Nikkor 35's

[Dunn]

If you are considering a wider focal length, I have used the 24mm f2.8 ai-s and it is quite nice. Very sharp.

 

[semilog]

So how does this work after the mount change? Would it have full AI usability? I assume no ADR would be added to the lens, i guess you could put one of those stickers on it.

hmm.

See Nobbylon's post #18 above, and the Leitax site here.

 

[nobbylon]

So how does this work after the mount change? Would it have full AI usability? I assume no ADR would be added to the lens, i guess you could put one of those stickers on it.

hmm.

Ken,
you lose auto diaphram with the R lenses. ie you are into stopped down metering with a manual camera.
I used the R lenses primarily on an F3 (now sold) and now on an F100 and F5 in A mode.
It's easy to focus using indicators and the mounts I got are in full stop detents so I just count the clicks for whatever aperture I'm after. Remember that if you are using focus indicator cameras that the arrows work in reverse as focus on R lenses is opposite to Nikon's,
j

 

[nobbylon]

Please correct me if I'm wrong - but these Leica R mount mods don't carry the Auto Aperture (wide open for focus - stopped down to chosen aperture for exposure) feature. One must manually open the lens for focus and then manually stop the lens down for exposure. The same procedure as used with View Camera lenses.

If this is the case I would opt for Zeiss/Nikon mount or maybe buying a Leica R body if Nikon glass wouldn't solve my problems. I too think the 28 f2.8 AI and AIs Nikkors are excellent and that a lens as commonly used as a 35mm would be on the top of Nikon's list for a really great lens - like the 180 F2.8 ED was. Not a good showing for Nikon designers of MF days. The AF 35 f1.4 is just too big to consider. Cameras and lenses have become very heavy in these AF digital days with batteries, zoom motors and the added elements necessary for fast zooms. And the bodies need to be sealed better than the Film cameras - as dust and moisture are bigger problems. I use lots of finder attachments on my film Nikons that aren't made for the "sealed up" DSLRs.

Although big, my F5 is sealed up fine and has interchangeable finders. The F6 is also sealed up. I think the F100 has some sealing apart from the back door.

 

[normclarke]

Nikkor's vs Summicron's

Nikkor's vs Summicron's

I have a Nikkor-O 35mm and used it along side a Summi IV, for my uses I could not see the advantages of a lens that now sell's for over £1K to one that sell's for about £50. Suffice to say I still have the Nikkor and the Summi went to part fund my recent trip to the States. Horses for courses!

Best,

normclarke.

 

[awilder]

The best compromise on size and performance is the 35/1.4 AIS Nikkor of any 35 in a Nikon mount. When I had this and the 35 Summicron ver.4, the Nikkors quality was easily on par from f/2.8 and smaller with a slight edge to the Nikkor over the Summicron. The Summicron was tiny but of course only focuses to 0.7 m. The new G version of the Nikkor ups performance by at least a stop over the original 35/1.4 but by f/4-5.6 is virtually indistiguishable from test comparisons I've seen.

 

[telecentricity]

Another vote for Leica 35/2 Summicron-R

Another vote for Leica 35/2 Summicron-R

I agree with others that the best Nikon 35 is the Leica Summicron-R on a Leitax mount. I converted mine in about 10 minutes with nothing more than a Phillips screwdriver. I shoot it on a D700 plus some old film bodies. The images are fantastic. Stop-down metering is really not a problem as I prefer to shoot it wide-open most of the time. Beautiful lens and a pleasure to use.

 

[awilder]

I use to own the 35 Summicron R (later 6 element) and found it to be a good lens but no better than the 35/1.4 Nikkor at similar openings. The optical design of this lens is quite similar to the 35/2 AFD. I also owned that one at one time found it's performance a tad less than the Summicron R but not by very much. Actually, the first Summicron R (9 element) is only marginally better (based on MTF charts) than the later version but a bit heavier larger and probably cheaper .

 

[Archlich]

From what I read from various sources I gather that the plastic Samyung 35/1.4 is an outstanding lens that beats the 35/1.4G optically. And cheap.

But, you know...

 

[semilog]

^------ Samyang's 35 looks optically very good [review here] but like the new 35/1.4 Nikkor (and the equivalent L lens), it's a big ugly pig of a thing.

 

[hans voralberg]

I have to put in a suggestion for the Samyang as well, 1/2 the price of the f2 Distagon. And it is sharp when I tested it out, the only problem of course is it's big, very big for a 35mm. And I think there's some QC as I have to test 3 sample for 1 that focus correctly.

 

[Flat Twin]

Nikkor-N 35mm f1.4

Nikkor-N 35mm f1.4

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/for...com/people/sdifaz/]Flat Twin[/url], on Flickr Glastonbury, May 2011 by Flat Twin, on Flickr

 

[wallace]

I had the 35 f2 Nikkor AI which was good (with hood!) but worse than my 35 f2 Canon srew mount (Jap Summicron), so I sold it.

You can learn more about the Nikkors here:



http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html



Thomas