Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,283   Posts: 1,534,952   Online: 916
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Utah Valley
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    IIRC, Nikon had an f0.9 lens that they sold in the 60s. It was not very good and was very very expensive. Again IIRC.

    PE
    http://homepage2.nifty.com/akiyanroo...k-e/index.html

    I found the website above a year or two ago. I don't know how accurate the information is, but the author profiles all sorts of interesting industrial Nikkors.

    Bjorn Roslett's old website http://naturfotograf.com/ has some information about a few of those lenses too.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Utah Valley
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    Just in case anyone's not living in the 1970's, there are these with more on the way:

    http://noktor.com/products.php
    Aren't the Noktor lenses just surveillance camera lenses for CCTV systems with different lens mounts stuck on them? They weren't designed for still photography. That doesn't mean they aren't useful or fun, but they seem over-priced to me.

    Also, are any of Noktor's current offerings compatible with film cameras, or are they only for crop sensor digital cameras like the lens patent in the first post?

  3. #23
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,271
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Helen B View Post
    Isn't that patent for Nikon 1 lenses - ie the little digital mirrorless thing, as already mentioned? Very small image circle, and no mirror pushing the lens away from the image plane. Despite what Ken Rockwell says (why would anybody use him as a reference?), there is a problem (challenge) created by the throat diameter in combination with the minimum possible distance between the image plane and the rear vertex (last piece of glass in the lens), so when you look at a very fast lens don't simply consider the throat diameter, but also how close it can get to the image plane. That f/0.9 Nikon was for the rangefinder, not the SLR, wasn't it?

    The f/0.7 lens used for Barry Lyndon had a very small rear clearance and therefore had to be used on a modified rackover Mitchell, didn't it?

    Best,
    Helen
    Hi Helen - welcome back!

    We've missed you!
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,617
    Quote Originally Posted by Helen B View Post
    The f/0.7 lens used for Barry Lyndon had a very small rear clearance and therefore had to be used on a modified rackover Mitchell, didn't it?

    Best,
    Helen
    Yes it was a modified Mitchell. One of the modifications included a locking mechanism so the camera couldn't be racked over unless the lens was rotated a bunch of times - which would move it outward enough to prevent the rear element from being damaged. During operation the rear element was only a few mm from the film plane.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin