what waS your last photography related purchase?

[GLS]

IR400 has a speed advantage, but nothing more.

This could make a significant difference though if you want to avoid movement in the subject. IR400 has an effective speed of about 12 with the R72 filter. Retro 80S will be what? About 1.6 or 3 at best.

 

[Anon Ymous]

This could make a significant difference though if you want to avoid movement in the subject. IR400 has an effective speed of about 12 with the R72 filter. Retro 80S will be what? About 1.6 or 3 at best.

Tru dat, but I'm not too worried about it. BTW, the current IR400 is based on the Aviphot Pan 200, 400 has long been discontinued, so the speed difference is probably less than 2 stops.

 

[Helios 1984]

I found a copy of Karsh: A Sixty-Year Retrospective at a flea market for 10$CAD.
I opened the book, closed it and headed straight to the cash.

 

[removed account4]

armand hammer swashings odor

 

[Bikerider]

To plug a gaping hole on my lens set up, I have just bought a used but boxed and mint example of the latest Tamron 90mm 1 to 1 macro lens.

Just before that I bought a new, unused, but a last of the line, 'sell off' Fujifilm X20. It came complete with the odd sized 38mm UV Filter and two spare batteries. It will have a particular use and that is when I am touring on my motorcycle I can take it out of the case and use it without having first to remove my helmet. With a 28 to 112 mm lens (35mm Equivalent) from what I have so far found it will fit the bill perfectly. An A3 print isn't bad although not as good as my full frame D600/D700 or my F6 film cameras. That is not a problem as there will not be many printed to that size.

 

[GLS]

Heliopan 105mm Slim SH-PMC High Transmission Circular Polariser.

Quite a mouthful, and eye wateringly expensive for a single filter. However I will be able to sell my current Lee equivalent and recoup a good deal of the expense. The Lee is a fantastic filter, but I wanted the Heliopan as 1) it has a brass ring which should help installing/removing it (the Lee can be fiddly in this regard); 2) it has a polarising index on the ring (the Lee lacks this); and 3) it only cuts one stop of light as opposed to 1.67 stops with the Lee. The last point will make using it with E6 much simpler.

 

[Ian Grant]

Today's haul :F

3 half plate book form plate holders (for someone else) three roller blind shutters one with an 8" (approx) f8 Rapid Rectilinear lens, and a 135mm f6.3 Goerz Berlin Dogmar

All the roller blind shutters are repairable, two work but the curtains need replacing.

Ian

 

[PGillin]

Last analog purchase was a block of XP2, a pack of D76, and a few rolls of TMax.
The last piece of analog equipment (as opposed to consumables) was a 20-35 2.8 Nikkor, to replace a drowned Tokina equivalent.
The last photo purchase of any kind was a tethering cable, if I'm allowed to mention such things here....

 

[wyofilm]

Two stainless steel sheets (0.10" thick) to flatten fb prints. They are big enough to hold 4 8x10s prints, but small enough to fit in our oven. Crude but works.

So far, no objections from my wife.

 

[fdonadio]

The last piece of analog equipment (as opposed to consumables) was a 20-35 2.8 Nikkor

I am looking for one of these.

 

[PGillin]

I am looking for one of these.

It's a great lens. I wouldn't turn down the Tokina AT-x version, though. And that's after having owned and shot both (the Tokina for several years, the Nikkor for several months.) The Nikkor is a bit better optically, a bit larger, and focuses a little closer. I got a good price for mine, but the Tokina is a better choice if you're concerned about price (and I know import fees in Brazil can be high.)

I might be one of the only ones in this thread who's last non-consumable photo purchase was months ago!

 

[fdonadio]

It's a great lens. I wouldn't turn down the Tokina AT-x version, though. And that's after having owned and shot both (the Tokina for several years, the Nikkor for several months.) The Nikkor is a bit better optically, a bit larger, and focuses a little closer.

What would you say about distortion? I’m after an ultra wide zoom with low distortion. I have a Sigma 18-35mm f/3.5 I bought from a member here for a song, but it has terrible barrel distortion.

At least according to Ken Rockwell, the Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8 is their ultra wide zoom lens with the least barrel distortion ever.

Edit: I forgot to specify “ultra wide zoom”.

 

[mshchem]

Just ordered 20 x 24 and 8x10 Ilford Classic MG fiber paper. Getting it before B&H closes for 10 days for Holiday.

 

[mshchem]

What would you say about distortion? I’m after an ultra wide zoom with low distortion. I have a Sigma 18-35mm f/3.5 I bought from a member here for a song, but it has terrible barrel distortion.

At least according to Ken Rockwell, the Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8 is their ultra wide zoom lens with the least barrel distortion ever.

Edit: I forgot to specify “ultra wide zoom”.

I have a AF-D 20-35 it's a very nice lens. I splurged a couple years back and bought a AF-D 28 1.4, that lens is the nicest wide lens I've ever touched, and it will work on a F3 or even the older stuff. I really don't get excited about new plastic, overly complicated, lenses. I have a 20 mm f2 AF-D that's a great, inexpensive lens. Small too.

 

[Buzz-01]

This set of 3 rolls of CHM-400 B&W film, ADOX FX-39 II developer, ADOFIX PLUS fixer and a Paterson changing bag from Fotoimpex.
Never shot B&W before and never developed my own film. Thought it would be time by now...

I already have a Paterson System 4 developing tank, so I should be good to go!

 

[mshchem]

This set of 3 rolls of CHM-400 B&W film, ADOX FX-39 II developer, ADOFIX PLUS fixer and a Paterson changing bag from Fotoimpex.
Never shot B&W before and never developed my own film. Thought it would be time by now...

I already have a Paterson System 4 developing tank, so I should be good to go!

Excellent!!!!

 

[PGillin]

What would you say about distortion? I’m after an ultra wide zoom with low distortion. I have a Sigma 18-35mm f/3.5 I bought from a member here for a song, but it has terrible barrel distortion.

At least according to Ken Rockwell, the Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8 is their ultra wide zoom lens with the least barrel distortion ever.

Edit: I forgot to specify “ultra wide zoom”.

I mean, I'd take Rockwell with a grain of salt. That said, it's a good lens optically. I haven't shot tests or gone looking for distortion, but when I'm shooting subjects that are square to the camera my straight lines are straight. If you're interested PM me and I may be able to send you a few raw files later this week, then you can see for yourself. The Nikkor has seemed a bit sharper and less inclined to fringing and flare than the Tokina, though I never had a shot ruined by softness or distortion using either lens. A repairman and camera shop owner I know praised it heavily when I told him I had bought the lens. He pointed out the aspherical front element and said he believed it's an optically better lens than the 17-35 which he now uses, but not by a wide enough margin for him to bother changing back, since he does use the extra width.

 

[removed account4]

contact frame glass

 

[fdonadio]

I mean, I'd take Rockwell with a grain of salt. That said, it's a good lens optically.

A repairman and camera shop owner I know praised it heavily when I told him I had bought the lens. He pointed out the aspherical front element and said he believed it's an optically better lens than the 17-35 which he now uses

That’s pretty much what Ken Rockwell says. He even mentions the 17-35 mm and the 18-35mm.

I would get the 20-35mm and, maybe, some ultra wide prime lens, like a 15mm for when I need go to the extremes.

I also have a fisheye (Zenitar 16mm f/2.8) and I love when I get a chance to use it for anything other than skateboarding. Still, I think (close to) rectilinear lenses are nicer for mostly everything. Fisheyes sure have their “charm”, but it’s hard to get the chance to use them and get a nice result.

Thanks for the comments. It makes me pretty much convinced I’m making the right choice.

Cheers,
Flavio

 

[fdonadio]

I have a AF-D 20-35 it's a very nice lens. I splurged a couple years back and bought a AF-D 28 1.4, that lens is the nicest wide lens I've ever touched, and it will work on a F3 or even the older stuff. I really don't get excited about new plastic, overly complicated, lenses. I have a 20 mm f2 AF-D that's a great, inexpensive lens. Small too.

I hate plastic. It’s feels cheap.

Thanks for the suggestions!

 

[removed account4]

ton of xerox negatives

 

[Nodda Duma]

A Nikon F6 camera body in mint condition, followed by a Canon T3i with the filter modified for astrophotography.

 

[NedL]

ton of xerox negatives

It'd be kinda fun to have an actual xerox machine.... 'cept I think I'd sort of go crazy putting all kinds of stuff on it....

Not a purchase but went out to dinner last night w/ a friend and he pulled out a negative he's going to use to try to make a print on a green leaf. Says he knows how to fix it after it's made!

 

[GLS]

Got the Heliopan 105mm CPL. The brass adds a lot of weight, but man this thing oozes quality.

 

[miha]

A bunch of Kodak T-Max P3200 film, Kentmere RC Paper and a pack of Fomapan 100 in 4x5.