Camera Talk

Got recently a 35/2.8 from Japan, and tested the lens in a roll of Ilford FP4+ that took more than a month to get finished. The roll was taken mostly in the area near Buceo harbor, a popular place for strolls and line fishing.





Art-deco front of an old medical furniture factory in the downtown area, converted to a market. I wanted to shoot inside but it did not work, not enough light by miles.



I also did a few in the fishing area with the 105/2.5, which is a fantastic lens.





The couple in the last one are drinking mate, something comparable to tea but much bitter. It is drunk from a gourd with a metal straw, the gourd is periodically refilled with hot water.

The 35/2.8 is a nice small general-purpose lens. It would go well with my FE body for travel duty, if need be.

I believe that with these two lenses the Nikon lens set is complete for what I do, at least on fixed focal distances (any comments on desirable zooms?).

This roll is the last one that I develop with DK-50; the old soup has become too dark and weak. This roll came out way too thin, fortunately with many frames that could be saved by scanning.

Thanks for looking1

Your test of that lens turned out well and you also made some fine photos. The first one really strikes me- the rocks in the foreground, the fishers at the end of the jetty, and the boats in the distance all combine in a peacefull moment. The one of the three fishers on the jetty and three boats farther on also catches the eye--two white sails and a dark, two light shirts and a dark.--maybe the perspective brings things closer together and makes it seem like something's going to happen soon? I wonder how it would look with a 50mm lens?

Bill Delehanty

Really nice scene work, Julio. I have a "day bag" I keep a 35, 50, and 105 in, and switch them back and forth between AI and Non-AI depending on what body I'm using. If I'm going to use a zoom, I usually go with the 35-105.

PF

Nice photos Julio! I agree what Bill said, also the scan job is great, wonderful contrasts.

Thanks for the comments, everybody! I am kicking myself for not using fresh developer, but fortunately these are subjects that I can reshoot.

PF, thanks for the 35-105 suggestion. Will look around. I remembered after the post that I actually have two zooms for Nikon mount, a 43-86 Nikkor (not too great) and a no-name 28-70 (which I do not remember ever using - shame on me!).

Bill, thanks for the kind and detailed comments. I did not take the 50mm this time. This area of the coast is nice for tests, it usually yields something with any focal distance provided the light is right.

Alex, scanning gives you a lot of margin to adjust tones, even in lousy negatives such as these. Hope you can try on your own soon!

There were two versions of the 43-86, Julio. The early one (which I suspect is what you have) has the lettering around the facing of the lens, while the later improved version has the lettering around the outer front ring. I've been looking to get one of the newer ones, but other possibilities have been cropping up, and I've taken advantage of current pricing for accessories (ie, I'm building up a Leica CL (film) outfit).

PF

PF, the CL is surely a tempting idea, probably the best way to get into the M RF mount. Good for you!

As you suspected, my version of the 43-86 is the earlier one, lettering around front glass. It is a useful, compact lens and I have some good results from it. Of course it is not in the same league as Nikkor primes, but sometimes it does not really matter. Maybe I just stick with it.

The other zoom is a plasticky 28-80 Makinon, which is stuck in the macro position.