Re: Nikon 15mm5.6 for panoramic photos?

[ralph fuerbringer <rof@xxxxxxx>]

twenty years ago  nikon was the bigest advertiser in the photo mags. in one
of the most famous equipment reviews of all time the writer admitted
pentax's 15mm lense was optically superior but  he  justified nikon's much
higher price. he wrote : its a lot bigger and heavier. zeiss released its
computations for this lens years ago and today there is better glass. nikon
first became famous  copying the zeiss 50mmf1.5 .
 a shift  of 6mm w/35 mm apo=grandagon on 612   makes no difference? i have
shots that prove otherwise.  when i figure out how to to it with my new imac
dv se and scanner i'll post a sheet that shows the inside of the javitts
center in ny, shifted, not shifted and with the vaunted hasselblad superwide
covering less than half of the 35apo-grandagon.  But  this coverage is
equivalent to an ll.5mm shift lense on 35
format. the 45 apo is a lot cheaper ,more  versatile for general use  with
its  10mm available shift.
-susrprise sursprise: its the horizontal angle of the 15mm on 35/- rof


----------
>From: Steven Morton <Steven.Morton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Nikon 15mm5.6 for panoramic photos?
>Date: Sat, Mar 4, 2000, 9:56 PM
>

> ralph fuerbringer wrote:
>
>> Pentax's zeiss-designed 15mmf3.5 w/aspherical element didn't just blow away
>> the nikkor .........
>
> I have owned the 15mm Pentax and the old Nikon 15mm 5.6 as well as the
> current Nikon 15mm all at the same time. The current 15mm Nikkor is
> superior to both of the others.
>
> Instead of using the 45mm apo-grandagon consider the 35 Apo Grandagon on
> 6x12. You don't need the shift, most of view is on the film already
>
> Cya
> Steve