HU - Nikon 50/1.4 RF Nikon S3 2000 Lens

ghost - I have had GAS for the last 10 years... I have owned and used hundreds of different cameras and lenses....you name a brand, I can tell you what I have used....
Dan
 
Meleica said:
I have had GAS for the last 10 years... I have owned and used hundreds of different cameras and lenses....you name a brand, I can tell you what I have used....
Dan
Click to expand...
And 10 years from now you'll be doing :bang: because you be thinking, Why did I sell that Nikon M with the 3 lenses :cool: :)
Kiu
 
OK here's a question for someone: Did Nikon optically redesign this lens when it was reissued ?

Optical design technique has made considerable strides since the 1950's, most importantly nearly any non-computer design can usually be significantly improved with automatic computer optimizing algorithms. (I know - I do it all the time).

If not I predict this very pretty lens will not perform to a higher level than old ones. Most certainly the coatings are better than 50's era models, so this is not a completely true statement.
 
>> Did Nikon optically redesign this lens when it was reissued ?<<

As far as anyone can tell, NOT QUITE.
It's not the classic 1950s version. Rather, in the early 1960s, the lens was optically redesigned in a very rare version known as the Olympic, and that optical formula/design is the one that was reissued, but with multicoating.

It definitely outperforms commonly available 50/1.4s from the 1950s.
 
Gosh, that's pretty... And with a "new-to-me" SP to attach it to...

Must... Not... Bid...

Mass isn't a bad motorcycle ride, though... Could save on shipping fees.
 
VinceC said:
>> Did Nikon optically redesign this lens when it was reissued ?<<

As far as anyone can tell, NOT QUITE.
It's not the classic 1950s version. Rather, in the early 1960s, the lens was optically redesigned in a very rare version known as the Olympic, and that optical formula/design is the one that was reissued, but with multicoating.

It definitely outperforms commonly available 50/1.4s from the 1950s.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. By the early 60's the first optical design codes were getting some traction as practical tools (on mainframes -- the only computers of the time), so I suspect that Nikon research engineers were on the cutting edge of that development -- hence the Olympic version. Optical design is to a large extent a problem limited by computational capacity which started making rapid advancements during the era of the Nikon rangefinder.
 
hmmmm. Kiu, did you just make that up about the M or did I tell that story somewhere ? I did sell a Nikon M unsync'd with 50 / 1.5 ( yes 1.5 ) and two other lenses and all paperwork...sold to Peter Lownds years ago....bought that outfit for $ 500....
 
Just got my hands on the Leica 50/1.4 aspheric yesterday, thanks to Ben Marks. I have started to work on the comparison with the Millennium 50/1.4. Does anyone know of the whereabouts of a lens diagram for this Nikkor?

Ed
 
Ed Schwartzreic said:
I plan shortly to test the 50/1.4 from the Millennium against the new aspheric Leica Summilux 50/1.4. Stay tuned.

Ed
Click to expand...
I have both too and think the Nikkor stacks up very well with the asph summilux.It's about the cosest i've seen to it.
 
Planar design

Planar design

Does anyone know of the whereabouts of a lens diagram for this Nikkor?
Click to expand...
It is rumored to be a Planar design, May be this would be more helpfull:
http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/jpn/whatsnew/2000/s32000_00.htm
The specs for the lens are there in the original press release, which is written in Japenese and only available in Nikon Japans' website, may be a bablefish translation would be helpfull.
http://babelfish.altavista.com/translate.dyn
Hope this helps,
Kiu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom