Actually I do have a 19 but it's one of the Vivitar 19/3.8s. I'm not very fond of it. I'm starting to use wides more often but the 50-150 range is still by far my most frequently used. I took the 50/1.4 with the 1.4x out for a bit tonite, on the D that's a very comfortable length for me. That's not surprising as the 100/105 is/was always a favorite on film. Unfortunately the quality with the 50+1.4x isn't the greatest. I'll fill in for now with the A35-70/4 set at 70, a bit slower than I'd like, but a very nice lens.
I seem to be having a lot of trouble with accurate focusing with shorter lenses on the D, don't have a clue why, it was never an issue with the film bodies. I seem to be consistently focusing well past the intended point. I'm trying to stick to wide open, fast, primes until I figure out why this is happening. Since it also happens fairly often with the FA50/1.7 set to autofocus, I'm not quite sure it's all me and not partially the ist-D. The thing that's still driving me crazy is that the viewfinder image says I'm focused, so does the confirmation indicator. But I'm not. :-( This doesn't happen with lenses 85mm or longer. I've got 2 film bodies loaded up just to prove I can still focus properly with them. Very frustrating problem. Don > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 8:43 PM > To: Don Sanderson > Subject: Re: Filling the 50-85mm gap. > > > Seems that you have a much bigger gap between the fisheye and the 24 > than between the 50 and 85. > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Thursday, April 21, 2005, 4:03:06 PM, you wrote: > > DS> My prime kit now consists of 16(fisheye),24,28,35,40,50,85,90,100, > DS> 135,150, 200, 300, 400 and 500. > DS> (NO, I don't carry them all at once) ;-) > DS> Though the 40 and 90 are redundant they have an entirely different > DS> character than their 35 and 85mm counterparts. > > DS> The missing length between 50 and 85 bothers me for some reason. > DS> 50 seems a bit short and 85 a bit long for some portraits on the D. > DS> Heck, maybe I'm just a lens addict! ;-) > DS> If the sun ever comes back out I'll try the 50/1.4 with the 1.4x. > DS> Might just do the trick. > > DS> Don > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Rob Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:20 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: Filling the 50-85mm gap. > >> > >> > >> From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> > >> > Any suggestions, other than the 77Ltd. (Which I can't afford) > >> > for manual focus primes to fill the gap between 50 and 85mm? > >> > I'm good down to 16mm and up to 400, but 50-85 is a pretty big > >> > hole, and I'd rather not fill it with a zoom. > >> > I was thinking of the K35/2 with a good 7 element 2x but I hate to > >> > do that to that nice lens. ;-/ > >> > > >> > Don > >> > >> Hmmm, if you consider 50-85 to be a big gap just how many > primes are you > >> going to carry around with you? I find a 1.4x converter fills > >> in the gaps > >> nicely between primes and solves the problem of how much weight > >> I'm prepared > >> to lug around. > >> > >> 1.4x converters have an easier time and generally yield better > >> results than > >> you get from the normal 2x jobbies. I would hesitate to use a > >> converter on > >> a wide angle lens, however a 1.4x converter on a 50 is an ideal > >> combination, > >> should give you the focal length you are looking for. > >> > >> I use an old DOI 1.4 converter that is stunningly good and a > >> fraction of the > >> size of any 2x converter - so small you don't notice it. The DOI > >> came top in > >> a comprehensive converter shootout in Amateur Photographer at the > >> time yet, > >> if you see one, you probably won't need to pay much more than > a tenner for > >> it. > >> > >> Or the 40mm pancake with the 1.7xAF converter could be fun - I wouldn't > >> expect the results to be as good though. > >> > >> Rob. > >> > >> > >> > > >
