Nikkor lens recomendations

[james.liam]

Chinese lens on my $7000 Leica.



75mm 7Artisans Wide-Open at F1.25, 1/90th sec, ISO2500.

You’ve demonstrated that the 7fArtisans can transmit light. I know from other images, you can focus a lens. Nothing appears to be in focus so my conclusion is that the lens is not up to that task at its widest aperture.

 

[former member]

The Shutter speed is 1/90th second on a fast moving subject.

These stood still.





This lens compares with the Canon 85/1.5, but these days- about 1/2 the price, and much lighter.

 

[james.liam]

The Serenar was introduced in 1952. That’s 69 years ago, 7 years after Japan was blasted back into the Neolithic age. You’d think the Artisans might do better than “comparable” after 7 decades.

 

[former member]

I said comparable- no floating optics, a basic planar formula lens. The Canon 85/1.5 is interesting as it uses the same 1-3-2-1, 7 element in 4 group design, as the Simlar 5cm F1.5 computed in 1937. I've also compared the Nikkor 50/1.2 with the Nokton 50/1.1.

I can do more side-by-side comparisons of the Canon 85/1.5 and the 7Artisans 75/1.25 in another thread. For moving subjects such as the skaters in this thread, it does not matter how sharp a lens may be- motion blur dominates the image. "Sharp" is not always necessary in an image. The Zoom-Nikkor 43~86/3.5 is reputed to be the worst lens Nikon ever made, but it is responsible for some of the best images made by photographers using Nikons.

Canon 85/1.5, wide-open on the M9. My 1950s Super-Speed Telephoto on my $7000 Leica. This lens was only $450 a few years ago. It is comparable with the Nikkor 8.5cm F1.5 and Leica Summarex 85 F1.5 that sell for several times the price.

Does not focus as close as the 75/1.25



But the 85 has more pull than the 75.



Either is a good choice for a fast telephoto on the M3, with it's 0.92x finder. I use a 1.25x magnifier on the M9. I have a better focus "hit rate" with either of these lenses at the skating rink than I do with the Nikon Df and the 85/1.8 or 105/2.5. I do better with the LTM 10.5cm F2.5 on the M Monochrom than I do with the F-Mount version with moving subjects. I've used rangefinder cameras since 1969 and SLR's since 1970. I went back to mostly RF's after my daughter was born.

 

[AlexBG]

I've always wanted a jupiter 9 for my M3, the wide open look from that lens and separation and bokeh are my ideal traits in a portrait shot.

 

[former member]

The Jupiter-9 is the most difficult of all the Russian lenses to make work on a Leica. I also did a quick hack on an LTM to M-Mount adapter to get pretty good agreement from 1.5m to 10m.

CAMRATIO by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

I did some calculations on focal-length versus focus accuracy on a Leica. Reducing the focal length of the J-9 to 83.2mm produces correct focus on a Leica.

The later Black J-9 has a secondary Shim that controls the stand-off for the rear group. Removing it, and screwing the rear group in 2~3mm closer to the front group brings the focal length of the J-9 closer to the 83.2mm that is required to focus properly on a Leica. After doing that- the main shim needs to set (usually reduced) for proper focus. It's best to optimize for the range you want to use. I did this for one J-9- AND replacing the glass elements with ones from an early KMZ lens, ended up selling it to a professional photographer very cheap because I liked his work.

In the Nikon line-up, the 10.5cm F2.5 Sonnar formula lens has Bokeh closest to the Jupiter-9. Skyllaney in the UK sells Contax mount J-9's with custom index-cam M-Mount adapters.

 

[former member]

Nikkor 85/1.8 factory Ai converted, Wide-Open on the Nikon Df, 1/6th second, ISO 12,800. Hand-Held. (Slow Shutter speed responsible for the lack of sharpness, this lens is sharp)

Nikkor 85/1.8, Wide-Open by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

The big/wide focus ring on this lens makes it easy to hold steady, the bright image makes it easy to focus in the dark.

Shot at night.
If you like Swirly Bokeh- this lens will do it.

Another shot, ISO 12,800 Wide-Open, 1/125th shutter speed-

Nikkor 85/1.8 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

My $125 lens on my $3,000 Nikon.

 

[james.liam]

And more images that don’t achieve sufficient resolution wide open. All AIS lenses were not created equal and many do not stand up well to digital sensors.

 

[former member]

If all you want is absolute sharpness in an image, put the camera on a tripod and take pictures of resolution charts. Camera shake at these shutter speeds is the great equalizer. With the shooting conditions- it would have not made any difference if I used the Zeiss lens or Nikkor lens. 1/6th second hand-held with an 85mm lens, I'm satisfied with the shot and did not delete it because of softness. If I want sharp, I'll pull out the AF-D Micro-Nikkors. They all out-resolve the Df. The AF-D series lenses outperform the new AF-S Micro-Nikkors. With the high-ISO of Digital, "F2.8" is fast enough. Or, I can stop down to F5.6 on the vintage lenses. My 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor tested out to 120lp/mm stopped down. I prefer the lenses used for the images here. Others can draw their own conclusions.

 

[former member]

Found a test of a Sonnar formula Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5 in F-Mount. This lens was $40, I used Richard Haw's online instructions for giving it a CLA. Was easy.

Pictures pairs at F2.5 and F5.6.










Sold this one for $75 after the CLA.

You can get this lens in F-Mount and LTM.

 

[james.liam]

What’s pleasing to the eye is relative. Don’t need razor sharp, in fact the 75 Summilux is my favorite portrait lens. The AIS Nikkors that do well on digital are numerous, like the 8/2.8, 16/3.5, 28/2.8, 45/2.8 AIP, 50/1.2, NOCT, 105/2.5 and even the 180/2.8 ED when converted to B&W. Longer tries are fantastic. The 35/1.4 doesn’t cut it until f/2.8 nor does the 28/2 until about f/4. Any decent lens stopped down to f/5.6 will do well. I’d rather spend another few extra dollars to get more at f/2. The only camera I can get usable images at 1/6th of a second without a tripod is a Leica M. Don’t own a tripod or even a monopod.

 

[former member]

My "Beater" Nikkor-NC 28/2, $100- very sharp wide-open, a real stand-out. There is sample-to-sample variation.

The 58/1.2 Noct-Nikkor: it is optimized for 10lp/mm, as per the original Nikon announcement for it in 1976 (there-abouts).

 

[james.liam]

My "Beater" Nikkor-NC 28/2, $100- very sharp wide-open, a real stand-out. There is sample-to-sample variation.

The 58/1.2 Noct-Nikkor: it is optimized for 10lp/mm, as per the original Nikon announcement for it in 1976 (there-abouts).

The NOCT’s high contrast makes up for its other weaknesses. Also improves dramatically by f/1.4-2. It’s operational envelope is very narrow.

I was referring to the 28/2 AIS version. Have no experience with the earlier version.

 

[former member]

For the Leica M3,

The Nikkor-PC 10.5cm F2.5 in LTM, use an adapter to bring up the 90mm framelines. Use the inner border of the framelines for 100% view.







These are on the M Monochrom. Full size images uploaded, click on the images and then click on "load full resolution"- about 8MBytes each for the jpegs.

This Sonnar formula lens is "almost" identical optically to the F-Mount version, the rear element of the F-Mount lens was moved 1mm closer to the front group. This 1952 lens was designed to be under-corrected for spherical aberration. I picked this lens up in EX+ conditon for $200 recently. Uses 52mm filters, same as the F-Mount version. This lens will focus accurately across range. The Nikkor-PC 8.5cm F2 in LTM- sharp, but is over-corrected for spherical aberration. Not as nice out of focus backgrounds. The 10.5cm F2.5 is a good substitute for the J-9, which goes in the $150 range. I'll take some shots with mine in the next couple of weeks, weather permitting.

 

[Ronald M]

Up close, Sonnar is less sharp at F2 compared to newer gauss. Own both. 105 can be used in place of 85 and 135.

Can not advise on 28/35.

 

[raid]

My two 105 lenses are Sonnar for the Nikon SLR and ltm. They are sharp enough.

 

[former member]

The NOCT’s high contrast makes up for its other weaknesses. Also improves dramatically by f/1.4-2. It’s operational envelope is very narrow.

I was referring to the 28/2 AIS version. Have no experience with the earlier version.

My personal observation from owning Nikon lenses for over 40 years: The AIs lenses are not as well made as the earlier lenses. There were problems with lubricants used, and the lens were not as mechanically "over-built". Visibly- went from 5 screws for the mount to 3. I shoot mostly pre-Ai lenses, many factory converted to Ai. I have F-Mount lenses made in 1959- just keep going. The all-metal focus-ring, multicoated lenses: probably Nikon at their best.

 

[former member]

Up close, Sonnar is less sharp at F2 compared to newer gauss. Own both. 105 can be used in place of 85 and 135.

Can not advise on 28/35.

One day I'll compare the F-Mount 10.5cm F2.5 Sonnar with the LTM version, both on the M Monochrom. The LTM version- it is a good match to my M Monochrom. Nikon had to revise the formula to clear the Nikon F mirror. I also have the F-Mount Planar version. The M Monochrom is a good camera to test with. I recently picked up an F-Mount 10.5cm F4 Nikkor-T. It is surprisingly good, a triplet. These are cult lenses, used to go for $600 a couple of years ago. Prices back reasonable, mine was $100 last year.

 

[AlexBG]

My personal observation from owning Nikon lenses for over 40 years: The AIs lenses are not as well made as the earlier lenses. There were problems with lubricants used, and the lens were not as mechanically "over-built". Visibly- went from 5 screws for the mount to 3. I shoot mostly pre-Ai lenses, many factory converted to Ai. I have F-Mount lenses made in 1959- just keep going. The all-metal focus-ring, multicoated lenses: probably Nikon at their best.

The Nikkor lenses that I have bought are all early versions, I like the look of the focus ring and would rather get older lenses to try and achieve a classic looking photo. They are all ai converted. My newer 50mm 1.4 is sharper than my 28mm and 35mm on digital, plus the subject separation at 1.4 is lovely compared to the other two especially as they are wider. The 35mm f2 size is fantastic. I'm hoping a 85m f2 has all of these qualities mixed together.

 

[splitimageview]

My personal observation from owning Nikon lenses for over 40 years: The AIs lenses are not as well made as the earlier lenses. There were problems with lubricants used, and the lens were not as mechanically "over-built". Visibly- went from 5 screws for the mount to 3. I shoot mostly pre-Ai lenses, many factory converted to Ai. I have F-Mount lenses made in 1959- just keep going. The all-metal focus-ring, multicoated lenses: probably Nikon at their best.

I always have thought the Nikkors had the best overall mechanical build quality and feel of the 35mm SLR manual focus era, marginally better than the other brands. This includes Leica, which as a rule are considerably heavier than equivalent Nikkors, a minus in my book. 🙂 Having handled hundreds of them over the years, the vast majority were still working like new, although there were plenty that had extremely loose focus, and others that had old lubricants that resulted in completely or nearly seized focus (seen several micro Nikkor 55mm that exhibited this, but I've seen this on the 55/3.5 pre-AI as well as the 55/2.8 AI.) On the other hand, during this era Nikon was by far the most used system by pro newspaper shooters, so there were many lenses that were not exactly babied during their lifetimes.

I would venture the AI/AIS are on par in build quality with the pre- AI/AIS. There certainly are changes in design, but not all AI went to 3 screws on the mount for example (my 85/2 has five.)

Most of mine have 3 screws in the mount, but then again they are all small light lenses. I recently sold my 135/2 AI which had 5, but that's a much bigger/heavier lens.