDeleteIf indeed, this somehow ADDS a stop of brightness, optically, I would love to hear anything, and everything about it. As, I have no concept how that would be possible. :-)
ReplyDeleteOk.. have you ever had a teleconverter? a 2x makes your 200mm f4 into a 400mm f8 because of inverse square.. it spreads the light out to cover 2x the space.. making 4x the area.. two stops.. if you have a micro 4/3 or fujix APS sensor.. you can generally get adaptors to use classic glass.. the cheap ones that are just adaptors you get no magnification..they just let a major brand 35mm film lens (nikon/cannon/Pk/oly... ect...) onto whatever camera, Xmount or Micro 4/3's, and you get a 50/25% crop factor.. making a 50mm a 35mm equivalent of a 100mm on micro or 75ish mm on Xmount.. but if you make a .75 adaptor.. You use the image circle of the 35mm film lens.. and focus it on an aps-4/3 sensor.. making a 105mm nikkor 2.8 into a 80ish MM f2 equivalent... its a pretty cool trick optically.. and a nice thing to have for an Xpro1 because REALLY NICE lenses are CHEAP if you don't mind focusing.. and I HaTE AF... If you have a question about anything no matter technical/camera,lens,focus.. or artistic, post processing ect.. please feel free to ask.. It really is no trouble.
ReplyDeleteI am familiar with the theory, But have never actually seen a working product. That ROCKS as long as the image remains good. :-)
ReplyDeletethe current ones are 'REALLY VERY good'.. but 500ish USD.. so a 'very good' one at 200 would be a great buy.. so long as they dont get to the 39$ 2x converter 'off brand' of the 70s/80s that make most people think of them as crap.. the good ones are very good, but also quite expensive..
ReplyDeleteOopsi, I was thinking the reverse. A negative extender to fill a lager format with a lens from the smaller film size.
ReplyDeleteMe Bad! Yes, I have worked with 2X and 3X "tele-converters". Some abysmal, and others, not so bad, aways with an f-stop penalty. Some horrible, and some not all that bad...
the ones meant for small format cameras use the light falloff of a 2-3x and flip it on its ear and get a full stop back and get a similar view you would if using a full frame sensor or 35mm film...
ReplyDeleteKevin Vincent, if you have any links, I would like to research this further. :-)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.metabones.com/products/?c=speed-booster
ReplyDeleteGot it - thanks!I shall read up on it. :-0
ReplyDeleteI cannot pretend to be as competent as you or Oshi Shikigami but If I listen to my inner, not educated critique, it says that the higher level of highlights might have made this composition more... "playful". May be I'd try lighting the shadows a little to show the textures more clearly.This same voice suggests that he does not necessarily like how the horizontal board is cut off. MIVO (my inner voice opinion)
ReplyDeleteOh my!I got chattering away, and never did comment on the picture! Silly me.
ReplyDeleteDefiantly needs lightning and contrast.With the level of details, you could get away with even harsh contrast.
I am not sure what the actual 'center of interest' is on this though? The background is blurred, but sharp enough to be distracting.