35mm or 50mm? - the age old question

[rthollenbeck]

There have been quite a few sitings of Big Foot in Hazelwood. In fact I have seen Big Foot there myself.

They tend to get flushed out of the Ozarks during deer season.

 

[Sirius Glass]

There have been quite a few sitings of Big Foot in Hazelwood. In fact I have seen Big Foot there myself. It seems Big Foot has moved to Pacific though. Still not too far from my house.

Does Big Foot prefer chairs, sofa, or in Canada Chesterfields?

 

[rthollenbeck]

I don't think there was a chair involved, he was siting for the bar exam.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A bar stool or is he into stools? Foot stools? Who would want a foot long stool from Big Foot?

 

[rthollenbeck]

Is this what your looking for Sirius?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

"35mm or 50mm? - the age old question" and talked to death on many threads! Do we Really need another one?

 

[rthollenbeck]

"35mm or 50mm? - the age old question" and talked to death on many threads! Do we Really need another one?

Maybe everyone should just look up all the old conversations and never have any new ones at all. Is that where your headed with this?

There probably isn't many original conversations at all. No need to have this website eh?

 

[Sirius Glass]

There have been quite a few sitings of Big Foot in Hazelwood. In fact I have seen Big Foot there myself. It seems Big Foot has moved to Pacific though. Still not too far from my house.

Does Big Foot prefer chairs, sofa, or in Canada Chesterfields?

I don't think there was a chair involved, he was siting for the bar exam.

A bar stool or is he into stools? Foot stools? Who would want a foot long stool from Big Foot?

Is this what your looking for Sirius?

Yes, I keep my eye out for them because I do not like stepping in stools.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Maybe everyone should just look up all the old conversations and never have any new ones at all. Is that where your headed with this?

There probably isn't many original conversations at all. No need to have this website eh?

So we should constantly rehash old threads in order to have something to read?

 

[rthollenbeck]

So we should constantly rehash old threads in order to have something to read?

Maybe it should be up to you when we can or can't?

 

[Alan Gales]

Does Big Foot prefer chairs, sofa, or in Canada Chesterfields?

Old cars.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I haven't shot 135 format for my personal enjoyment for a very long time but when I did, I considered a 35mm lens normal if I cropped the print to 8x10 ratio and 50mm more normal if printing full frame.

 

[flavio81]

"35mm or 50mm? - the age old question" and talked to death on many threads! Do we Really need another one?

YES we do.

Please create it.

 

[destroya]

The 35-70/2.8 is a very good zoom lens but not perfect, and i would really like to check out which 4 nikon 35mm primes you used as a comparison. Please don't take this into offence, quite the opposite: I'm thinking about buying another Nikkor 35mm.

I have the PC-Nikkor 35/2.8 and it is tack sharp even on the corners wide open at f2.8, shows no distortion and no visible abberations in general, which is something that i doubt the nice 35-70/2.8D would achieve.

I tried the f2 d lens, the f2 ais, the 2.8 ais and 1.4 ai. all were soft. the best one i found and by a long shot, was the rokonin 35mm 1.4. new from B&H for under $240 on sale. its much much bigger than the nikons, but it is by far the best one i found and now use all the time. the 35-70 is now back on the shelf.

 

[flavio81]

I tried the f2 d lens, the f2 ais, the 2.8 ais and 1.4 ai. all were soft. the best one i found and by a long shot, was the rokonin 35mm 1.4. new from B&H for under $240 on sale. its much much bigger than the nikons, but it is by far the best one i found and now use all the time. the 35-70 is now back on the shelf.

The F2 ais should be good, you tell me that at f2.8 the zoom was better than the 35/2 AI-S? Not only in sharpness but in the other important parameters as well? If true, please say so, because then i'll add the 35-70/2.8 to my "wanted" list

35/1.4 AI/AIS is a carryover of an old design (1971) which was a breakthrough in its day. Too fast (f1.4) means optical compromises as well unless super expensive glass, or aspherical surfaces (the Rokinon has 12 elements and 2 aspherical surfaces, btw) are adopted.
Also the 35/2 AI is based on the same optical design from 1962, but in any case this was/is a very good design, and would be my choice.
35/2 AF-D lens is a completely different lens which I feel was stripped down in potential quality to provide for quick AF operation and/or less manufacturing costs.

35/2.8 AI is a simplified 5-element lens, streamlined down for cost, i would not expect this to be the maximum performance that could be possible for a 35/2.8 lens; but i would still think this should be a very good lens. At the risk of sounding a fanboy, my Canon FDn 35/2.8, an inexpensive lens contemporary to that AI lens, has fantastic performance. Both lenses (Canon and Nikon) have almost identical optical design (see links), however the Canon has one element more, where Nikon uses a single element in a group, the Canon has two elements.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/35mm.htm
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/35mmnikkor/35mmf28.htm

I can't help but feel Nikkor was aiming to reduce costs there. Or, that Canon felt the need to one-up Nikon (most likely, because the FD New lens line comes a little bit later than the AI line)

Thanks for information on the Rokinon, i've always read that it was a good lens but i've also read that the construction of those lenses mean that if it drops on the floor, it falls apart -- literally. Or de-centers, etc.

So bottom line is... in 1971 Nikon had really pro-quality 35mm primes, but then afterwards didn't really want to release an improved pro-quality 35mm prime. Except maybe for my PC-Nikkor 35/2.8 (latest version, optical design is early 1980s) which I feel it has fantastic performance.