csxcnj
Well-known
I want to add a "long" lens to the S2 arsenal, was hoping folks could share their opinions of these two lenses, pro's and con's.
I've heard good things about both...
thanks, Bob
I've heard good things about both...
thanks, Bob
bobkonos
Well-known
I have both lenses but prefer the CV 85 f3.5. It is a fantastic lens: more affordable than the Nikkor 85 f2, lighter than it, and most important: sharp as a tack, as they say. The slower speed has never hampered me, as it is used with a rangefinder camera that I can hand hold at slow shutter speeds. Really, I am very impressed with it - it lives in the same bag as my S2 and CV R2S.
You should also consider the CV 21 or 25 lenses if you ever seek a wide angle for the S2. Both are terrific, too.
-Another Bob
You should also consider the CV 21 or 25 lenses if you ever seek a wide angle for the S2. Both are terrific, too.
-Another Bob
VinceC
Veteran
I was contemplating getting a CV 85/3.5 until I got a sudden deal on a Nikkor.
The chrome Nikkors are more affordable, but you also have to factor in the weight ... 13 to 14 ounces. Black Nikkors weight about 2 ounces less and cost a lot more.
I've never seen the weight of a CV lens listed. I'm sure it must be marvelously sharp. And the lighter the lens, the easier it is to carry around. Remember that with an S2 you ought to have separate finder for the 85.
The chrome Nikkors are more affordable, but you also have to factor in the weight ... 13 to 14 ounces. Black Nikkors weight about 2 ounces less and cost a lot more.
I've never seen the weight of a CV lens listed. I'm sure it must be marvelously sharp. And the lighter the lens, the easier it is to carry around. Remember that with an S2 you ought to have separate finder for the 85.
RObert Budding
D'oh!
Brian - What scanner did you use?
csxcnj
Well-known
me mynd is mayd oop....
me mynd is mayd oop....
Thanks all for your replies and Brian for the photos, pretty crispy...
I think the 13 to 14 ounce
statement did it, at about 9 ounces for the CV I just sent the Gandy Man an email asking about CV 85 availability.
I'll eventually get whatever Nikkors I can find/afford because I'm infected with the collector bug-fortunately only mildly. User grade stuff is good enough for me- but I'm very happy with the two CV's I've purchased so far handling-wise, and enough folks have said the IQ is good...now I just need a 85mm finder. I guess CV didn't make one for this lens, maybe the 90mm finder would do?
me mynd is mayd oop....
Thanks all for your replies and Brian for the photos, pretty crispy...
I think the 13 to 14 ounce
statement did it, at about 9 ounces for the CV I just sent the Gandy Man an email asking about CV 85 availability.I'll eventually get whatever Nikkors I can find/afford because I'm infected with the collector bug-fortunately only mildly. User grade stuff is good enough for me- but I'm very happy with the two CV's I've purchased so far handling-wise, and enough folks have said the IQ is good...now I just need a 85mm finder. I guess CV didn't make one for this lens, maybe the 90mm finder would do?
back alley
IMAGES
the 90 finder should be fine.
there are used 85's around also.
there are used 85's around also.
VinceC
Veteran
Either an 85 or 90mm finder will work fine. Brightline costs more but shows a better image. With some experience, you can get a good idea of framing by just imaging the central 2/3rds of the 50mm frameline.
The difference between 85 and 90mm is inconsequential. I read somewhere that the CV 85/90mm lens (it is the same optic for LTM and Nikon RF) is actually a compromise of about 87.5mm.
The difference between 85 and 90mm is inconsequential. I read somewhere that the CV 85/90mm lens (it is the same optic for LTM and Nikon RF) is actually a compromise of about 87.5mm.
VinceC
Veteran
BillBingham2
Registered User
I think the CV 85 is so slow because the Bessa R body will not focus a faster long lens well enough. The T will, but she is M mount. While I love the look and price point of CV lenses, they do not make a fast enough tele for my tastes. I like to have the ability to throw the background out of focus if I want and I need a bit more than Pres K offers today.
I do have the 85/2 in LTM and she is great. I wish I could find a Black one that did not break the bank, some day I will. I've moved up range a bit and changed over to a 105/2.5. The lens ROCKS! Big, heavy, but it provides me with wonderful images every time she get taken out. I have one for both my M6 and S2 kits, it is that good. Matter a fact, if you gave me just two lenses to live the rest of my life with, it would be the 25/4 CV and the 105/2.5 Nikkor. Telephotos are one place where I would choose Nikkor over CV every time.
105 finders are harder to find than 85, but a good Nikon Zoom finder can be found that handles both.
B2 (;->
I do have the 85/2 in LTM and she is great. I wish I could find a Black one that did not break the bank, some day I will. I've moved up range a bit and changed over to a 105/2.5. The lens ROCKS! Big, heavy, but it provides me with wonderful images every time she get taken out. I have one for both my M6 and S2 kits, it is that good. Matter a fact, if you gave me just two lenses to live the rest of my life with, it would be the 25/4 CV and the 105/2.5 Nikkor. Telephotos are one place where I would choose Nikkor over CV every time.
105 finders are harder to find than 85, but a good Nikon Zoom finder can be found that handles both.
B2 (;->
VinceC
Veteran
However, the CV specs say the 85/3.5 focuses down to 3 feet. The old Nikkor only focuses to 3.5 feet. Six inches makes a big difference when you're in that close. The CV would let you do a little more dramatic work with close-ups of faces.
ZivcoPhoto
Well-known
As available as the Nikkor is I would always go for that option. The speed and quality more than makes up for the extra heft.....besides these old Nikkor lenses are what this forum is about....using and discussing Nikon RF gear.
csxcnj
Well-known
Hmmmm.....
Hmmmm.....
Okay, okay, now I'm going to have to get both and compare
What is a fair price for a good clean Nikkor 85 user? In chrome....
Vince, looks like somebody enjoys mugging for the camera...
Hmmmm.....
Okay, okay, now I'm going to have to get both and compare
What is a fair price for a good clean Nikkor 85 user? In chrome....
Vince, looks like somebody enjoys mugging for the camera...
VinceC
Veteran
>>looks like somebody enjoys mugging for the camera...<<
Human beings are highly adaptable beings. She has learned to adapt to the fact that her dad is always carrying a camera.
One of the things I always liked about the Nikkor 85/2 is its historical importance. Back in the spring of 1950, Life magazine photographer David Douglas Duncan was Tokyo bureau chief. A young Japanese photograher, Jun Miki, took a photo of Duncan at the light table in the bureau, printed it and gave him a copy. Duncan studied the print with great surprise, saying it was the sharpest 35m photograph he had ever seen, and asked what lens was used. Miki showed him the 8.5cm f/2 Nikkor made by a Japanese company. Duncan borrowed it to take some photographs, was impressed by the quality, visited the local factory, and bought a set of Nikkor lenses in LTM mount, which he considered to be superior to Leica lenses of the time. A few weeks later, the Korean War broke out, Duncan photographed it with Nikkors, and the Nikon reputation was born.
Here's a quick link to the story:
(http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/history/index.htm
And here is Miki's photograph of Duncan with an early Nikkor 85/2 --(this is a copyrighted photo placed here in low resolution for historical purposes)
Human beings are highly adaptable beings. She has learned to adapt to the fact that her dad is always carrying a camera.
One of the things I always liked about the Nikkor 85/2 is its historical importance. Back in the spring of 1950, Life magazine photographer David Douglas Duncan was Tokyo bureau chief. A young Japanese photograher, Jun Miki, took a photo of Duncan at the light table in the bureau, printed it and gave him a copy. Duncan studied the print with great surprise, saying it was the sharpest 35m photograph he had ever seen, and asked what lens was used. Miki showed him the 8.5cm f/2 Nikkor made by a Japanese company. Duncan borrowed it to take some photographs, was impressed by the quality, visited the local factory, and bought a set of Nikkor lenses in LTM mount, which he considered to be superior to Leica lenses of the time. A few weeks later, the Korean War broke out, Duncan photographed it with Nikkors, and the Nikon reputation was born.
Here's a quick link to the story:
(http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/history/index.htm
And here is Miki's photograph of Duncan with an early Nikkor 85/2 --(this is a copyrighted photo placed here in low resolution for historical purposes)
Attachments
migtex
Don't eXchange Freedom!
csxcnj said:
Glad you made the same question as the one in my mind... but for the price.. I thing I'll go with the CV... besides I already have the CV 21... so...
Just waitting for the heavy 135 3.5 from Nikon to show up on the mail (anyone has it?)... and the 105 keeps going high too on $$$... I'm doomed!:bang:
rbsinto
Well-known
I'm new to all this rangefinder business, but something that always amuses me is when I read about preferences for this (rangefinder) lens over that one because among other things it is lighter.
I know everything is relative, and one gets used to what one uses all the time, but compared to my SLR gear, my rangefinder camera and lenses weigh nothing.
I routinely prowl the streets with three old, motorized manual focus cameras, and one in particular, my motorized Nikon F2As with a zoom Nikkor 80~200 2.8 manual focus monster attached has a weight measured in tons, not pounds.
Oh, and I'll be getting the CV 85 in a few weeks, but my decision to buy it instead of the Nikkor has nothing to do with weight.
I know everything is relative, and one gets used to what one uses all the time, but compared to my SLR gear, my rangefinder camera and lenses weigh nothing.
I routinely prowl the streets with three old, motorized manual focus cameras, and one in particular, my motorized Nikon F2As with a zoom Nikkor 80~200 2.8 manual focus monster attached has a weight measured in tons, not pounds.
Oh, and I'll be getting the CV 85 in a few weeks, but my decision to buy it instead of the Nikkor has nothing to do with weight.
rbsinto said:
Robert, don't just leave us hanging ....
So if you're not getting the CV 85 because of the weight saving, why get it instead of the Nikkor? Price? Modern design?
VinceC
Veteran
>> compared to my SLR gear, my rangefinder camera and lenses weigh nothing<<
In an apples-to-apples comparison, several of the early chrome/brass Nikkor RF prime lenses weigh considerably more than their SLR F-mount prime equivalents. The 10.5cm/2.5 weighs 560 grams / 19 ounces compared to the optically identical 105/2.5 F-mount lens, which weighs 400 grams/14 ounces.
In an apples-to-apples comparison, several of the early chrome/brass Nikkor RF prime lenses weigh considerably more than their SLR F-mount prime equivalents. The 10.5cm/2.5 weighs 560 grams / 19 ounces compared to the optically identical 105/2.5 F-mount lens, which weighs 400 grams/14 ounces.
rbsinto
Well-known
Hey Jon,
I suppose the CV 85 is the path of least resistance. It is readily available at a price I can afford. Currently there is one Nikkor 85 f2 on ebay for over $1,000 US, and in a word, I haven't got that kind of disposable income to dispose of at this time.
Besides, while I'm enjoying using a rangefinder camera, I'm still more comfortable with SLR's on the street, so when I'm really being serious, I'll stick to what works best for me. I hope this might change with more experience, but I'm findng too many shortcomings with rangefinders for the kind of subject matter I like to shoot to believe I'll ever be as comfortable with them as I am with SLR's.
I owe you a reply regarding our chat at Nikonians. I'll PM you in the next day or so.
I suppose the CV 85 is the path of least resistance. It is readily available at a price I can afford. Currently there is one Nikkor 85 f2 on ebay for over $1,000 US, and in a word, I haven't got that kind of disposable income to dispose of at this time.
Besides, while I'm enjoying using a rangefinder camera, I'm still more comfortable with SLR's on the street, so when I'm really being serious, I'll stick to what works best for me. I hope this might change with more experience, but I'm findng too many shortcomings with rangefinders for the kind of subject matter I like to shoot to believe I'll ever be as comfortable with them as I am with SLR's.
I owe you a reply regarding our chat at Nikonians. I'll PM you in the next day or so.
rbsinto
Well-known
Vince.
Just for fun I checked out the weight of my F2AS/MD-2/MB-1/Zoom Nikkor 80~200 2.8 AIS.
According to the manuals:
F2AS- 840 gms
MD2/MB-1 470 gms (I assume without the 10 AA batteries)
lens- 1900 gms
total- 3210 gms (7.07 lbs)
In the real world, I weighed it all on the bathroom scale and it came in at 8 lbs.
The lens alone is over 4 lbs.
So no, I never buy photographic equipment based on weight.
Just for fun I checked out the weight of my F2AS/MD-2/MB-1/Zoom Nikkor 80~200 2.8 AIS.
According to the manuals:
F2AS- 840 gms
MD2/MB-1 470 gms (I assume without the 10 AA batteries)
lens- 1900 gms
total- 3210 gms (7.07 lbs)
In the real world, I weighed it all on the bathroom scale and it came in at 8 lbs.
The lens alone is over 4 lbs.
So no, I never buy photographic equipment based on weight.
rbsinto
Well-known
Brian,
I assume the DS-12 is that EE Servo gadget for providing aperture-priority automatic. Waste of time and money. So no, I neither have nor use one.
I buy and use equipment that will allow me to take photographs, and I do not collect gear for the sake of collecting.
(Jon-How was that?)
I assume the DS-12 is that EE Servo gadget for providing aperture-priority automatic. Waste of time and money. So no, I neither have nor use one.
I buy and use equipment that will allow me to take photographs, and I do not collect gear for the sake of collecting.
(Jon-How was that?)