Two New Lenses: 50 f/1.8 and 135 f/2.8

[Prospero]

With everyone on this forum buying new lenses, I just couldn't resist getting some for myself :D

I will be shooting pictures the coming years at my student club which is always dimly lit, so I needed faster lenses. The budget was very low, so I couldn't get one of these fancy f/2.8 telezooms. Instead, I got myself two primes for a little over 200 Euros.

The first is the 50 f/1.8. The lens that needs no introduction. For the price it is simply magnificent. I briefly considered getting the f/1.4, but after looking at samples, the bokeh of that lens did not seem substantially better. The two/third increase in f/stop was't enough to justify paying double the price.

So far, I really like the lens. Focussing is pretty fast, the DOF - or rather lack there off - wide open is awesome. The only thing that somewhat dissapoints me is the minimum focussing distance. I guess I am a bit spoilt by using Sigma glass with macro functions for close to two years.

Some samples:

29995

Finally a decent lens cap again, not the Sigma trash that keeps falling off :D. Wrestlingreport was right after all ... :D j/k

29996

29997

29999

And this is the other lens: the 0mm f/0 (at least that's what the Exif sais)
No really, it is the Nikon Series E 135 f/2.8 AI-s. I got this one because I wanted a fast longer lens as well, but I couldn't afford any of the fast long lenses on the market. Also, this lens is great for portraits (though a bit long on a 1.6x camera)

The lens does not meter with the D50 (it would with a D200), which means that it may take a couple of times to get the exposure right. I suppose shooting with this is like shooting a Nikon D30 (no AF and no metering with all glass that's not af-s) :).

If the light does not change too much, this shouldn't cause too much trouble. The lack of AF is not that bad either. Manual focus on this lens works very nicely. The ring turns smoothly, but not too smoothly; this makes it easy to make precise adjustments. Also due to the small DOF (smaller than the 50 f/1.8) it is pretty easy to judge the focus.

The E-series was introduced by Nikon in the 80s. These lenses were budget oriented. Their build quality was worse than the Nikkor AI-s lenses, but the optics more or less the same. By todays standards, the build quality is pretty good, though. It feels solid, and I really like the build in telescopic hood.
An advantage of E-series lenses was that they were so compact. This one is really small; it's double the length of the 50, but has a smaller diameter.

Anyway, here are some samples:

29998

30000

30001

30002

[davew]

Nice shots, enjoy your new lenses
:)

[jcon]

Finally a decent lens cap again, not the Sigma trash that keeps falling off :D. Wrestlingreport was right after all ... :D j/k


And this is the other lens: the 0mm f/0 (at least that's what the Exif sais)
No really, it is the Nikon Series E 135 f/2.8 AI-s.


WrestlingReport.... Ahh yes.. good times..good times!:D

Thanks for sharing your first impressions. I seriously considered buying the 135mm awhile back but thought it was a tad too long for studio portraits. Your samples look very impressive!

[r3g]

Very good looking images.. I expect some awesome pictures from you with those lenses now! :cool::p

[Rooz]

the images from that 135mm look very good. nice and sharp with excellent bokeh.

[XaiLo]

What? No HDR :( lol nice clean images Prospero, hope they serve you well :) happy shooting.

[K1W1]

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=29999&d=1192832597

I've got a Tamron 135mm f2.8 lens from about 1980 that looks almost identical to that one.

[Prospero]

Dave, thanks

Thanks Jason. I think it would indeed be too long for studio shots. In a studio, I think you can only get headshots at that focal length. So far, the performance of the lens seems great, but I'll do some more testing tomorrow.

Rooz, thanks for your reply.

Reg, thanks for your comment, glad you like the pics. By the way, I won't be posting any "who needs VR at 135mm"-pictures. Compared to the pictures you posted that would be simply embarasing :o...

Xailo, thanks. Perhaps I'll try to take a HDR with these tomorrow :)

Besides needing the speed, I also bought these lenses to try out different things with DOF. With the lenses I had, DOF was a lot bigger, so these lenses open up many new possibilities.
By the way, If I hold the 50mm inverted onto the 135 it becomes a super-macro. I couldn't get any shots now, because it was too dark and I needed much more DOF, but I'll try it again tomorrow.

Richard, the lens you have may very well look like this one. At the camera-store where I bought this one (there was a huge collection of ancient glass) I found that many of the lenses from that time look very similar.

[rawpaw18]

Funny, I just assumed everybody that buys a Nikon DSLR automatically buys a 50 1.8, well better late than never, welcome to the club.

From someone who thinks 20mm is a telephoto lens:D, using these two lenses you will probably feel as if you have tunnel vision. Nice to get new gear, post up my friend.

[fionndruinne]

Awesome shots. I love the lighting with those lens shots especially. I'm sure you'll enjoy the glass.

[herc182]

The only thing that somewhat dissapoints me is the minimum focussing distance. I guess I am a bit spoilt by using Sigma glass with macro functions for close to two years.



You can but some macro lenses to slap on the front of your 50mm such as:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/MACRO-CLOSE-UP-LENSES-for-Nikon-Nikkor-50mm-F1-4D-NEW_W0QQitemZ170158829685QQihZ007QQcategoryZ30070Q QssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[Prospero]

Thanks Rich. Yeah, it's definitly nice to get new gear. I always love to experiment with new lenses.
The 50 had been on my list of lenses to get for a very long time. Every time I decided I needed something else more. I didn't have much need for it either.
The length of the lenses indeed takes some getting used too :), I always used to take portraits at 10mm :D

Thanks Andrew. The lighting of the lens pictures was done with two lights in my room, one near the desk from the left, the other farther away from behind.

Herc, I know you can get these filters. I was actually thinking of getting a set tubes myself, so that the optical quality of the lenses would not get worse. Then I can use them for all my lenses, so also the 135 and the 70-300.

[Prospero]

Here are some shots I took today in the forest of some nice autumn colours. I used the 135 on all of them.

I really like that focal length. It's great to take pictures of details of a landscape. The 50 on the other hand is not that great for nature photography. The focal length is a bit too short to take pictures of details, but too long to take pictures of a certain scene. Well, I didn't get it for that purpose anyway.

Here are the shots. The DOF may be a bit on the short side in these shots. Now that I have fast glass, I just can't bring myself to stop it down :).

30045

30046

30047

30048

30049

[achuang]

Great photos Dennis and hope you enjoy the new lenses. reversing the 50mm on the end of a lens works pretty well, i did that on the end of my 60mm macro lens and could fill the frame with a flower stamen. Beautiful colours in all your photos.

[r3g]

The DOF may be a bit on the short side in these shots. Now that I have fast glass, I just can't bring myself to stop it down :).



So glad to hear Im not the only one with that problem. ;)

[toriaj]

Congratulations, Dennis! Looks like some good shopping got you some great new toys! Tell us how the non-metering works out. Sounds like it would be very helpful for developing your own eye for the light in a scene.


The 50 on the other hand is not that great for nature photography. The focal length is a bit too short to take pictures of details, but too long to take pictures of a certain scene.

Yes, I like the 50mm for some "mid-range" shots like this:
50mm, 1/90 sec., f/6.7, ISO 200
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1013/1398706185_66f893bd98.jpg

50mm, 1/90 sec., f/9.5, ISO 200
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1190/1398706209_92b3a919ec.jpg

And I got the Raynox 2.5x macroconverter (http://www.adorama.com/IRXDCR250.html?searchinfo=raynox%202.5x&item_no=2), which works great (http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1058077005&size=l) with the 50mm 1.8. If your 135mm's diameter is 67mm or less, the Raynox would work on it too, bringing you even closer. It might be harder to find focus, though. I haven't noticed any degradation of image quality.

Have fun with your new lenses! I'm enjoying your results already :)

[wh0128]

For the 135 that doesn't meter, just get a hand held meter and meter the subject for yourself whenever you're using the lens. Though some meters can run up to 400$ US.

[Prospero]

Thanks achuang. I tried getting some shots with the 50 reversed on the 135. The magnification I could get with that was amazing. I estimate the magnification is in the order of 4:1 to 5:1.
The DOF was extremely thin, though. Also, the 50 takes away quite some light, so I couldn't stop down that far either without a tripod.

Here are some shots I got with the two lenses. The first really shows how thin the DOF is wide open.

30084

30085

30086

So, the magnification is great but the DOF makes it very hard to work with. It's very hard to get anything into focus, let alone get enough DOF.
I was once told that the effect of reversing the 50 onto another lens is a lot bigger when the focal length is larger. I also read reports of someone reversing it onto a Sigma 150 Macro to get a magnification of 9 to 1 with which he could get frame filling pictures of the heads of insects...:eek:.

Thank Tori. The lack of metering does indeed help to get a feeling for the light in a scene. The more I shoot with the lens, the less attempts it takes to get the exposure right.
By the way, when shooting during daytime, the sunny sixteen rule is pretty easy to work with. If you shoot f/16, you can use 1/ISO as your shutterspeeds. Then it is easy to calculate the shutterspeed at f/2.8, it's just a matter of counting the stops and doubling your shutterspeed so many times.
The 50 focal lenght is indeed great for such scenes. Having used this length very little, I find it difficult to find such scenes, though. I guess that takes some practice.
The results you get with the Raynox are really great. I don't think I will get one, though. Extreme magnification doesn't really work with the 135, because it is almost impossible to get focus and keep it long enough to take a shot, having only manual focus to work with. Though I can use it on the 50, I can also use the 17-70 instead, which generally gives me enough magnification.

[achuang]

That's some miniscule DOF there, that's crazy. As you'd expect there's more DOf with a 60mm macro lens and the 50mm reversed. But depending on how close i focused the macro lens made a difference in how much magnification i could get. Here's a shot that was made handheld with the 50mm on the front reversed. And that's some small DOF. The subject was about 3-4mm across. http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2236/1547769613_41023a291b_o.jpg

Using a speedlight helps since the 50mm cuts out a fair bit of light.

[Prospero]

That's some miniscule DOF there, that's crazy. As you'd expect there's more DOf with a 60mm macro lens and the 50mm reversed. But depending on how close i focused the macro lens made a difference in how much magnification i could get. Here's a shot that was made handheld with the 50mm on the front reversed. And that's some small DOF. The subject was about 3-4mm across.

Using a speedlight helps since the 50mm cuts out a fair bit of light.

Amazing picture. Beautiful colours and DOF. I didn't try it with the speedlight or pop up flash yet, because with the AI lens I need to set that one manually as well (there is no TTL metering whatsoever)

Maybe using a flash I can get better shots. An advantage of the 135 is that I can stop it down all the way to f/32 (unlike many other AI lenses).

EDIT: I just tried it with a flash. Using the full power of the flash, I could get a sharp picture at f/32. It wasn't very pleasant for the eyes, with the full power of the SB-600 bouncing of on a surface barely less than 40 cm away :). Will post some more tomorrow.
The magnification is not as big as I thought. I took a picture of a ruler and found that the long side of the picture was 8mm. By comparing it to a picture I took with the 17-70 (which I know can do 1:2.3 according to Sigma) I found the magnification is 2.5:1... Still pretty good, though.