Classic Nikkor lenses for my F, any advice?

Melancholy said:
I´ve been looking in this topic and other threads at the forum, so many great lenses, but what should I get and why?
Click to expand...
The problem that I see is that every RFFer will advise you to get the Nikkors he owns and likes, so at the end of the day you will be advised to get about all the Nikkors produced ever.

With your Nikkors 50/2 and 105/2.5 you've got among the best normal and short telephoto lenses ever made for an SLR system.

Depending on what you want to add to your kit you may want to get a 35/2, a 28/2.8, or a 180/2.8 ED.

Anyway - it may be shorter for the experts to tell you which lemons Nikon have made. Since they weren't that numerous, this will be an easier way to go. ;)
 
There have been some advises for the Nikkor 50/3.5 micro. Just remember that there are at least 2 types. The old Nikkor-P compensation type and the newer 50/3.5 with a optimized design for "non-macro" work. It you want the lens for macro work then get the old compensation type or if it is to be used as an general purpose lens then get the newer version. The old 50/3.5 compensating type is probably one the best macro lenses ever made.

Also look for one the newer Nikkor Q 200/4 (the one which stops down to 32). It is a very cheap lens......and very good.....much better than you would expect. Even at 4 it is sharp as has a very nice bokeh. It is a much under estimated lens. I have tried my on digital......and it is superb.
 
I've got heaps of Nikkors in every version ask if you want a well rounded opinion on a specific lens.
I would suggest the early version of the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 N or N.C with the thorium yellowed elements. A stellar optic in its day and still a strong performer now with lots of character.
The suggestions of the 28mm f/3.5 is a good one, handy small light and sharp.
The 28mm f/2 N is another great on almost on par with the 35/1.4, and can be found for quite cheap in the F Non-Ai mount; these are very tough built lenses so worn copies can be a very good deal.
For 24's I prefer the earlier Non-Ai N.C or K f/2.8's, the optical formula was changed in the earliest Ai and I prefer the look of the early one on film, the N.C has the modern multi coating but the regular N has a lesser level of multi coating, still a fine lens but the 24 needs the more modern coatings to help with flare on backlighting.
 
My picks:

24/2.8, even if it's a little late for this project
35/2 - even the early ones are great, I;ve had my 1966 production one since about 1976
105/2.5 - any version
180/2.8

For some fun, pick up the Nikkor that everyone loved to hate but secretly owned - a 43~86!
 
My pre-AI F and F2 kit is:

2.1cm f/4 mirror lock-up lens (gorgeous rendering and zero distortion)
3.5cm f/2.8
5cm f/2
10.5cm f/2.5

Yes, all of them are marked in centimeters - the oldest F lenses were marked this way. These all have the 9-bladed apertures (except the 2.1cm is 7) and are really nice. Makes a great travel kit. All take 52mm filters.

I prefer the F2 for its easy mirror lock-up, with no wasted frames like the F.
 
Go for the non-AI ones with the early knurled metal focusing ring. Almost all of these are labeled "Nippon Kogaku" rather than Nikon. The 35mm f/2 is a classic, as is the 55mm f/3.5 macro. The 105mm f/2.5 would round out a basic kit. I agree with TA on the 200mm f/4. The early ones are chrome and have a narrow focusing ring. None of these is very expensive!
 
I have the 21f4 Nikkor too - and it is very good. However I find changing it a bit of a hassle and I usually carry two bodies anyway - so I have dedicated a body (with a crappy mirror) for it. Alos, with the mirror up - it is almost as quiet as a rangefinder Nikon!
 
Great Minds Think Alike

Great Minds Think Alike

When I made a living as a photojournalist (Nikon F era), the lenses to own were 24f2.8, 55f3.5Micro Nikkor, 85f1.8, 105f2.5 and 180f2.8. They have all already been mentioned so all I can say is great minds think alike.
 
ktmrider said:
When I made a living as a photojournalist (Nikon F era), the lenses to own were 24f2.8, 55f3.5Micro Nikkor, 85f1.8, 105f2.5 and 180f2.8. They have all already been mentioned so all I can say is great minds think alike.
Click to expand...

Well, I was trying to only mention three, but I have all of these and use most frequently, except the 24. I like the 20mm if I'm going that wide, even though it is a bit slower. The 180mm non-AI is relatively inexpensive because of the non-AI, but is the same optically as the later 180's. Of all of them, the one I've found hardest to find in pristine condition is the early 85 f1.8. Maybe fewer of them were made. The one I have is one my mother bought for her Nikkormat around 1970. The early 105mm is out there in abundent quantity.
 
My earlier post was sloppy in that I interposed a new sentence referring to the 1335mm f2.8 making a later reference to the 105mm lens in Sonnar design confusing - it looks as if I was referring to the design of the 135mm not the 105mm. Please bear that in mind if you have not already worked it out.
 
Some reviews of Nikkors from old magazines - contemporary to the lenses being reviewed. I have posted some others with reviews of Leitz glass in another thread.

Hope this helps your decision making. Your thread prompted me to remember these pages.






 
I put together a fun Nikon system using the least expensive Nikkor lenses, 28mm f3.5, 50mm f2 and a 135mm f3.5. Total cost for all the lenses was $69. These lenses take great photos!
 
All the greats have been mentioned here.
I'll add another vote for the very unique optic that is the 2.1cm f/4 mirror lockup lens. The only way you can get this kind of look in a true non-retrofocal wide like this 2.1cm is to get a Super Angulon for a Leica RF or a Biogon for a Contax/Nikon RF.

I loved the 24mm f/2.8 and still love the 50mm f/2 H. Most of my current lenses are AiS though so there have been a lot of changes in the last 40+ years in Nikkor offerings.

Phil Forrest
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom