"Back In The Day"....We Built Systems

In my childhood and teenage years, while I waited with anticipation, each month's photography magazines (as much for the ads of gear that I could only dream about), I planned and plotted as to which lenses I would own.....when I grew up. Funny thing is; I still do that, but instead of dreaming, it's more methodical planning. In the intervening 30-35 years, life and inflation happened. According to the various online money calculators, that painfully saved $100 of cash is the equivalent of almost $650 these days. So those, $150-200 Pentaxes, Mirandas, Canons, and Minoltas of 1970 would cost roughly $1000-1300 today. The next step up, "baby Nikons", high-end Canons, or relatively inexpensive German cameras would be in the $1500-2000, range with the "F", Leicas and such running into the $3000 area. 

No wonder people shelled out the money to buy expensive aluminum cases such as Zero Halliburtons to protect their prized gear. Although the prices in actual dollars don't seem to have changed all that much in that time, our perceptions of them have. In those days, when an engineer or accountant shelled out that much to buy a camera, he expected it to last a life-time and perhaps pass it on to his son. Yes; I said "he" and "son" since photography in those days was almost universally the province of men. In today's Walmart'd society, we're thrilled to have something last more than 3 years physically and usually, by that time, it will have been discarded, sitting forlornly in a closet or garage sale. Therefore, people don't go to great lengths to create a "system" and protect it.They might shoot a Nikon DSLR this year, but switch to Canon the next, because they have a new model with some neat video features that they might use, then in a couple of years have moved on to Sony or Samsung because those new mirrorless APS-C cameras are so cool and compact!

I'm a dinosaur, if not in equipment, in perspective and philosophy. I thought long and hard when I decided to switch from Pentax film cameras a few years back. I weighed the pluses and minuses of Canon and Nikon while reading a ridiculous number of commentaries and reviews both on the web and in magazines. Ultimately, I decided to go with Nikon because they had the lens I wanted (18-200mm VR) and their company philosophies fit mine and my idiosyncrasies. 

This is one of them. Nikon never changed their SLR mounts. To this day, they still use the "F" mount. Which means, barring any of the nebulous coupling lugs and what-not, any F-mount lens will fit any F-mount body. Now, you have to watch for things like; intrusive rear elements that might break a mirror that hasn't been locked up, or pre-Ai/non-converted lenses that might break the coupling lugs on your newer camera. But the mount itself.....that'll fit. I LOVE that! Make of it what you will. I don't really care. Am I going to run out and buy a drawer full of old glass? I probably would if I was a retired millionaire, but no, it's not in my plan. 

However, there are a few pieces that fit my "system", and the fact that they are old, or manual focus, whatever....is not relevant to me or doesn't effect my intended use of them. We'll start with some I already have. The first is this an older, non-Ai (auto-indexing), 50mm f/1.4. It has been converted to Ai so functions fine on modern Nikon bodies. It also has been "chipped" meaning that it has the CPU and contacts which send and receive information from the digital Nikons. The 50mm focal length roughly translates to about 75mm on my DX (APS-C), D300 body making it a nice portraiture lens. Not only is manual focusing a non-issue on this VERY bright (1.4!) lens, but it take all the other automated adjustments from the camera just due to the CPU. Oh yeah; it was free. My brother sent it to me as the result of one of his many projects......Bonus. If you don't have an unusual and generous brother, this lens will run $100-150. Yeah, that's about $15 of 1970 money!

You might ask yourself, why I would have/want another lens in the same focal length range? Yes, this is a 55mm, Micro-Nikkor f/2.8 making it a comparatively slow 82mm lens. Well; it too was free. Yeah, you guessed it.....another of my brother's projects. This one was half-finished in-so-much as he bought it at a great price because it can hardly be focused due to the weirdness of a lubricant that seizes up after a 20-25 years of use. Imagine that! Anyway, I dropped it off at a local repair place and they are replacing the lube at a cost of about $65. Probably worth that, given that it's a true macro lens versus a lens that focuses closer than some others and thus has "macro" put in the name. No, it's not chipped, but since it's Ai already and will meter couple with my D300 as long as I put it into the camera's bank of manual lenses, I'm good. Given that's it's job is to shoot things such as flowers, and bugs, I'm not going to be overly concerned that it has no electronic coupling with my D300. I know, this is a bonus that just showed up in the mail, otherwise, I wouldn't have pursued it. But if I was a macro photographer, the common price of around $100 makes it worth looking into, particularly if you don't have to shell out to have it re-lubed.

Then we have this; a 500mm f/8.0 catadioptric mirror lens. Of course, mine isn't this Nikkor that's depicted, but the concept is the same, and if I get a few things out of the way and have the time, $$$ and inclination, I'd like to swap my Tokina for the Nikkor since it's much sharper and has significantly more contrast. Of course, those differences might have something to do with the $1000 or so difference in original prices! All in all, I'm going to say that I really like the Tokina. It's well made since it was purpose built with a fixed mount, vs. the many cheap-o, T-mount mirrors out there. It's main purpose is to sit here and look good while awaiting it's occasional excursion out to shoot wildlife or zoo trip. Apart from that; I'll have to admit that I only have it because it's cool and it costs about $35 after the seller refunded me half the price due to fungus on the glass.

If I was really a serious user, I'd have bought the Tamron SP/SPII, the Perkin-Elmer made Vivitar Series 1 600mm (or 800mm), or the aforementioned Nikkor. These 3 have advantages ranging from collectability and/or top-notch performance.....for a mirror lens that is. You can see from the upper image how compact the 600mm Vivitar Series 1 is sitting next to the a 55mm f/3.5 Nikkor. If you want to see the size of the Tokina on the D300, please refer to my "Mirror, Mirror" post: 

http://frugalpropellerhead.blogspot.com/2013/04/mirro-mirro.html

It really balances very nicely on that camera, especially when it has the battery grip attached. 

So, on to the lenses that I don't have and are planning/plotting to acquire. The latest to grab my interest is this; the 300mm, f/4.5 Nikkor. There are a number of different versions of this lens, however, as typical for me, I've focused (pun partially intended) on one, the 2nd version. The early "P" (Penta) version referring to it's 5 elements, aren't very sharp, besides being non-Ai which would require conversion, so it's eliminated. The 3rd version which is "IF" for internal focusing not only had that feature, but is considered to be among the smallest of the focal-length and speed, thus are more sought after and consequently making them more expensive. Which leaves the middle-child 2nd version, one of which I watched sell for $66 yesterday on eBay!

What's my purpose for this lens other than that it's a bargain and very sharp? I have a gap between 200mm (300mm, eq.) and the 500mm (750mm, eq.). That's a pretty big hole, besides which the 500mm is a mirror and thus a bit of a specialty lens, plus at f/8 is quite slow. So, a 300mm with a 35mm eq. of 450mm that's pretty bright at a constant f/4.5. Then you consider that it's an actual "normal" lens with controllable f-stops and it's relatively compact size that doesn't over-power the D300 (as you can see): these things are a bargain at the sub-$100 that they can be found at. But it's a manual focus lens, you say! OK. First of all, I'm not a professional shooting sports for my livelihood or I'd be looking for a 300mm, f2.8 AF lens....which costs a lot more money. And secondly, I'm an old photographer, meaning that I've spent most of my life focusing lenses, not some 20-something who hasn't focused much of anything ever in their life. Plus, really; less than $100 for classic Nikon glass!?! Do I need to go further?

Then there's this. A 28mm. The image above is an Ais, Nikkor version, that tends to range anywhere from $85-90 to over $150. They are really sharp lenses, there were lots of them made so they aren't terribly expensive. That 28mm converts to something like 42mm on the DX cameras I use, so just a little wider than what would be considered normal. Why would anyone with a typical kit lens like the 18-55mm or a super-zoom like my 18-200mm want something like this? Well; look at it. Even this larger Ais is quite compact, and that the (unremarkable for it's day) f-stop of 2.8 is fast compared to the 3.5 to 4.5 that the kit zoom is, at that focal length. Do I really want to spend the $100 or so for this lens? I don't really see myself using it on the D300. That 42mm focal length is an informal, "walk-around" lens. Do I really want to walk around (meaning with no specific purpose in mind) with a D300?

Probably not. What would I use as a walk-around camera then, that I could attach a good walk-around focal length lens? Well, I've spent the last week or so rationalizing my switch from my current Nikon D50/Panasonic GF-1 combo to the D40. So there you have it. This then takes me to the next line of reasoning. On a DX camera, there's going to be precious little difference between the Nikkor Ais lens, versus the significantly smaller, and cheaper Nikon Series E lens. These sell in the range of between $50 and $75. Adding a $30 Dandelion CPU chip to it gives you something that electronically couples to a D40 making it an almost perfect walk-around combo.

Even professional who make a living using their cameras don't have anywhere near this gear. Maybe some well-heeled collector who buys up all the stuff in "pristine" condition, then puts it away in a case does. But that's not what real people do. What we do, if it's something that we actually use and have real jobs with real families with real expense, is to use logic applied to costs, projected use and availability to create a system that we can use.

A More Fantastic Plastic-Fantastic

If it hasn't become apparent to you by now, I'll be more specific. I'm in the process of trading out my backup/secondary camera from a D50 to a D40. You might ask yourself, why even bother to trade what is essentially the same sensor into a different (albeit smaller/lighter) body? After all, it's not a major difference in size, NO difference in resolution, little if any difference in capability. 

You don't need to look very closely at these images to see the difference in mass. Although the dimensional differences are not terribly significant, the difference, "in the hand" is telling, but difficult to describe. I started thinking this after holding and playing around with my brother's D40x. One of the original reasons for the decision to go with the D50 was that my primary lens is the 18-200 VR Nikkor that is rather large and didn't balance very well on the D40. I found though that I virtually never use it on the D50, it's really my primary lens and lives pretty much exclusively on the D300. 

Actually it's this lens that's the deciding factor. It's my 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Nikkor. How this lens doesn't get more love is beyond me. It's sharp, doesn't have anywhere near the distortion of the 18-200. It's compact, and pretty darned fast. Maybe it's that there's no VR, or that weird compressed zoom area between about 30-45mm (eq), but it's the DX/APS-C equivalent of roughly a 28-105mm walk-around lens..... and it doesn't overpower the compact D40. 

I'm not saying that it wouldn't look great with a "pancake"; just look! It makes that Pentax K10 look positively HUGE. But I doubt that I could A) afford that 45mm Nikkor-P, and B) it's probably not how I'd be using it most of the time. It's going to take the place of both the D50 and the Panasonic GF-1. So it's typically going to have one of two or three lenses mounted on it depending on it's role at the time. When I'm out shooting portraiture, it'll most likely have my "chipped" 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor mounted and become the "low-light/available-light" camera secondary camera that already has the lens mounted, which eliminates the need to change lenses in the field. In a weird way, one of the strengths of this camera is the 6Mp sensor, meaning very-few/very-large sensors on the same physical size give it excellent light gathering abilities. 

And as you can see; making it, virtually, the perfect companion to the full-boat loaded D300. Kinda like the contract killer's .22 pistol compared to a machine gun!

And of course, it's other most likely use would be the walk-around camera when the D300 isn't necessary or welcome. This body is small enough to take the place of the mirrorless GF-1, while at the same time big enough for me to feel comfortable using. In this configuration, it would probably mount the 18-70mm or something even smaller, such a chip-converted 28mm which would give it a very usable 42mm eq. focal length. 

 

When combined with the Quantaray XLF-50 (SunPak RD2000) that I picked up recently, gives a very compact little, "do everything" kit. One of the things that swayed me toward the little Quantaray was the rotating shoe that can hide out of the way when not in use. That along with the $40 price-tag and Nikon iTTL compatibility might have something to do with it as well!

Don't get me wrong. The original "plastic-fantastic" was a great idea (and a really nice camera). I really loved having the GF-1 as well and it did a great job for it's suited purpose. So, how I'm going to choose to see this change as an upgrade. On top of which, I eliminate one entire system and having to keep two different manufacturer's ways of doing things. Plastic-Fantastic/Travel Camera 2.0

Fall Is In The Air!

Without a doubt, this is my favorite time of year. From right about now to January, it's almost perfect here in North Texas. It's no longer HOT, and let me tell ya....it gets hot down here! Kinda' like Alaska gets COLD. The days are generally in the 70's and the nights in the '40s. It's the time of year that neither the air conditioner OR the heater runs. You can wear pretty much whatever you want. Anything ranging from shorts to sweats, and be comfortable. 

Psychologically, the holidays are on the horizon, but you don't yet have the hub-bub of it actually being here with the crush of last minute shopping and lots of people in the house. The kids are excited, about the season, but not completely focused on what they are going to get yet. I'll be 2/3rds of the way through the school year next week and the classes are rolling along. 

Football season is in the last few weeks (at least for college) before the bowl season begins and the excitement is building. As a bonus, our high school season came to a close Thursday night in a loss that knocked us out of the playoffs. Let me tell ya....I'm just not a fan of the format where the top 4 teams get into the state playoffs. The "old school" in me just won't accept those bottom teams being there, and that's us this year. 99.9% of the time, you get steamrolled and finish the season in a really ugly way. So, now, my Friday nights are back! If you don't think that's a big deal, I'm here to tell you that it is; in my life at least! What it means is that Saturday is completely yours. Yeah, Saturdays! What our family routinely does is that we get our grocery shopping done that night which gets rid of the cloud hanging over our heads for the rest of the weekend. That's huge, when you consider that I often spend the majority of Sunday afternoons grade essays for my AP World History classes.

Speaking of football and history! Look what I came across today! In my classes, the students will often ask me things about sports and sports as related to history since around town, I'm known as "coach" and I've always taught history. Anyway, the discussion will quite often turn to mascots and teams/schools changing mascots for reasons of "political correctness" (which I've always hated). What I've routinely told the kids has been that I might very well feel differently about the issue if some school in San Francisco or LA (for instance) was called the "Chinks". Lo and Behold, look at that! A flag from the Pekin Community High School (Illinois of all places) who's mascot was the "CHINKS" from 1930's to 1980 at which time it was changed to the Dragons! The mascots would dress like Chinese people.....traditional costume of course. Is that cool or what! 

Obviously, this Frugal Propellerhead post isn't all about fall and football. It's about the fact that the time available and temperature makes it the perfect combination for me to get stuff done. In some ways, it's reminds me of living in New Orleans with it's inverted seasons where people spent May to November running from A/C to A/C and the winter, doing outside activities or sitting at sidewalk cafes.

The first order of business is this. I need to put into action, my plan to turn the garage space into a functional shop. This will in all probability BE this years project. 

The first order of business will be this, or something like it. A lumber cart is needed so that I can not only store my wood away neatly, but actually be able to find what I have.

....Which will then leads to this.....an extended base cabinet for my new table saw. My "shop" such as it is, will be built around this piece which will incorporate, the table saw, the router table and an extended surface to one side that will function as my assembly area. The cabinet itself will then house the majority of my growing power tool collection...... Which will then clear space all around the shop area for things that I don't have yet like a drill press and a band saw.

Here it is: the other project. $10 at a garage sale. I stopped because I spotted a bike that was the correct size for my daughter to start training-wheel-less riding on. Then I spotted this (pun intended). It was the typical, looks like was never used, but been sitting around for so long that there were missing parts telescope. I bought it anyway. It's a lot better than my son's old "garage sale" telescope, so we'll figure it out. 

What I'd really like to do with it, is this. Yes, I know that this Meade is a lot more expensive telescope, but you gotta start somewhere. If we can get to where we are seeing the moon and take a few digital pictures from that, the kids'll be ecstatic! So will I. Something to do in the winter time when it's cold and now that my father-in-law has moved out to this area and more importantly, away from the city....... That's the perfect opportunity for us to take it out there and do a little star gazing. New hobby to learn. Cool!

Now, if I can get myself to do more of this, and less of that, then it'll have been a successful fall/winter season this year.

Time to Move On: I Was Wrong

 

Not too long ago, I scored one of these: a Panasonic GF-1, although mine has the 14-42mm kit zoom lens vs. this 20mm f/2.0 pancake. I later picked up the VF-1 electronic viewfinder, after learning the hard way that outside shooting in full-sun was pretty difficult just using the LCD. I love this picture of it with the Minolta CLE which I would argue is it's spiritual forerunner. Japanese company known for cutting edge electronics, teaming up with revered German lens (and camera) maker to create a hybrid camera which was more then either could accomplish alone......2 1/2 decades apart.

Turns out that I'm not terribly comfortable using it. Love it's compactness, however, for me to be even somewhat comfortable, I have to have the VF-1 attached. This really blunts it's most compelling attribute in my world.....the size and ease of carry. I find that I'm constantly snagging that finder on things. Maybe I'd feel differently if I already owned the 20mm pancake lens and would have another reason to try and justify keeping it. But that's another $300-350, when combined with the $175 that I already have in it; it's just way more than I want to have invested in a "sometimes" camera. And now that, I've got the CoolPix 8400 that my brother sent me, I just don't find myself turning to this camera very often if at all. Yes, I know that those are very different cameras, but for me, they fill a similar role. 

Then there's this guy. It's smaller and lighter than my D300, and I've found, that for what I use this camera for; the 6Mp sensor is just fine. However, it's just not enough smaller and lighter than the D300 to make it compelling enough to keep. Plus, I've found that, other than the 28-80mm that I keep on it, I don't have, and aren't contemplating buying any more of the old "screw-drive" auto-focus lenses that allowed the D50 to have an advantage over the D40. It also turns out that the camera's commonallity of battery with the D300 is also something I never use either. The fact is: I was wrong. Some of you are now stunned, right? But hey, you live and learn. Well; now what? I'm going to say that I've got about $175 tied up in the GF-1 and conservatively, another $125 tied up in the D50. I'm almost 100% certain that I can get at least the $400 selling these two camera.

This is kind of like waving a red flag in front of the proverbial bull! Ouch! What can a Frugal Propellerhead do with a potential $400!?!

This is a little like asking Michael Jordan, what he'd like to do with a basketball in his hands! The possibilities are endless. He famously once told an interviewer that when he has the ball, "you are at my mercy". That's what I think of eBay or Craiglist when I have a mission and money to accomplish it!

So, we'll start at the beginning. This is the starting point; my D300, with MB-D10 battery pack, and Nikkor AF-S 18-200 VR lens attached. What I'm looking for is a counterpoint of this beast. Something significantly smaller and lighter. It doesn't need to be compact enough to be "pocket able", but I'm going to want it to take the same lenses and flashes that I already use. So in other words.....a Nikon. 

Now, wait-a-minute! That's not a Nikon! No it's not. In a perfect world, that would be a Nikon instead of the Olympus E-420 with the Zuiko 25mm f/2.8 pancake attached (50mm eq.). But no, there's never been anything in the Nikon inventory of this size.

What....The Enemy!?! I wish! Let me just say that I love the form-factor of the new Canon EOS Rebel SL1 (100D in other countries). And I'm damn lucky that Nikon didn't do this! 'Cus it's brand new and the price is in excess of $500 dollars without a lens! The fact is; I don't want to spend anywhere near this kind of money for a secondary camera/backup. I am after all, frugal. However, if you are in the market for an entry-level DSLR, I'd highly recommend looking at this thing at the big-box stores and reading some reviews. It's very well thought out, the size is great (especially for those with little hands), and the price it pretty darned good....for those who are into buying new, that is. Why not the E-420, which by the way, can be had for $200-250 used on a regular basis? Dead mount, that's why! When the 4/3rds consortium moved over to the Micro version of the mount, it orphaned the old mount, plus all the lenses and cameras along with it. Does this mean that they are useless? Absolutely not! Just understand that they aren't making anything new for them so they aren't a very good investment. However, if you are already into this system, I'd jump all over the good deals that I see cropping up everywhere for these cameras and lens. If instance, for my friend Rich who already has Olympus 4/3rd gear, a cheap E-410/420 would be a great buy. I've seen 4/3rds lenses in pawn shops for less than $50 and E4/5/6x0 camera on Craigslist for less than $150. This is excellent equipment and a great deal right now. Just not for me since I'm pretty much married to with Nikon. 

Which leaves me with this guy. The D40. Yup, I had considered it and rejected it back when I was looking for a backup/secondary camera. I originally went with the D50 because it was not only smaller and lighter than my D300, but could use the same battery (which has never come into play). It also was a more similar form-factor with a secondary LCD info panel next to the penta-prism just like the D300 as well as other controls in similar locations. And I believe that's why Nikon went with the D40 design to replace the D50. When you keep everything very similar, by default you also limit the new design in many ways as well. Duh! Therefore, really, other than weight, the D50 didn't give me nearly as many advantages over the D300 as I would have liked so as to fully be an alternative! The very reasons that led me to choose the D50 over the D40 are the reasons that it failed in it's mission. But why not the higher pixeled D40x and D60 built on this chassis? Ahh; that's fodder for another post.

Yup, I feel pretty dumb about it, but I don't feel too bad. I can fix this. I should be able to sell the out-going cameras for around $400 and able to snag a functioning D40 for between $100 and $150. So, in the end, I'll probably do better than break even....plus I'll have had the fun of the hunt!




 

The "Throw-back"

God knows, that as techno-oriented as I am, I love throw-backs. Although, in the modern era, I've not been much of a professional football fan; I was always a fan of this guy....Brian Urlacher of the Chicago Bears. A modern day Dick Butkus! Maybe its a function of me getting old, or maybe its just another aspect of my weirdness, but I'm willing to embrace it.

The trend has always been strong in the photographic industry. It could be due to the engineers that still run many of these firms, or possibly that it's all a marketing ploy to get old guys like me (the more well-heeled versions) to buy these nostalgic creations. It's always been around, but it really got going a few years ago with the introduction of the Olympus Pen Micro 4/3rds camera. Clearly it's design cues were taken from the original Pen F of the '60s, but whatever the reason, it was an unequivocal success.

Of course, there were those companies who never did change their product much, even with changing over from film to digital as witnesses by the Leica M9. However, as the movement gained steam in the last few years, it's gotten too much for even the mainstream companies to ignore. 

Surprisingly, the company that got this segment of the market really heated up wasn't any of the expected players. It was Fuji with the various models of the modern version of the interchangeable lens "rangefinder" idiom. 

And now we have this.....the Nikon Df (f for fusion). If you are familiar with traditional Nikons, it'll be self-evident a fusion of what! A full-sized "FX" sensor from the flagship D4, focusing subsystems from the D610, and the concepts and designs of both the Nikon F3 and FM film cameras.

It's $3000 worth of ridiculously good and beautiful. I HATE it! More accurately, I hate that I can't run right out there and buy the thing! The only thing that I can do to soothe myself is to sit here with my D300 and hold it like some sort of talisman! 

It's almost a perfect size. Compared to the D800 which is similar in size to the D700 which it replaced and was based on the D300 chassis, I can clearly see that it's significantly more compact. Almost an ideal "carry-around" size with full-on control knobs for it's major functions which are plainly visible. At the same time, this compact chassis is of the completely magnesium type common to professional cameras. 

At the same time, when the camera is viewed from the back, it's clear that it's every bit the modern day digital SLR and all that they are capable. Yeah; I'm pretty much smitten.

 

More Pancakes Please

I hate addictions, I really do! So, repeat after me....."My name is XXXX, and I'm an addict....." For one thing, I've got NAS, no not network attached storage, although, come to think of it, I've got that too. NO! I'm referring to that weird little ailment known as "Nikon Acquisition Syndrome".....Yeah, that.....but really a sub-category of it having to do with "pancake" lenses. That's right, pancake lenses! The image is oh-so appropriate with the white gloves holding it like it's some sort of dangerous substance under clinical study!

 

Here, it's depicted in it's original role attached to a 60's Nikon F, with the Photomic TN head on it. Oh, I'd love to have one of those too, but that's another story. Funny looking little thing isn't it? It's official name is the 45mm f/2.8 GN Nikkor, with the GN standing for Guide Number which was used as a coupling mechanism allowing for automatic diaphragm control in flash photography when used with compatible Nikon Speedlight units. It was small and light at 3/4" (18mm) and 5.3oz. Although I haven't been able to find out exactly, this lens is thought to be the least expensive Nikkor available in it's day. As well it should be since it's really a very simple Tessar formula of 4 elements in 3 groups.

During the later part of the 70's and early 80's, you could pick up this lens for a song, but all of a sudden, the pancake is back with a vengence! Today, all manner of small/little lenses are dubbed or claim to be the second coming of these interesting little lenses. Consequently, the price of the originals have skyrocketed despite the fact that they aren't really very useable on modern cameras. In fact, it's not really a very good idea to try and mount them (without modification) least you damage your camera! Things really got heated up when Nikon released an updated version (although optically the same) in 2001, complete with electronic contacts made to complement the FM3A. When these ended production at 25,000 (silver) and 12,000 (black), the collectors' market went crazy, driving the prices of these very useable lenses into the ridiculous (and seldom use) range. They've subsequently come down, but they aren't in the Frugal Propellerhead's radar yet. That doesn't mean, I don't want one. Look at it on the D200. That virtually turns this thing into a pocket camera.....for very big pockets, that is.

But, price and availability isn't really the issue. As you guys know, I shoot DX sensor'd Nikons. A 45mm lens pretty much works out to be a 68mm or so eq. in 35mm terms. That's not exactly ideal for a "walk-around" camera. What I need is something that's just on the wide-side of normal. Something in the 35-40mm range. I know some folks like to go wider for that, but I like things a little tighter. And amazingly, they're on the market today! Here is the Voigtlander SL 28mm, f/2.8 which would translate to something like a 42mm on my APS-C cameras. It's manual focus, but that's OK. Remember I'm an old guy, so I focused myself for decades before I bought my first autofocus DSLR in 2009. I like this lens. It's made by Cosina, which reputedly made the "P" or latter 45mm Nikkor for Nikon back in 2001, and is now the Japanese Zeiss contractor, so yeah, they've got the "chops". They've also bought the rights to use the venerable Voigtlander name to market their own line of high-end manual focus optics. But you know what? I don't have $450-500 burning a hole in my pocket right now! So, back to the drawing boards.

And on that drawing board is this. I know, I know. The original Nikkor 45mm was only 3/4" deep, about 18mm, and the newer "P" lens was 17mm....true pancakes. This......is a whopping 24mm! But such is life. I'm sure the French have a pithier saying, but I'm a barely adequate speller in English, much less in French! So, I'm on the prowl again; this time, for a Nikon 28mm f/2.8 "E" Series lens. I've set my limit at around $50, so after I buy a Dandelion chip for it, for around $30, my plan is to be all-in at not much more than $75. 

The pay-off? Here's an image of a D40 with an early version of the "E" lens mounted. Early versions were all back with the yucky looking "big-block" focusing grip. It's my intention to find the later version with the silver ring that looks like a proper Nikon lens. Yeah, it's something like 7mm longer than a "real" pancakes, and about 4 or 5mm longer than the Voigtlander, but the thing is still very compact and light. 

I know that a true pancakes like this Voigtlander 40mm, f/2.0 looks much cooler, but for a $400 dollar differential, I'm going to live with it!