From: D_Mac on
On Sep 13, 12:21 pm, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
> No wonder Canon shooters prefer this lens to the 85/1.2L II. Seems like the
> old Nikkor strikes fear into the dSLR community again! The old dog does it
> again.
>
> A sample image of the old 85 on the D3.
>
> <http://chsv.nikon-image.com/jpn/products/camera/slr/digital/d3/img/sa...>
>
> Rita

Some of the other images on that site taken with a F/2.8 zoom lens are
equally impressive. I can't help but wonder at this common remark:
"Boy, you must have a good camera" when looking at these pictures.

If by some Herculean effort Nikon have finally managed to even come
close to Canon DSLR body science, there will be a lot of people (me
included) breathing a sigh of relief and handing over more than the
cost of a new car to jump camps.

I've been waiting for nearly a year for the long awaited Pentax 654
digital replacement with no word of it's pending arrival. Pity because
without it, my Pentax lenses are of little value compared to what they
cost me. Probably buy Nikon and cash in on the lenses when Pentax do
actually announce the camera.

Doug

From: Paul Furman on
M-M wrote:

> In article <13eh7ot9l0a4pc2(a)news.supernews.com>,
> Rita � Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>>No wonder Canon shooters prefer this lens to the 85/1.2L II. Seems like the
>>old Nikkor strikes fear into the dSLR community again! The old dog does it
>>again.
>>
>>A sample image of the old 85 on the D3.
>>
>><http://chsv.nikon-image.com/jpn/products/camera/slr/digital/d3/img/sample/pic
>>_006.jpg>
>
>
> This lens and camera do indeed look exceptional, but this example is to
> my eye not the best representation. The out-of focus areas are much too
> distracting.
>
> I can see softening the area around the face, but just allowing the
> eyelashes to be in focus is a bit overkill.

Ha, yes, just the eyelashes on one eye and a little hair in the center
of the frame does not show much but I do have this lens on order as of a
few days ago. I'd be real curious to see some test shots from the new
14-24/2.8 though I doubt it's in my budget, I'd like to see how it
matches up to the 14/2.8 prime which is about the same price. If it
matches up well, I'd expect the prime to be more affordable used.

--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com
From: Annika1980 on
On Sep 13, 6:22 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
> Even Bret found he couldn't get this level of creamy bokeh
> right out of the camera with the 85/1.2/L II or in Photoshop.

I did? That's news to me.
The Canon 85 f/1.2L II's bokeh is the creamiest!



From: Wolfgang Weisselberg on
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
Rita � Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04(a)aol.com> wrote:
> No wonder Canon shooters prefer this lens to the 85/1.2L II.

All Canon shooters. You asked them all. Personally. Right?

Or is it because you are slowly sliding straight into
the merciful arms of Kwanon, using Canon bodies, buying Canon
lenses ... that you have to bolster your own wavering spirit?

> Seems like the old Nikkor strikes fear into the dSLR community again!

Oh, Yeah, see me tremble, see me roar!

> The old dog does it again.

Looke thou here, ya olde doggie, here's thou master:
http://weissel.smugmug.com/gallery/2113651/1/119724685#119724685-L-LB

-Wolfgang
From: Wolfgang Weisselberg on
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
Rita � Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04(a)aol.com> wrote:

> Even Bret found he couldn't get this level of creamy bokeh
> right out of the camera with the 85/1.2/L II or in Photoshop. The old Nikor
> is unbeatable for optical performance; just ask most Canon shooters that
> have the 85/1.4L II.

Asking "most" Canon shooters that have the 85 f/1.4L II ...
let me all hear a resounding >>"Rita"'s wrong<<!

-Wolfgang