LTM: 35mm Nikkor 1.8 vs. 35mm Nikkor 2.5

[jsrockit]

My understanding is that the 3.5cm/1.8 W-Nikkor is similar to the Leitz 35mm Summicron from the same era, so maybe that or the 35/2 Konica Hexanon-L (pre UC), another 'cron-like lens, would be a better bet? Doubt that they'll be any less expensive than the W-Nikkor in LTM, though.

Yeah, the 1.8 nikkor is the least expensive, but also the least ergonomic of the bunch. The thing is that I don't really need anything. I'm not going to rush it.

 

[jsrockit]

One more comment to jsr: most Nikkor 35/1.8 LTM lenses have yellow'ed over the last 50 years. I know mine is, but I don't care much for my mostly B+W use. On the M9 it might be a different story and you might consider bleaching it, if you go for it.

Roland.

Roland, meaning the coating has yellowed?

 

[ferider]

The glass, JSR (radioactive, I think Thorium based). When I say bleaching, I mean something like this: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=101883

Roland.

 

[jsrockit]

JSR - I am making this remark just as food for thought. I think the lens you'd most like from this Nikkor 35 family is the 2005 re-issued 35/1,8 W-Nikkor. Of course, it has better? (more recent lens coatings) than the old LTM f1,8 version does, yet it retains all of its modestly wild character as a faster lens wider open.

I'm sure it's great (and I would LOVE to have it), but I'm trying to save money, not spend more.

There are two problems with this lens that you need to be well aware: one is that it is expensive (because, for a M-mount user, we'd want the S-mount 2005 re-issue modified to fit a M body; and most copies are found paired with a SP-2005 re-issue body); two there is for a long time M-user the "unfamiliar" or 'nikkor' way of focusing: this drove me nuts.

The LTM version I borrowed focused the "right" way, but the aperture ring turned the opposite way. Though I don't like it, I'm sort of used to it from my Fuji X100.

Here's a shot inside an orthodox church during lent from a few years ago to give you an idea of its resolving power wide open:-


Through a veil darkly by thomasw_, on Flickr

Anyway -- just another alternative to consider.

Thanks for the info and nice photo. I've decided I better borrow my friends lens again to make sure I like what I saw last Sunday. Sometimes the light and subject matter can make a regular lens seem magical. 🙂

 

[ferider]

Thanks for the info and nice photo. I've decided I better borrow my friends lens again to make sure I like what I saw last Sunday. Sometimes the light and subject matter can make a regular lens seem magical. 🙂

Here is a maybe unexpected suggestion, jsr:

When you play with Calzone's Nikkor, see if you can do a 1:1 comparison with the 35/1.4 SC Nokton. You and your wallet might be positively surprised 🙂

Roland.

 

[jsrockit]

When you play with Calzone's Nikkor, see if you can do a 1:1 comparison with the 35/1.4 SC Nokton. You and your wallet might be positively surprised 🙂

I don't own the nokton anymore... the shift was a real issue on the M9. The 35mm lenses I own are the c-biogon (not going anywhere) and the color skopar (expendable). I was using the 35mm color skopar the same day and could see a difference. However, I wouldn't call either of them bad or better... just different.

 

[furcafe]

I stand corrected, not being an expert on the old fast 35mm lens designs other than that they all appear to be of the symmetrical double-Gauss/Planar tribe. Perhaps a lot of the confusion between the various pre-ASPH Summicrons & the W-Nikkor/Hexanon designs comes from their similar renderings? I personally only have experience w/the W-Nikkor (vintage & modern Nikon RF) & Hexanon (on the Hexar AF). I also have the Canon RF 35/2, but I have no idea what design family it belongs to.

If you don't mind me saying, furcafe (Chris?), Summicron v1 vs Nikkor / UC/L-Hex (original and later L-mount) are two very different design families, wrt nr. elements and in particular the rear group. For its time, the Nikkor was unique. But the L and UC Hex 35/2 are close design copies, as is the Hexar AF.

One more comment to jsr: most Nikkor 35/1.8 LTM lenses have yellow'ed over the last 50 years. I know mine is, but I don't care much for my mostly B+W use. On the M9 it might be a different story and you might consider bleaching it, if you go for it.

Roland.

 

[johannielscom]

Shot today on the venerable Ricog GXR with M-mount and the Nikkor 1.8/35mm:

Dear Agnes, first 20mins forest walk after surgery​

This was ISO 800, 1/160th at 5.6. Minimal Lightroom processing.

Linking the file here from Facebook, which seems to compress it a bit, it loses a bit of sharpness and contrast from the original.

 

[Crazy Fedya]

I shot this image with 35/1.8 W. Nikkor in S-mount, shimmed for Contax. I think it was wide open, or f/2.

I sold 2.5 version, and kept 1.8, because I have a post-war Biogon, and it is not going anywhere.