gavinlg
Veteran
I've been searching for a good, reasonably priced 50mm(ish) as a second camera/lens to my leica M body and 35mm ultron f2. I've gone through several brands of fast 50's and have yet to feel satisfied with any of them as a long term choice.
After some thought, I had the epiphany that maybe my issue is that I'm trying to make older, fast aperture 50mm's work for me and that I should try a slower, more 'corrected' 50mm instead.
Enter the Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 and f2.8 for F-mount.
After some research, there are some high opinions floating around on these guys - especially the f3.5 version. I managed to find a later AI f3.5 model, and it's currently on its way from the land of the rising sun along with an F2a body to use it on.
Please feel free to share your experiences with any of the Micro Nikkor 55mm lenses, and photos taken with them in this thread.
After some thought, I had the epiphany that maybe my issue is that I'm trying to make older, fast aperture 50mm's work for me and that I should try a slower, more 'corrected' 50mm instead.
Enter the Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 and f2.8 for F-mount.
After some research, there are some high opinions floating around on these guys - especially the f3.5 version. I managed to find a later AI f3.5 model, and it's currently on its way from the land of the rising sun along with an F2a body to use it on.
Please feel free to share your experiences with any of the Micro Nikkor 55mm lenses, and photos taken with them in this thread.
Siluro
Member
No experience personally, but have you seen the 400tx project?
https://www.instagram.com/400txproject/
https://www.instagram.com/400txproject/
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I have a Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 plus the "M tube" to bring it out to 1:1. I purchased it (in mechanically, functionally perfect shape about a decade ago, cosmetically a bit worn) remembering the one that my uncle loaned me in the 1970s.
It's an excellent lens. I use it mostly for copy work, adapted to various other cameras, and it performs superbly. It's one of the two lenses I've kept to use with my Nikon F on the very occasional moments when I shoot with that camera.
Good luck with the one you're purchasing. This is one of the classics..
G
It's an excellent lens. I use it mostly for copy work, adapted to various other cameras, and it performs superbly. It's one of the two lenses I've kept to use with my Nikon F on the very occasional moments when I shoot with that camera.
Good luck with the one you're purchasing. This is one of the classics..
G
lukx
Well-known
I have the 55 f2.8 and it is indeed a very good lens. Very sharp wide open, pleasing bokeh when you get close. It uses CRC technology, which is nothing else than floating elements. I have re-greased mine with a heavier grease for more dampened and more accurate focus and have come to appreciate its construction and design.
I use it both on my F2AS and as a film copying lens. The latter requires a flat image plane and corner to corner sharpness, both things this lens satisfies to my eyes.
I use it both on my F2AS and as a film copying lens. The latter requires a flat image plane and corner to corner sharpness, both things this lens satisfies to my eyes.
keytarjunkie
no longer addicted
This is my favorite lens for the F system. I would also recommend looking at the 400TX project, and at forum member Richard Haw's page on the lens (actually he has a few pages, here is the one regarding your specific model). He is somewhat of an expert and a Micro-Nikkor hoarder!!
There are many conflicting accounts of sharpness across the different versions, both at infinity and close-up. I don't think you could go wrong with any of them though. I have the earlier non-AI version with the metal focus ring. It handles really well, it's larger and longer than a normal 50mm lens but also lighter. You don't need a hood because the front element is very recessed.
Unlike other 50ish F-mount lenses, there is no distortion. This and the slight extra reach makes it a great landscape lens. I wouldn't use it for portraits, unless it was a mostly environmental portrait.
I have also used it for copy work with the M tube. It performs okay. A modern lens will destroy it here if you're going by corner sharpness and color rendition, but digitizing negatives is a highly precise application. I suspect the newer f/2.8 version is better for copy work. The f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor is still great for general macro photography though. Anyway...
There are many conflicting accounts of sharpness across the different versions, both at infinity and close-up. I don't think you could go wrong with any of them though. I have the earlier non-AI version with the metal focus ring. It handles really well, it's larger and longer than a normal 50mm lens but also lighter. You don't need a hood because the front element is very recessed.
Unlike other 50ish F-mount lenses, there is no distortion. This and the slight extra reach makes it a great landscape lens. I wouldn't use it for portraits, unless it was a mostly environmental portrait.
I have also used it for copy work with the M tube. It performs okay. A modern lens will destroy it here if you're going by corner sharpness and color rendition, but digitizing negatives is a highly precise application. I suspect the newer f/2.8 version is better for copy work. The f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor is still great for general macro photography though. Anyway...
gavinlg
Veteran
Yes! This is where I unashamedly stole the idea of the Micro-Nikkor from. Renato Repetto's work is superb (the founder of 400txproject)
Wonderful, thanks Godfrey, I'm looking forward to it!
Wonderful photograph! You guys are making me excited. I've previously poured over Richard Haw's stuff and the 400txproject photos too - both excellent resources.
I would love one of the original or Nikkor-P versions with the metal focusing ring, but decided to make an effort to stick with multicoated lenses to better match my very modern rendering Ultron 35 f2. The no distortion bit is also exciting news to me.
It's funny, I've never understood why people would use a macro normal as a non-macro lens, but my last 50 - a Zuiko 50mm, put against my modern Ultron just didn't match up in characteristics. I'm really hoping the Nikkor satisfies here.
madNbad
Well-known
It’s one of the most versatile lenses. Being able to focus down to half life size has advantages. I’ve owned several over the years and currently have the 2.8 Ai-S that is mostly used for scanning negatives.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I've been using Micro-Nikkors for years! First the 55mm f/3.5, then the 55/2.8, and recently I added the 60mm AF version. They are all great lenses. The only negative point is poor bokeh when used at wide aperture in the close range. A photo of a bush with frozen branches, in early spring, had double images of the OOF branches. Otherwise a great lens!
keytarjunkie
no longer addicted
Thanks. I love Renato's compositions, and probably 90% of my photographs with this lens are vertical. Here are a few more...
Nitroplait
Well-known
Just a gentle reminder. Having used one sample of a 30+ years old lens does not prove or disprove its qualities.
Sample variations at the time of production has an impact, as do, to an even higher extend, the kind of life the lens has lived up untill now.
There will be dogs among the Micro-Nikkors as there will be among other highly praised lenses.
I have a Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8 that I am very happy with, but have had two which were un-remarkable.
The Dots are performance of the individual lens, the bars compare it with all lenses in the class. At F5.6- edge performance is better, at F8- "pegs the test".
I'll have to upload some pictures taken with it. I use the newer 60/2.8 AF-Nikkor with Digital these days. Used the Nikkor 55/3.5 and 55/2.8 more with film.
Note that the big improvement over the non-macro lenses are Distortion and Centering. Absolute resolution is about the same as the Nikkor 50/2.
JMQ
Well-known
The original micro-nikkor (max aperture f3.5) which is a pre-set lens focuses all the way down to a 1:1 magnification
dfdann
Member
I have the 55 f2.8 and use it on my Leica CL. Excellent lens and easy to focus with Focus Assist.
Cheers, Dan
Cheers, Dan
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
John Free is trying to use 55 2.8 on the streets for decades now. On F3. He stated in several videos what training to focus this lens is required. Like focusing on targets in the backyard.
I prefer Nikkor 50 1.4. Makes huge difference in focusing convenience and accuracy.
I prefer Nikkor 50 1.4. Makes huge difference in focusing convenience and accuracy.
cjm
Well-known
I can enthusiastically suggest the Micro-Nikkor. Any version should be great. I have used a non-ai 55mm f3.5 version (picked up for about $35 a few years ago) on my F2 for much of my photography this year. I scan with a DSLR using the 60mm f2.8 AF-D version. Most of the photos on my Instagram linked below are with this combination. As may be obvious, I too have been inspired by Renato Repetto's work.
Samples:
Samples:
hilltime
Well-known
The Micro Nikkor 55/2.8 AIS was the first lens I bought for my new FE2 back in the early 80's, after using it in a 1HR Photo Lab, for a few years shooting thousands of 35mm copy negatives. Still have it as well as the 60/2.8 AF and a 55/3.5 with tube, just because I always heard it was even sharper than the 2.8. Never found that fact to be correct as well as noticing any difference with the 60 Micro, but being that critical seems to be a bit of nitpicking...just saying.
Also I forgot, I had a Micro 200/4 for a few years but never really did use it as much as I had intended.
Also I forgot, I had a Micro 200/4 for a few years but never really did use it as much as I had intended.
petronius
Veteran
Pre-AI 55mm/3,5 on a Sony A7; It´s one of my most loved lenses:
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
I started with a 3.5 that I found on C-List super cheap. It was kind of beat up but had good glass. This was when I was setting up a slide copying rig. It worked great. Then I started reading that the 2.8 was better. Found one of those on the G-W site. I consider it one of my best lenses. I gave the 3.5 to my nephew. I'll be keeping the 2.8 till I'm gone. I use it on my Sony A7ii and A7iii.
Muggins
Junk magnet
I have one of these which I've used for years, lately on a D200. Thoroughly versatile, focussing down to I think about 35cm (can't be bothered to go find it!). The only downside is that the grease tends to migrate after 30+ years, so I have to take it apart every decade or so. Could be worse failings, especially as it was free - it's a real beater, even has a hospital's name carved on it (came from the Path lab...).
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
I can only comment at the macro end, I use and have tested a number of lenses for 1:1 camera-scanning of film. At 1x, the 55 f/2.8 Micro Nikkor is in the top rank of lenses for resolution and contrast. It equals some modern macros (e.g. 70 f/2.8 Sigma Macro ART) and is near equal to the very highly regarded 75 f/4 APO Rodagon-D 1x copy lens.
At 1:1, the 55 f/3.5 is not as good. At lesser magnifications, the two lenses are excellent and much closer. The superior performance of the f/2.8 at 1x is reputed to be achieve by the Nikon "Close Range Correction" that moves the lens groups differentially at very close focus distances.
The f/2.8 reportedly suffers from oil-on-blades, and the recommendation is to store it vertically.
At 1:1, the 55 f/3.5 is not as good. At lesser magnifications, the two lenses are excellent and much closer. The superior performance of the f/2.8 at 1x is reputed to be achieve by the Nikon "Close Range Correction" that moves the lens groups differentially at very close focus distances.
The f/2.8 reportedly suffers from oil-on-blades, and the recommendation is to store it vertically.