Jump to content

noone

Members
  • Content Count

    1,153
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About noone

  • Rank
    Long-time member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

3,931 profile views
  1. I think they deteriorate just through age, maybe through drying out (someone should do a proper examination of it) ...something in the design and it does not seem to happen to the lower lenses which probably do not have brass bearings with rubber over them but just use plastic or similar. My 50 1.2 never had it and my 24 1.4 doesn't either, only my 85 1.2. The 85 is otherwise in excellent condition while my 24 looks ratty but has good glass. I hate it when good gear gets known issues (I have two of my late Dad's four thirds high grade lenses and they BOTH have known issues that mean they are either unusable or limited in use which is a pity because they are otherwise pro grade lenses.
  2. I have seen some posts around the internet on fixing the problem though forget where (maybe DP Review?, there is also a long thread on Red User too I think...maybe there?). There are some lens repair places that will do it too (have not found any here in Australia yet though have not looked much lately). Probably be too expensive for me and I am not going to try myself. I have not used any of them for video other than mucking around with using clear zoom to use them as 2x zooms on my A7s. I loved the 50 1.2 and to me, it was the best by far legacy normal lens I have had out of quite a lot though none of the others was anything special (Pentax K 50 1.2 and Nikon 50 1.8 non D AF lenses were nice though). I had to sell the 50 and when i could afford it thought about another FD 50 L but went instead with the Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 (which is even better than the 50 L for me). If I was using them for video more, then i WOULD have got another 50 L instead of the Zony 55. I do think they make a lovely set (24, 50 and 85 FD Ls) but I would check the focus throw before buying..
  3. I love the aspheric FD L lenses and have the 24 1.4L, 85 1.2L and had the 50 1.2L One thing to look out for with Canon FD lenses is that some of the L primes get an issue with dissolving bearings (more accurately I think it is rubber coatings on brass bearings/rollers disintegrates and only happens on some of the more expensive L lenses that use brass and rubber in the rollers). My 24 1.4 is fine but my 85 1.2 L has it and that means I hardly use the lens now as much as I love it (it works ok but is very annoying to have such a loose focus throw where the focus does not move until it takes up the slack). Some people get them rehoused as cine lenses though that adds a lot more expense but might mean you can buy lenses with the problem a lot cheaper if doing that. The 24 and 85 do have the same size filter thread but the 24 is actually not a huge lens for a 24 1.4 and is I think the smallest and lightest of the type.
  4. I just used either a Zoom H1 or a cheap mic on the hotshoe and the audio was fine (I have no desire to shoot an orchestra though I have shot some classical stuff as stills....I will do everything from metal to jazz and more). These are mostly pub/club gigs with a fair bit of crowd noise often which is why I need something other than the camera mic but it is still easy and not having the audio clip/too loud is pretty much it. Not going to be other than what was heard there at the time . Not going to do multicam either, just me with a camera and letting the band do the work. I do like to use my 17mm tilt shift architecture lens close to the "stage" with all band members visible (never had an issue taking it into a mosh pit yet). My H1 died before my first A7s did and I have not done much of this lately (plus with the virus there have not been any gigs). I do want a new mic (will just settle for a cheap Rode from JB-Hi-Fi) and have a "new" old lens to test so have a band in mind to try it with as soon as things are back to normal.
  5. But but but Video IS easy! So is stills photography. FILM making on the other hand is very difficult. I am not now and never will be a film maker. Every time I tried, my mind would just be blank (permanent writers block??). I am (I think) a reasonable photographer and my videos pretty much consist of bands playing songs live and that is as simple as finding a spot, putting the camera on a tripod with mic facing the band, set camera to suit and hit record and turn off after the song. From time to time a few very short videos experimenting with stuff as well. The new little Sony vlogging RX1## camera would be great for me (not that i will get it) I would not use it for vlogging but to do the same as i do with my A7s for recording songs but in a tiny package that would make it even easier.
  6. Nikon J5 DOES but at 15fps it is a joke.
  7. A7s first version* *with external recorder
  8. I think the FD L primes with aspheric elements are sharp wide open (in the narrow area that is in focus). SOME (not all) the Canon K35s are based on the FD L primes (24 1.4, and 85 1.2 and maybe the 50 1.2??) I think At least the ones I had were/are sharp wide open (newer lenses are sharper though). I have the 24 still and the 85 though my 85 still has an issue.
  9. Ouch, the 280 2.8 alone would be north of $50,000 Australian no doubt. How much discount for the set of 16? You can sort of get a "similar" lens (aperture and focal length anyway) for all but the 150 1.8 I think though they all seem fantastic lenses.
  10. noone

    Tokina AT-X 60-120 2.8

    Expecting the worst shooting into a light source after some of the ( few) posts about this lens around the internet, I was pleasantly surprised and it seems no worse than most lenses in that regard (and if i am shooting right into a very bright light up close, it is not going to be pretty regardless of the lens). It also seems ok as a general purpose lens at longer distances. For close in at 2.8, it does seem to have some magic and much more than i expected. A couple at 60mm at a distance 2.8 and f8 and a couple into a light at 2.8 and f22 (another surprise, this lens produces pretty much ZERO sun stars). I really can not wait to use this for both video and stills at a gig (indoor pub or outdoor concert) though with the current climate that might be a while. Portraits hopefully will be a lot earlier.
  11. noone

    Tokina AT-X 60-120 2.8

    Thanks, Biggest bargain of my photographic life (over 70 interchangeable lenses over the years and dozens of cameras). Who would of thunk it would be an old MF off brand zoom! Well it DID take around ten years of searching (on and off apart from the last few years) to get it! Those are all at 120mm too I think.. I did take some at 60 which are just as nice to me but mostly i just could not manage to make myself use it stopped down or below 120 (it is supposed to be at its WORST at 120). I may find I end up using it at 60mm and using clear zoom for video which will get me the same reach but be a lot easier (especially with a remote) than trying to zoom a one touch zoom for video which would be near impossible to zoom and focus optically.
  12. I was after a 2.8 manual focus mid range zoom for years when using Pentax DSLRs and just occasionally, I would see this lens on Ebay. I have had a lot of mid range manual focus film era zooms and most have not been great, two exceptions being the Tamron adaptall 70-210 3.5 (model 19b), a lovely lens but very big and heavy and Canon FD 80-200 f4 L (this one I never had until a lot more recently). When I DID see a 60-120 2.8 lens, they were very few and far between and all from Japan and usually very expensive or had fungus or other issues. More recently i have given up on old lenses unless I get them very very cheap from the charity shop I volunteer at or likewise at a pawn shop i haunt but have gotten rid of most of them in the last couple of years. I was looking for an AF portrait lens on Ebay for my A7s but kept going down and came across this old lens (around 40 to 50 years old). $150 Australian plus postage is an absolute bargain and when the lens was listed as near mint condition, well I put off paying the electricity bill to buy it It turned up today (two days early) and I fell in love at first sight and want to marry it after a minutes use! There are very few reviews of it around but most say it is very good though some say it is not sharp...Well I think it may well be the sharpest zoom i have ever had and its bokeh is to me, superb. It is not quite mint (though looks like it was made yesterday), One touch and the focus works very smoothly but the zoom action is a little stiff (better that than loose though). Minimum focus distance is a fraction longer than i would like but that is just nit picking. For video, I will only use it to record single musicians either seated or not moving far just for the odd song (on a tripod and zoomed to the focal length wanted and set). For stills it will be a wonderful portrait lens (all I need are victims) but it might be a while before i can use it properly unless i stop random people in the park. I am sure it will have downsides (maybe if a light source is in view though yet to try it) and I get a new flash in the next few days that i want to try it with. IF you can find one in even half decent condition, from what i have seen so far, I would say BUY it (or kill for it but check the prison will allow you to keep it with you first). Some lame first shots. Any errors are MINE, not the lenses. All at 2.8
  13. I do not think the early M43 cameras were all that great for available light beyond base ISO or just a little higher. If you can use base ISO it is ok even now I think. The Gh1 (actually scores a little better on DXO than the GH2) DR for instance is competitive with the Canon 1Dx at base ISO but by ISO 200 is about a stop behind already and by ISO 3200 is almost THREE AND A HALF stops behind (the 1DX is behind newer FF cameras at base but seems to have pretty much the same DR from base through to ISO 800). My A7s has greater DR at ISO 102400 than the GH1 and the same DR as the GH2 at ISO 3200. When I can find one cheap enough and have the money then and there I would love one to play with (Gh1 or 2).
  14. IF it does as promised, it will sell regardless of the price. A higher price will just mean a few less enthusiasts (who probably do not NEED it). I do think it will mean a few more second hand R, RP and Sony A7# type cameras available second hand.
  15. If you are am member of IMDb pro, you could contact him via agent/publicist or what ever is linked there (I m not)
×
×
  • Create New...