Micro nikkor 55mm - as good as the rumours suggest?

keytarjunkie said:
...
4MPaFKH.jpg
Click to expand...

Beautiful photo! That place seems familiar to me. Where is that?

In 2003 I chose a new 55/2.8 AIS for my new FM3a and over the years it’s been an outstanding lens both for general purpose photography and macro work - especially with the PK-13.
 
Another thumbs up here! I used it when I had a Nikon, and it still remains a favourite now I've moved to the Sony A7R series. Sharp, minimal aberrations and distortion, and works just as well close up as at a distance. It's also common = cheap! The f2.8 is the better all-rounder, though the f3.5 variant directly preceding it is not much different.
 
My 55/2.8 AI is one of my most loved lenses in my "collection". Including the Leica, Zeiss, Oly OM, and so on. It's most certainly one of my favorite Nikon lenses.

My copy is sharp sharp sharp across the field at most (all?) apertures. I use it for a lot of my "scientific" work of documenting specimens and plots. It plays very nice adapted to the Leica Bellows II and Visoflex III (the old version) on either a film or digital M. It plays nice on good ol' Nikon bodies as well (film or digital). I've used it for digitizing negatives too with great results (but usually I still use my Minolta Dual-Scan for 35mm scanning).

Anyway, if you're looking for a lens that's sharp, flat field, low/no distortion, reliable, versatile, well I think you'll not be disappointed. :cool: There's a good reason so many of us own this lens.
 
The 50 plus mil macro lenses of the major Japanese camera companies never fail to awe you with their optical performance, for macro work or as a general purpose 50mm lens.

I used Zuiko, Takumar, Canon and Rokkor macro lenses and all have been great and I don't think the Nikkor lens of that type will be any different.
 
55 f/2.8 is an extremely likeable lens, it has some really nice features:

- deeply recessed front element acts as a lens hood and elliminates need for protective filters at the same time improving image contrast.
- it's an extremely good macro lens and a very good normal "walk around" lens.
- its hyperfocal distance scale is very compressed on the longer end making it perfect a lens for any street-shooter.

Having had two copies of this lens I'd say they are more prone to lubricant solidification making the focus ring really hard to rotate, rather than oil separation and migration to the aperture blades.
With a bit of skill and proper tools it's fairly easy to relube both 2.8 and 3.5 and make the focus smooth as silk (I recommend Super Lube 51014 synthetic PTFE oil).
 
Both the 2.8 and 3.5 are incredible lenses. That being said, the 50 1.2 ai-s is probably sharper at f/8 or f/11 (in my highly unscientific testing), with the biggest advantages of the micro lenses being the lack of distortion, low price, lower weight, and close-focusing abilities (also the recessed front element is nice), imo. The single coated 3.5 also has the benefit of having a very pleasant black and white draw. I like using the 3.5 the best and have subsequently sold my 2.8. I'll keep my 1.2 because it's definitely it's own thing, but the 3.5 will be on my camera way more often.

the 2.8:
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

Cat by Jim Fischer, on Flickr


Dog in Parked Car by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

Taylor by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

the 3.5:
No Clos Radio by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

Apt by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

Taylor by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

Dad and His Watch by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

Dead End by Jim Fischer, on Flickr

Riley by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
 
xayraa33 said:
The 50 plus mil macro lenses of the major Japanese camera companies never fail to awe you with their optical performance, for macro work or as a general purpose 50mm lens.

I used Zuiko, Takumar, Canon and Rokkor macro lenses and all have been great and I don't think the Nikkor lens of that type will be any different.
Click to expand...


The Asahi Pentax 50mm macro lenses are excellent as well.
All do 1:2 without adapter, about as close as one can hand hold.
The SMC Pentax-A 50/2.8 macro is a terrific walkaround lens.

Chris
 
the_jim said:
Both the 2.8 and 3.5 are incredible lenses. That being said, the 50 1.2 ai-s is probably sharper at f/8 or f/11 (in my highly unscientific testing), with the biggest advantages of the micro lenses being the lack of distortion, low price, lower weight, and close-focusing abilities (also the recessed front element is nice), imo. The single coated 3.5 also has the benefit of having a very pleasant black and white draw. I like using the 3.5 the best and have subsequently sold my 2.8. I'll keep my 1.2 because it's definitely it's own thing, but the 3.5 will be on my camera way more often.
...
Click to expand...

A nice set of photos, Jim. Very pleasing.

In your photos I like the sharpness and also the soft backgrounds.
 
FWIW, the very fast focus throw of the 55/2.8 Micro-Nikkor made it by far the easiest to focus of any of my manual focus Nikon lenses, including the 50/1.4. The way the image snapped into focus on the plain matte field of the focusing screen was a revelation.
 
I agree Doug, this photo was easy to focus with my 55/2.8 Nikkor on the FT2 screen.
U51008I1626008840.SEQ.0.jpg

Nikomat FT2, Delta 100, Xtol.
John Mc
 
Turns out I was wrong about my Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 sample: it’s an early AI version, not pre-AI. Which is great b/c I would love to use it with my Nikon FM2n…

I used the Nikon FM for the shot below; film was TMax 100 in Diafine:

Regarding tidepools by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr
 
Yes, wonderful lenses. I shot with the 2.8 on an F for some time now I use the 3.5 to scan my film. Very happy with both. Enjoy yours!
 
keytarjunkie said:
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...

4MPaFKH.jpg
Click to expand...

well if this is the rendering
Give me an 'F' camera and this lens... Yum, Beautiful, Stellar !
 
Over the last year, the Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 has slowly become my favorite lens for B&W, which is pretty much all I shoot in 35mm. Honestly, the only thing keeping me in the rangefinder world is the joy of using them and their small size. The end result I am getting with the Nikkor for the subjects I am interested in is (for the most part) all I could ask for in this format.

51058629378_71506855d4_b.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom