Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About noone

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Wagga Wagga, Australia
  • Interests
    Low light low life, more photo than video but here to learn
  • My cameras and kit
    A7s, RX100 iv, Fuji superzoom cameras (among others), Canon 17mm TSE, Canon FD 24 1.4L, Sony Zeiss 55 1.8, Tokina 60-120 2.8, Sigma 150 2.8 (EF mount), Tamron 300 2.8 adaptall (among others)

Recent Profile Visitors

9,667 profile views

noone's Achievements

Long-time member

Long-time member (5/5)



  1. noone


    I think with the prices of the FD 20-35 3.5 L for about the same or maybe less, can get the later EF 20-35 2.8 L and while I am a fan of FD L lenses in particular, and I am not a huge fan of zooms, there is just something about the old EF 20-35 2.8 L that i hang onto mine (the alternative is throw it in the trash since it is very battered and the MF/AF switch cover is gone and I use a piece of coloured electrical tape in its place).
  2. noone


    I have had a LOT of 85mm lenses FD 1.2 L, Nikon 1.8, Sony FE 85 1.8, Sony A mount 85 2.8, Minolta 85 1.7 (I thhink?) and from a photographers point of view (not so much video), the GM is light years better than any of the others and I loved the FE and the FD ones. I can not wait to find portrait victims and use it (and do a comparison test against other portrait lenses i have). The GM is expensive and does make noises when focusing (not as bad as i expected reading reviews but it is there) but is very sharp and 11 rounded blades make for lovely bokeh even stopped down a bit.
  3. noone


    On some Fds, the brass bearings are coated in rubber and the rubber dissolves over time. It does not affect every copy it seems (or at least some take much longer for it to happen). It happened with my 85 1.2 L and I just gave the lens away to the bloke I sold my FD24 1.4 L too (that did not have the bearing issue) and I got a Sony GM 85 1.4 from the buyer as well as some cash. I could still use the FD 85 but it was very annoying that the focus was very loose and the GM 85 1.4 is spectacular to me by comparison so was never going to use it again anyway. Some of those FD 24 1.4 asphercials have sold for around $20,000 which is plain nuts!
  4. noone

    Olympus OM-1

    The FIRST version A7s is STILL the camera with the highest DR of all above ISO 12800 (at least by DXO). The latest version A7siii is a bit behind the original A7s for lowlight ISO BUT it has a LOT more detail at all settings probably due to being 80mp in subpixels or however they describe it (so not really 80mp but maybe not really 12mp either). This new Olympus seems to d something similar so I kind of expect the same....Lots more detail at most settings but no or only a little improvement in terms of high ISO.
  5. noone

    Olympus OM-1

    Low light and dynamic range are two separate things. A 1 stop improvement in DR will always be nice. I do not yet buy the two stops improved ISO (is it even possible?) though no doubt will be better than previous M43 cameras. As a interested bystander (and unlikely ever to buy it), the thing for me would be if it improved DR AT high ISOS. Smaller sensor cameras fall away in DR more steeply in general than larger sensor cameras (case in point, my Sony Rx100iv a now aging camera with a 1 inch sensor has about the same DR as the also aging Canon 5d iii at base but by around ISO 800 the Canon FF is well ahead). So, my question is how well this camera holds up at higher ISOs for DR compared to previous m43 cameras.
  6. noone

    Olympus OM-1

    Seems to me it IS a "wow" camera but only for a couple of specific groups of people. For SOME already high end m43 users, it might be and for adventurers who travel to remote locations off the beaten track in all weather for wildlife it might be just the ticket. For me it is just a nice m43 camera that I am unlikely to ever buy but i hope it does sell well.
  7. I just want "enough" DR for any given use. Every camera i have had is different and I have never said that any of them did not have enough. I have had an old Canon G10 (pro grade with a tiny point and shoot sensor photo camera) and it took lovely photos (at base ISO only) but had about the same DR (about 10 stops) as my A7s has at ISO 6400.
  8. noone


    I just sold my FD 24 1.4 L for $5000 Australian ($4000 to me), Mine was very ratty externally but the glass was ok (apparently a few cleaning marks and a tiny not noticeable scratch). Others with bad fungus and worse have sold for MORE than i got. I maybe could have got $7000 on Ebay worldwide but am not greedy and sold it to a local dealer. Turns out these are being purchased to rehouse as cinema lenses and likely the same for your 35. I used some of the money to buy a GM 85 1.4 lens from the same bloke (and for about what I paid for the FD in the first place!).
  9. Turns out the Oly 12 f2 IS wider than 12mm (if you can find a RAW convertor that does not correct for distortion). What do i win? https://www.lenstip.com/310.6-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_12_mm_f_2.0_ED_Distortion.html
  10. Yes but some M43 lenses are actually wider than marked and it is AFTER the distortion correction is applied that they become that focal length. I do not know if the 12 f2 is one of those (maybe not since it is a bit older). There is a chance it MIGHT be something like 11mm or 11.5 (You can not out pedant a pedant!).
  11. Wouldn't the Oly 12mm f2 qualify IF you shoot RAW and turn off corrections? It has been many years since I had it.
  12. noone

    Old treasures...

    I had a Biotar years ago. A really old one with 17 blades (I think it was) and it was sharp but very low contrast. Of my two (from memory for the Biotar) I would say the Biotar was the one with the dreamy look and the Helios is almost like any similar lens of its era. Just got a hood for it yesterday too, not that i had any real issues with stray light. My Helios is one of the newest. The coating was probably the biggest difference although the Biotar was a lot smaller
  13. noone

    Old treasures...

    I just got a Helios 44M-6 for $20 (Australian) with a camera. I am shocked at how much i like it given it is almost throw away and especially because it focuses to infinity (I was led to believe if I used a flange adapter I would have a reduced range or I could use a non flange adapter but only wide open unless the pin is taped down). I can use my cheap Neewer m42 to E mount flange adapter with infinity and able to stop down. I will probably not use it for video but I can highly recommend it (mine is almost like new).
  14. Not much for me to say really. Just an old amateur still shooter who rarely dabbles in video now. More interested in what i can get cheap from the charity shop I work at now as a bit of fun. A Canon FD 50 1.8 is a surprisingly sharp little lens. Helios 44-M 6 is a fun little thing too. (along with a Tokina 28 2.8 they all cost me $40 total Australian in the last few weeks....The Helios came with a camera I donated back). Still trying to sell my Canon FD 24 1.4 L (very frustrating because I see them selling now for sometimes over $21000 (Australian) for mint copies while lesser ones go for $6000 and up. Mine is ratty on the outside but good on the inner but because I will not sell world wide, I will probably not get anywhere near that). I am in no hurry to sell it though but would love to get a new AF portrait lens, a mid range zoom and a Laptop PC for it soonish Seasons greeting to all and stay safe!
  15. Great thread. A few thoughts from a 99% stills shooter. Sony Clearzoom. How much I use depends on the lens used. With a better lens I am fine with 2x as for example my Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 is still better at 110mm than many old lenses of that focal length (or similar). I use primes mostly for specific purposes, Tilt shift, macro, super telephoto, shallow DOF (including portraits) and in the case of the 55 1.8 for IQ and as a body cap. It helps that all of those CAN be used with clearzoom. I have never been a big fan of zooms but have always had a few including maybe a dozen or so "kit" lenses and I have been happy with all of the kit lenses for what they are. Some zooms I love are the old Tokina 60-120 2.8 (great as a portrait lens), my ancient EF 20-35 2.8 L (technically not great optically but i do like what it does even if hardly used). I keep a Canon IS ii APSC kit lens as it is useful as a almost disposable lens that actually covers FF on my A7s from about 24mm and up and it is currently my only stabilized lens. I have a few old MF variable aperture zooms and they are a mixed bunch some ok some just old but none used very often. I work at a charity shop and handle the camera gear most of the time.....we have a few lenses in at the moment and if they do not sell will probably buy most of them. Still have the Contax 50 1.7 and 35 2.8 I posted about ages ago in the lens forum. Looks like they will be coming home at some point but just got an FD film camera with a 50 1.8, a 28 2.8 and a mint condition old Promura zoom in case. I would love to try the Promura but will probably pass but could get the primes for no reason. We also got three Pentax film cameras in last week and all had the same Sigma 28-70 macro zoom that was sold as a kit lens in Australia with Pentax (same distributor) and an old Russian Kiev camera with a Helios 58 f2 M .....This thread has me thinking i will buy one of the Pentax kit zooms and the Helios to compare them at 58mm.
  • Create New...