Lenses Tag

If you aren't prepared to do it, rest assured that your Golden Labrador or Beagle are. Also most of your kids under 4. You'll know when they've done it because your lens will be either cleaner or dirtier than it was before...

An earlier column mentioned Tamron as a brand name and poked a little gentle fun at the Adaptall system that this company used in the film era. Readers may have gotten the impression that we thought little of the lenses - such is not the case. Camera Electronic and probably tens of thousands of Australians have a keen appreciation of the worth of the Tamron brand and products. It has developed over many items and many decades. Here's an example of what Tamron could do in the analog days  - do for themselves and do for you. It's a 17mm f:3.5 lens with a Nikon AI mount affixed to the back. A similar lens would have been available for most of the major mounts in those days. If its design reminds you a little of Nikon or Tokina remember that the Japanese companies did see people and ideas flow from one to another. Its mount is all metal, as things were in those days, and is sturdy and precise. The lens grind is excellent and the coating does a good job. And...

Well, it's a good start when you bring your equipment in to be cleaned and repaired and you don't bother to put the front, back, or body caps on. That'll get a smile. When he finds the lenses in the footy socks sans covers he'll bust right out laughing. He'll be positively hysterical when he sees the surface of your sensor and after you say you want all the dust and bugs taken out of the prism and focusing screen system of your DSLR it'll be all we can do to hold him down. We're not suggesting that you become the camera enthusiast that needs to put on a HAZMAT suit in a NASA clean room to change lenses - or the worried individual who shines Mag-Lights into lenses in an effort to find dust motes...

" So I want one too - but his had a 50 milly meter lens so none of the pictures came out good. I want a 50 milly meter camera so mine will be better. And I want a 50 milly meter zoom. " You can only hold your breath so long before sparkly lights flash and the world sort of greys out. Then you have to breathe and come back to consciousness, and if you're a salesperson in a camera store you've got to start unravelling the knotted ball of informational string. It's no good fainting and falling to the floor as someone will just revive you and you'll have to start over again. I blame the manufacturers. If they had not decided to turn 35mm motion picture film sideaways and start to make still pictures none of this would have been a problem. Even then, they could have used Imperial or Russian or Andaman Island units of measurement for the focal length of the lens and it would have made it easier. When the film makers started to refer to the 35mm...

I frequently pass by the Sigma racks in the storeroom but foolishly never stop to pluck something from the shelves. My fault, because I am missing some of the most intriguing lenses in the place. The shooters who use Canon or Nikon camera bodies get a better chance than I to test things out. And someone with a Nikon Full-frame DSLR will be the one to take an interest in today's lens. The dear old 105mm lens has been the mainstay of the portraitist for a long time - when mounted on a 24 x 36 camera it is perfect for head and shoulders and upper torso shots - such a good combination of focal length and depth of field that these lenses are frequently ground with a wide maximum aperture. f:2.8 is common and then it'll run up to f:1.4 in the premium ones. f:1.4 for this length is a sizeable chunk of melted sand and demands the best design for the resolution and freedom from distortion, It looks as though it also demands the best possible barrel mounting - this is...

Some years ago I opted for the Fujifilm mirror-less X system cameras and sold off my other equipment. In the move - on I gave up a lens that was absolutely magnificent - a Sigma 8-16mm zoom. I cannot speak highly enough of it as a part of the system I used then. It scooped in big wedding parties, coped with dim, pokey little churches, and was an absolute hoot with the tabletop scenes I create. Hats off to Sigma. Unfortunately Sigma cannot get the go-ahead codes to make lenses for Fujifilm - and few other makers can either, though I note a few Chinese factories turn out X-mount lenses by the score. But that wasn't the issue. The issue was where was I going to get a lens that would do what the Sigma did - if not a zoom, then at least a decent compromise focal length. The model tabletop scenes could be made to order but the dim, pokey little churches would stay the same...

The preparation of the new Nikon Z-series mirror-less camera systems must have been a time of furious activity in the Nikon organisation. Leaving aside the marketing questions and the business strategies - forced or otherwise - the idea of a new Nikon lens mount as well as a new type of Nikon camera would have had all departments designing like madmen. How much paper, how many pencils, and how much midnight ( whale ) oil must have been expended is anyone's guess. The chance to start afresh with something  like this would have been relished by the lens designers. A new mount - bigger and less complex than the previous F-mount - would have relieved them of a lot of the pressure that they were under in their earlier digital age. The fact that they are now firing their light rays into a larger sensor means exit paths need to spread - but all the years of the 24 x 36 film capture will have been good experience. Ah, but now there is no mirror box or mirror to stay clear of,...