The M Club! - Page 5

*G_Money* · 05-19-2008, 11:27 AM

I have to admit the market for that 85mm I sold surprised me. It was in nasty condition, having travelled with me for years in a canvas sack with my other lenses, strapped to my motorcycle. The glass was fine, but one iris blade was slightly corroded and the cosmetics were nasty, lots of scuffs and my SIN etched into the barrel. I still got $120 for it on eBay. That schooled me in the value of fast medium-teles. I had my old Super-Tak 55mm f/1.8 that I had hoped would be close to the 85's equivalent on digital, but in addition to the clumsy manual diaphragm actuation, there's something wrong with the lens that caused the diaphragm to open and close about 1/2 stop when the focus is rotated back and forth. I've had five different 50mm lenses in the last year through buying, selling and trading. They all work great, I still have two, but they work out to 75mm on digital, just shy of the traditional 85-100mm portrait length. I guess I either need a nice fast 57mm from somewhere, or a full-frame and a good 85mm.

*Canada_Rockies* · 05-19-2008, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by jsherman999

.

Here are some shots taken today with my personal favorite M - the 85 f/2.

Note: Very little PP in these, despite the 'weird' nature of some of the lighting
effects and colors - the 85 can do funky things on it's own sometimes.
I've described it before as "Tolkienish".

If you are referring to the deep blue coloured flowers, (lupins?), there are certain flowers, deep blue in colour, that defy film or digital. They apparently, according to some of my readings, a very high UV component to the colour to attract certain insects.

*Canada_Rockies* · 05-19-2008, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by G_Money

Everyone today seems so obsessed with covering entire ranges of focal lengths, though. I read people worrying about having holes in their coverage, but I can remember back in the day, when zooms weren't as widespread, that the general consensus was to work in multiples of 2. If you started with a 50mm normal, you would look for a 24 or 28mm wide angle, a 100mm and 200mm telephoto and that was seen as covering your range. Or perhaps a 35mm, 80mm, 150mm and 300mm. I'm not lecturing, chastising or admonishing, just noting with interest.

The journalist standard set of lenses, pre zoom, was 28/55/135.

Zewrak · 05-19-2008, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by Canada_Rockies

The journalist standard set of lenses, pre zoom, was 28/55/135.

And nowdays its Canon EF 600/4L IS USM or Canon EF 400/2,8 L IS USM + 1,7x converter.

*Canada_Rockies* · 05-19-2008, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by Zewrak

And nowdays its Canon EF 600/4L IS USM or Canon EF 400/2,8 L IS USM + 1,7x converter.

Have you noticed that journalists are getting heavier? Must be the lack of "zooming with the feet". Couldn't resist.

Zewrak · 05-19-2008, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by Canada_Rockies

Have you noticed that journalists are getting heavier? Must be the lack of "zooming with the feet". Couldn't resist.

Well sitting for hours in Ghillie Suits or in the back of a handyman marked van doesn't help.

*Fl_Gulfer* · 05-19-2008, 12:43 PM

Wouldn't the SMC-A lenses fall into this post also?

nathancombs · 05-19-2008, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Zewrak

And nowdays its Canon EF 600/4L IS USM or Canon EF 400/2,8 L IS USM + 1,7x converter.

around here it is a F2.8 70-200 or 80-200 of some tipe seems to be what stayes on the cameras i use a Tonkina AT-X 80-200 F2.8 a LOT i also use a Sigma APO 70-300 F4-5.6 i just got a Magnicon (re brand Tonkina) 70-210 F4 AF that i am proble use a lot

i still use my 1.7 50 but i also have a 1.4 50 that i will use also

i often use 2 cameras when shooting so i do not have to change lenes

wavecurrent · 05-19-2008, 01:43 PM

Here is another "member" of the M-club, and a picture of some of my M-lenses

Regards,

Mike

*jsherman999* · 05-19-2008, 01:48 PM

wavecurrent, very nice collection there. I'm particularly jealous about the 20 f/4.

How would you compare your two 28's - the f/3.5 vs the f/2.8?

.

8540tomg · 05-19-2008, 01:50 PM

Hi all,

I have not used this puppy for quite a while. Glad this thread gave me a reason to take it out of mothballs. Lousy weather continues here in Waterloo. As I just finished watching a ToolTime rerun I was inspired and went to my own workshop. At least it was warm and dry there.

Cheers

TG

*jsherman999* · 05-19-2008, 02:01 PM

TG !! - that M 50 f/4 macro was one of my all time favorites Ms, congrats on owning
that!

I sold mine

I couldn't justify keeping it after I got the 35ltd macro and FA 50 macro. Wish I hadn't.

Here are a couple taken with the M 50 f4 macro:

8540tomg · 05-19-2008, 03:20 PM

Thanks Jay.

Your shots arn't too shabby either. It's a shame we have to let a lens go from time to time. I've resisted the urge so far but that DA* 300 is calling me. Some of the guys may have to be sacrificed for the cause. In any case I think we can say the M 50mm f4 macro is a pretty fair lens based on the evidence presented here. As I recall I gave it an 8 on my scorecard in the lens review database. It is hard to rate a fully manual, non-autofocus lens higher than that but these tool shots looked very sharp and crisp to me. They were all right out of the K10 with no post processing. I think Ill move on the the M 35 f2 next. This one hardly ever sees the light of day. I wonder if my cat will sit still for a few shots? Stay tuned.

Cheers

TG

deudeu · 05-19-2008, 03:59 PM

jsherman999... Amazing shots... Love the colors.

There we go, I want one of these! I am so weak!

deudeu · 05-19-2008, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by jsherman999

.

Deudea - all I can say is... wow. Probably two of the best so far, very strange,
evocative, sombre images. Very European feel. I need to get up to Montreal.

.

Well if you ever make it here, let me know! I would love to play with some of your toys! I can be a pretty good guide in exchange... (i wish i could offer to let you play with my lenses but I feel like my collection is a little too shallow)