Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,663   Posts: 1,481,649   Online: 803
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,149
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    If you're looking for a really good, not expensive, portrait lens, with excellent image quality (including bokeh), to use on a Nikon...

    why not get the legendary Nikkor 105mm f/2.5?
    Indeed. Hard to improve upon... either version.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by momus View Post
    ...and far too many little hexagonal highlights wide open.
    How does one get hexagonal highlights wide open?

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Oren Grad View Post
    How does one get hexagonal highlights wide open?
    Hexagonal lens elements. I want one...

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    552
    A number of pros used the Russian Helios 85 on their Nikons back in the 70s. One stop down it hit the right mix of soft and sharp.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rAdelaide
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by blockend View Post
    A number of pros used the Russian Helios 85 on their Nikons back in the 70s. One stop down it hit the right mix of soft and sharp.
    I've got the aperture-less Cyclop which has the same glass, makes for good portraits. There's a decent review here. They were going for up to $6-700 a few months ago, but the factory has just started up production again, you can get them for $4-500 brand new.
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by momus View Post
    I thought about the T90 actually, but it's a very old, all electronic camera, and I don't trust one.
    Its only vice is a tendency for the shutter to stick if left in storage for extended periods, but that can be eliminated by an occasional burst on the motordrive. Apart from that, the T90 is a solid piece of design. It has three coreless motors instead of the usual one and great metering modes. At the price they sell for the T90 is a steal, and the most advanced FD platform outside a mirrorless digital camera. I bought a mint example and paid for a CLA last year for under £100.
    Last edited by blockend; 08-26-2013 at 05:00 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #17
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Oren Grad View Post
    How does one get hexagonal highlights wide open?
    The lens is cursed. It had a hex put on it.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  8. #18
    Zathras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    492
    I think that the 135 ƒ2.5 SMC Takumar is a beautiful portrait lens. Bought one for a good price on Ebay a few years ago and was pleasantly surprised that it had a WORKING black Spotmatic SP body attached to it when I got it. Thinking that the seller made a mistake, I contacted him and he told me that it was part of the deal, but he forgot to mention it in the listing. I still have that Spottie, she's been very good to me.
    When the chips are down,

    The buffalo is empty!!!



  9. #19
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,403
    If the Nikkor 85mm f1.8 lens isn't a good enough portrait lens for him, this man must be a hell of a portrait photographer.
    Ben

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    769
    I don't like using 135s for portraits unless they have reasonably close focusing. Some 135s with close focusing include the 135/3.2 Konica Hexanon, 135/2.3 Vivitar Series 1, the already mentioned Tamron (all of these lenses focus down to about 3 feet), the Promaster 135/2.8 which reaches 1:5 and the Vivitar 135/2.8 Close Focusing which reaches 1:2. The last one must be my favorite 135 for its versatility and good image quality. The Canon 135/2.5 FD and 135/2.8 Nikkors (Q, QC, 'K') are very nice lenses but they do not get very close. The same is true of the 135/2.5 Super Takumar and SMCT and the 135/2.5 Konica Hexanon. There is no shortage of good 135s. Another favorite 135 of mine is the f/2.5 Canon FL. I still don't like it for portraits but for everything else it's very good. I have many lenses in the 85-105mm range, both macro and general purpose. These include the Canon 85/1.8 FL and New FD, Canon 100/3.5 FL, Canon 100/2.8 FD, Canon 100/2.8 FD SSC, Canon 100/2.8 New FD, Konica Hexanon 100/2.8 and 85/1.8, 85/2 AI Nikkor, 105/2.5 Nikkor (various versions), 105/2.8 Super Takumar, 100/2.5 Minolta Rokkor (various versions), 100/3.5 Minolta MC Rokkor and others. All of these lenses are capable of excellent portrait results if they are used carefully.
    On a recent vacation I used a 35-105/4.5-4.5 Canon New FD at the 105 end for some nice portraits.

    Nikon gradually changed its lenses over from five blade and six blade apertures to seven. Some had nine. My 45/2.8 GN Nikkor has nine blades. You will only get out of focus hexagons in the highlights from the earlier lenses.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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