Nikkor 50/1.4 Tokyo vs Japan version Compared!

[goamules]

For about a year I've been shooting an early Nikkor 50/1.4 in Leica mount (Nippon Kogaku Japan version). I know that some people parse the years these were made into fairly small periods, and you sometimes hear "the Tokyo labeled ones are better." To me, I didn't really care, and figured it may just be camera lore. But when I got 2 Tokyo versions, I decided to do a test.

The lenses are supposedly optimized for closeup and wide open, so thats where I concentrated. Below are shots from one lens, then the other, at F1.4, 2, 2.8, and 4 or 5.6. I have an outdoor series too.

 

[goamules]

Started at 5 feet away, F1.4. Click or Right-click, "open in new tab" to see larger.

 

[goamules]

At 2.0 these sharpen up and lose almost all their soft spherical aberration.




At 2.8:

 

[goamules]

More natural lighting. F1.4:




2.0:

 

[goamules]

And at 4.0:

 

[venchka]

Mine is the newer (~ 1956) Nippon Kogaku Japan version with the Nikkor - S · C which denotes that the lens is coated.
Standing by for the definitive answer.

Wayne

 

[goamules]

What I'm seeing, is a slight difference.

 

[Jan Pedersen]

To me it looks like the second of the two have much more glow at 1,4 and a lot less contrast is that not what you are seeing?

 

[xayraa33]

Are we suppose to guess which lens took which photo?

Or is there a label with each photo that I am not seeing?

 

[goamules]

I don't usually state which lens is which at the beginning of such tests. I figure people can remain unbiased that way. Decide for yourself, is there a difference, enough for you to desire one version over another?

A lot of conversations on lenses show one good picture taken with that lens, and the author says, "see? It's a good lens." A lot of talk about one iteration of a lens being better than another is just that - talk. Here are side by side comparisons, for people to decide for themselves. The first pic in each pair is the Tokyo version.

 

[goamules]

To me it looks like the second of the two have much more glow at 1,4 and a lot less contrast is that not what you are seeing?

You know Jan, I think I am seeing that! Thanks for making me look harder. Around the front of the Christmas ornament face.

 

[goamules]

At 5.6

 

[Jan Pedersen]

You know Jan, I think I am seeing that! Thanks for making me look harder. Around the front of the Christmas ornament face.

Exactly, that's were is spotted the difference first.
The white Mug in the second set also shows some glow that i don't see in the first of the two photos.
Stopped down i still detect more contrast in the first image than in the second.

 

[raid]

Which images are from the Tokyo version? The first always or the second one?
Everyone is waiting .......

 

[aizan]

in the first set, the first lens flares more at f/1.4, but there's a smidgen more detail at each aperture, too. the extra flare is maybe 90% gone at f/2.

in the second set, the second lens has more flare at f/1.4, and lower contrast at f/1.4 and f/2, but the two lenses look very similar at f/4.

did you pull a switcheroo on us?

 

[goamules]

Raid, I already said which is which, in post #11. No switching around, the Tokyo is always the first one. I'm seeing a slightly more warm color in the Japan version, second in each set.

 

[xayraa33]

I don't usually state which lens is which at the beginning of such tests. I figure people can remain unbiased that way. Decide for yourself, is there a difference, enough for you to desire one version over another?

A lot of conversations on lenses show one good picture taken with that lens, and the author says, "see? It's a good lens." A lot of talk about one iteration of a lens being better than another is just that - talk. Here are side by side comparisons, for people to decide for themselves. The first pic in each pair is the Tokyo version.

Thank you for clearing that up.

So far I cannot see much difference between them.

 

[raid]

Raid, I already said which is which, in post #11. No switching around, the Tokyo is always the first one. I'm seeing a slightly more warm color in the Japan version, second in each set.

Thanks for the comparisons here. I once had a Nikkor 50/2 Tokyo, and I sold it. Now I have two Nikkor 50/2 Japan.

Anyone wants to trade?

 

[aizan]

Raid, I already said which is which, in post #11. No switching around, the Tokyo is always the first one. I'm seeing a slightly more warm color in the Japan version, second in each set.

huh...maybe i got them switched around.

i guess i'd take the one with less flare.

 

[ChrisLivsey]

I note two Tokyo versions were to hand, it would be interesting to compare the two directly. With single samples of lenses inter-batch variation could be as much or more than variation between years production.
As ever many thanks for the patience involved in doing a test only to be told to go away and do more, slightly differently 😀