ryan greenberg Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 I realize that this has been talked about in the archives but I never found a description of the some of the more common Nikons or any recomendations of ACTUAL lenses used out there -more on the philosophy of using 16 lenses for 16,etc...- Since it is more common now to get Nikon mounts for our own16 cameras- including the Aminima and Eclairs,etc., could anyone comment on what Nikon lenses look good for 16 and which ones do not. Of course, anything wider than 25mm is not cost effective and that is understood - but for the long lens look - Which Nikons have given you guys good results? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 I only ever use my Nikon adapter for telephoto lenses. There's a terrific 400mm T4 lens and an 80-200 T T2.8 that are each worth about $1000 and they look excellent in S-16. Limited use of course. I have occassionally used a 105mm portrait lens and a 200mm standard prime (a friend's--only cost maybe $150) but I found that they do not have the same quality of contrast and color depth that my cine primes do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Juskalian Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 I've used the Nikon 105mm macro lens which I loved. It was a far better color/contrast match to the Cooke 10.4-52mm zoom I was using than the Nikon 80-200mm 2.8 zoom. The standard Nikon lenses seemed low contrast and fllare prone in comparison with the Cooke, and the 105mm. In addition the lens markings weren't very helpful for pulling focus. I don't know if this helps or not? Brett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 BTW, there is a Nikon 80-200 T 2.8 for auction on eBay at the moment. Same type of lens I've used in the past with success. I do agree that there is a difference in image between the finest primes and zooms in still lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryan greenberg Posted February 24, 2004 Author Share Posted February 24, 2004 Anyone had any experience with the 50mm 1.4 the 35mm 1.4 or 2.8 the 24mm or 28mm or anything more practical for 16 mm filming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Pacini Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 Not yet, but that's why I'm hoping to use, as soon as I get a CP16-Nikon adapter. I have this nice set of Nikons, plus a Zeiss 20mm & Zeiss 70-300 and I'd love to see how they stack up to the Canon 12-120 & CP9mm, 12.5mm & 25mm I have. Matt Pacini Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now