Fuchs
Well-known
I love my 35/2 AI-S
35mm lens to go with F3
- Thread starter totifoto
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 58
- Views 11K
Flat Twin
Film Shooter
Hamradio,
I just read your post. I agree, the 35/1.4 Nikkor is also an excellent lens. I have a very early radio active non ai version and I love it. Its a bit heavy but thats to be expected.
Here's a shot at f1.4, film, Nikon F camera...
Not that interesting a shot granted, but its pretty sharp wide open...
Regards,
Simon
I just read your post. I agree, the 35/1.4 Nikkor is also an excellent lens. I have a very early radio active non ai version and I love it. Its a bit heavy but thats to be expected.
Here's a shot at f1.4, film, Nikon F camera...
Not that interesting a shot granted, but its pretty sharp wide open...Regards,
Simon
Fuchs
Well-known
redisburning
Well-known
@hamradio, is the second image the 40/2 or the 35/1.4
hamradio
Well-known
35/1.4 ai-s.
Ljós
Well-known
Interesting, and the always well informed Bjorn Rorslett would seem to agree: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_wide.html
talking about coating changes only, too.
One factor can of course be sample variation. Entirely possible that one of the versions got more "love and attention to detail" at the production stage than the other 🙂
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_wide.html
totifoto
Well-known
Hamradio,
I just read your post. I agree, the 35/1.4 Nikkor is also an excellent lens. I have a very early radio active non ai version and I love it. Its a bit heavy but thats to be expected.
Here's a shot at f1.4, film, Nikon F camera...
Regards,
Simon
This looks good, sharpness and distortion is good enough for me 🙂
Frank Petronio
Well-known
Ah I see you ripped the electronics out of your DF and replaced it with a sprocket mechanism... I imagine that must have been very expensive and only for experts.
jultou
Established
When I purchased my first Nikon SLR I was like you looking for a 35mm lens.
But after some research I end up with a 28mm and 50mm lenses. There are many great lenses at cheap prices for these focal lengths. And a lot easier to find...
An alternative as someone suggested is the 40/2 Voigtlander. A great lens but pricy compared to Legacy Nikkor Ai lenses.
But after some research I end up with a 28mm and 50mm lenses. There are many great lenses at cheap prices for these focal lengths. And a lot easier to find...
An alternative as someone suggested is the 40/2 Voigtlander. A great lens but pricy compared to Legacy Nikkor Ai lenses.
JChrome
Street Worker
+1 for the Nikon 35mm F1.4 AIS... It lives on my camera and suits me wonderfully.
Next on the list is either the 85 F1.4 or the 24 F2.0.
Next on the list is either the 85 F1.4 or the 24 F2.0.
jwicaksana
Jakarta, Indonesia
Nikon F3 / 35 AF-D
Vics
Veteran
Hmmm, I mostly use Leica lenses, which all seem a bit flare prone, so I don't shoot up to windward much. I'll try my 2.0 and see how it does.
Noserider
Christiaan Phleger
I'd recommend both the 24f/2 and the 85mm f/1.4 as complements to the 35mm f/1.4.
As for the O and Ais Optics, I have been inside both in comparison and it looks as if they are identical and the same from what I can recall. The O.C with the improved coatings is really the one of all the f/2's. I have a couple of f/2 Ai-s's and they are solid capable lenses. The O's are made to the older F standard with very rugged components. The Ais can take a lot of wear but starts to get pretty sloppy and the optical unit can jostle a bit.
The older N 35mm f/1.4 are really the most interesting lens.
That and the K and early AI over serial number 77xxxx 6 element 35mm f/2.8.
As for the O and Ais Optics, I have been inside both in comparison and it looks as if they are identical and the same from what I can recall. The O.C with the improved coatings is really the one of all the f/2's. I have a couple of f/2 Ai-s's and they are solid capable lenses. The O's are made to the older F standard with very rugged components. The Ais can take a lot of wear but starts to get pretty sloppy and the optical unit can jostle a bit.
The older N 35mm f/1.4 are really the most interesting lens.
That and the K and early AI over serial number 77xxxx 6 element 35mm f/2.8.
jschrader
Well-known
So when read all the comments here I feel I have to check another 2.0/35 because the problem might be only in my lens.
That would be good, because I like the 35mm as a standard.
Highway 61
Revisited
This is all true.
The Ai-S lenses have a polycarbonate rear inner barrel with two metal sliders in notches which allow the optical unit to move forth and back when you focus. As a result the optical unit often wobble even when the lenses are new or have seen very little use. Most of their Ai counterparts are better built, with a 100% metal inner construction.
A few Ai-S lenses have different (and noticeably better) optical formulas than their Ai predecessors (28/2.8, 105/2.5) but this is not the case for the 35/2. For this lens, an Ai or an O-C will feel more robust with less wobble than the Ai-S version.
gavinlg
Veteran
I have owned and used the 35mm f2 ai-s and the zeiss ze/zf 35mm f2 distagon. I don't think the distagon is that much better than the Nikkor - in fact I prefer the nikkors more subtle contrast and color. The distagon was one of the most contrasty lenses I have ever used - too contrasty for my liking. Also huge and super heavy.
I would either go the voigtlander 40mm f2 or the nikkor 1.4 personally. Maybe even both.
I would either go the voigtlander 40mm f2 or the nikkor 1.4 personally. Maybe even both.
sparrow6224
Well-known
If you have money to spare and love the wide open bokeh blah blah it might be worth going for the 35/1.4 but I'd say in size, weight, and image quality, the AI-s 35mm f/2 is the perfect fit for the F3. If you want that other stuff too I'd advise the AI-s 50mm f/1.2 over the 35/1.4.
In case you haven't checked out the worthy Bjorn Rorslett's Nikon lens site, here he is on the 35/1.4:
<<Nikon has offered this superspeed lens for two decades now, so must believe the design is good. It is a highly temperamental lens and you have to learn the manner in which it "draws" to be able to unleash its full imaging potential.
This is an excellent lens for low-light and general photography, although the results are not stunning when it is used wide open. Partly this stems from the tendency to internal flare that needs stopping down to f/2-f/2.8 in order to disappear. Its imaging capacity quickly increases when the aperture is set to f/2.8 and peak performance is reached between f/4 and f/5.6. In this quite narrow range it produces tremendously sharp images. To illustrate its imaging potential: In the peak range it is possible to discern objects that actually measure <1 mm within a recorded area of 5 by 8 m. You'll need at least 40X magnification to observe these tiny details on the film, but they certainly are there . This shows the unbelievable level of detail that can be resolved on film by this lens! At f/8, however, performance starts to decline and by f/16 it's just another ordinary lens. Flare isn't usually a problem with it and ghosting is well controlled, too.>>
And on the 35/2 he praises as sharp at all apertures but his versions from the late 60s had ghosting problems. These reportedly were addressed in coating/design tweaks in the later (AI, AI-S) lenses.
In case you haven't checked out the worthy Bjorn Rorslett's Nikon lens site, here he is on the 35/1.4:
<<Nikon has offered this superspeed lens for two decades now, so must believe the design is good. It is a highly temperamental lens and you have to learn the manner in which it "draws" to be able to unleash its full imaging potential.
This is an excellent lens for low-light and general photography, although the results are not stunning when it is used wide open. Partly this stems from the tendency to internal flare that needs stopping down to f/2-f/2.8 in order to disappear. Its imaging capacity quickly increases when the aperture is set to f/2.8 and peak performance is reached between f/4 and f/5.6. In this quite narrow range it produces tremendously sharp images. To illustrate its imaging potential: In the peak range it is possible to discern objects that actually measure <1 mm within a recorded area of 5 by 8 m. You'll need at least 40X magnification to observe these tiny details on the film, but they certainly are there . This shows the unbelievable level of detail that can be resolved on film by this lens! At f/8, however, performance starts to decline and by f/16 it's just another ordinary lens. Flare isn't usually a problem with it and ghosting is well controlled, too.>>
And on the 35/2 he praises as sharp at all apertures but his versions from the late 60s had ghosting problems. These reportedly were addressed in coating/design tweaks in the later (AI, AI-S) lenses.
semi-ambivalent
Little to say
I can vouch for this level of performance (although not this exactly) from my own tests a number of years back using Tech Pan and 30x +. The AiS's wide open performance has apparently been surpassed by the newest AF models but the manual focus is still offered new by Nikon as a special order. That says something. (Maybe just enormous overstocks 🙂 )
L Collins
Well-known
YES. The 37XXX Tokina T4 mount is an absolute gem, better than the 2.8 AI Nikkor, and you can pick them up for $20 on ebay.
Similar threads
