james.liam
Well-known
Have you ever worked with any of the later R lenses? May change your mind.
Nikkor lens recomendations
- Thread starter AlexBG
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 140
- Views 7K
Have you ever worked with any of the later R lenses? May change your mind.
Yes i have.
Too heavy, large, over-built, but love the optics.
ZF are similarly described.
Prefer C-Y over the Leica R.
Too heavy, large, over-built, but love the optics.
ZF are similarly described.
Prefer C-Y over the Leica R.
james.liam
Well-known
We are choosing between different 1st growth Bordeaux here. Years ago KOH camera in NY was selling off its remaining OEM AI conversion kits. Most were for the infamous 43-86 zoom, a few for older less notable non-AI lenses and a single kit for an 8/2.8 FE. Bought it on a lark. Several years later I stumbled across a non-AI version at KEH built in 1970 for $1000, and sprung for it. Perfect glass and seemingly never used.
The damned thing was built to last 100 years before a CLA.
The damned thing was built to last 100 years before a CLA.
F
former member
Guest
The Nikkor manual focus lenses feel more solid than the other Japanese lenses of the same period. The Leica lenses from before the mid 60s feel more solid than those that followed. Compare a first-version 50/2 Rigid Summicron with the later 6/5 that replaced it. The 1950s Leica RF lenses define "over-engineering", but it works.
Buying user-condition Nikon lenses for a fraction of their original cost: I've not had to take many of them apart. Most just work quite well. I've relubed more Zoom-Nikkors bought dirt cheap, like the 80~200/4.5 at under $50 that sold for over $600 when new. Work fine now. Fixed the infamous "zoom-creep" of the 1-touch mechanism. I sold a lot of these lenses when they were new, paid for the first 1/2 of college.
Buying user-condition Nikon lenses for a fraction of their original cost: I've not had to take many of them apart. Most just work quite well. I've relubed more Zoom-Nikkors bought dirt cheap, like the 80~200/4.5 at under $50 that sold for over $600 when new. Work fine now. Fixed the infamous "zoom-creep" of the 1-touch mechanism. I sold a lot of these lenses when they were new, paid for the first 1/2 of college.
Disappointed_Horse
Well-known
I'm a Nikon fan and love my Nikkors. All mine are K, AI, or AI-S, but I have to say my Pentax Super Takumar and Super Multi Coated Takumar lenses are every bit as solidly build and, if anything, are even smoother and nicer to use.
Only think wrong with the Takumars is that Pentax never made them in F mount.
Only think wrong with the Takumars is that Pentax never made them in F mount.
F
former member
Guest
My most rare (and valuable) SLR lens is a Pentax 85/4.5 Ultra-Achromat. The Super-Takumars are nice, I converted one to RF coupled M-Mount.
I've never had any of the Takumars, but have three of the SMC Pentax M. Had to work on two of them, one had a slow aperture. The mechanism had oil but not the blades. The other lens had an aperture ring that required a little more effort to rotate than it should have. Fixed both, they are well-built and so small, 49mm filter standard is ideal. 🙂
m.galimathias
Member
Question to the Nikon experts:
I was wondering how the 50mm 1.2 (latest version) performs by today's standards?
Some of the reviews attribute a rather mixed performance to it, i.e. putting it into the "gimmic"-lens categeory alongside the Noctilux and others.
However, other reviews state that it clearly eclipses the 1.4 and 1.8 Nikkors at 1.4 and above.
Also, does it make sense to look at more recent offerings like the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 ZF Planar? Rockwelll is quite vocal about the Zeiss being not a notch better than the 50mm Nikkor 1.4 ...
Maybe I should stick to M-mount and my 50mm 2.0 ZM Planar ... makes things a whole lot easier ...
I was wondering how the 50mm 1.2 (latest version) performs by today's standards?
Some of the reviews attribute a rather mixed performance to it, i.e. putting it into the "gimmic"-lens categeory alongside the Noctilux and others.
However, other reviews state that it clearly eclipses the 1.4 and 1.8 Nikkors at 1.4 and above.
Also, does it make sense to look at more recent offerings like the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 ZF Planar? Rockwelll is quite vocal about the Zeiss being not a notch better than the 50mm Nikkor 1.4 ...
Maybe I should stick to M-mount and my 50mm 2.0 ZM Planar ... makes things a whole lot easier ...
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
The 50mm f/1.2 AiS Nikkor is a fantastic lens. These days, the age of the lens and how it's been handled by previous users is going to be the deciding factor about how good it is. I have an Ai version of this lens which I love and I feel outperforms my old 50mm f/1.4 but I have to say again that sample variation may be at play here. My current Ai 50/1.2 sample definitely outperforms the AFD 50/1.4 as well.
As for Ken Rockwell, take some of that hyperbole with a grain of salt.
Find gear that YOU like to use and then enjoy using it. We hear a lot of "your opinion is wrong" when discussing things like lenses.
Phil Forrest
As for Ken Rockwell, take some of that hyperbole with a grain of salt.
Find gear that YOU like to use and then enjoy using it. We hear a lot of "your opinion is wrong" when discussing things like lenses.
Phil Forrest
oldwino
Well-known
I found the 50/1.2 a little too well behaved wide open. It is very sharp stopped down, no question.
I sold mine for an older 55/1.2, which has a wonderful, dreamy character wide open, but from f2.8-4, sharpens right up and loses all those aberrations.
It is probably not as sharp overall as the 50/1.2, but who buys a lens like this for “sharp”? There are plenty of sharp lenses which are more compact and are lighter.
I sold mine for an older 55/1.2, which has a wonderful, dreamy character wide open, but from f2.8-4, sharpens right up and loses all those aberrations.
It is probably not as sharp overall as the 50/1.2, but who buys a lens like this for “sharp”? There are plenty of sharp lenses which are more compact and are lighter.
I prefer the 50/1.2 over the 1.4 AI/AIS although I recently sold both and kept the pancake 1.8. Just didn’t need the speed and small/light wins nearly every time for me, these days.
F
former member
Guest
I have a very late 50/1.2 Ais, bought "mint in box" for $400. I've only used it on the Nikon Df. It is sharper edge-to-edge than the 55/1.2, I have the Nikkor-SC 55/1.2 and the 55/1.2Ai, both are mint condition and perfect performers. Due to the very large front section- be careful when buying that it did not get a knock to throw out the front element, a common problem for this lens. I will upload comparison shots between them, and the 50/1.1 Nokton- which is the M-Mount lens most similar to it.
Nikkor 50/1.2 Ais, Wide-Open, ISO 5000, 1/90th second shutter speed.
Wide-Open, 1/500th- so no camera shake,
F1.4,
F2.8,
Nikkor 50/1.2 Ais, Wide-Open, ISO 5000, 1/90th second shutter speed.
Wide-Open, 1/500th- so no camera shake,
F1.4,
F2.8,
F
former member
Guest
Nikkor 55/1.2 Ai version,
F1.2
F2,
1/60th, Wide-Open,
My favorite Museum Display,
Nikkor 55/1.2Ai, wide-open.
I donated the "Graphical Firing Table" that the Marine is holding to the Museum. The Korean War Vet that was in charge of this display was happy about that. Someone stole the original.
The 55/1.2 non-Ai used to sell for $125 in mint condition, which is what I paid for the Nikkor-SC version. The Ai here was under $200. Prices are probably double that now. Performance over the center 2/3rds is better than the 50/1.4 of the day.
F1.2
F2,
1/60th, Wide-Open,
My favorite Museum Display,
Nikkor 55/1.2Ai, wide-open.
I donated the "Graphical Firing Table" that the Marine is holding to the Museum. The Korean War Vet that was in charge of this display was happy about that. Someone stole the original.
The 55/1.2 non-Ai used to sell for $125 in mint condition, which is what I paid for the Nikkor-SC version. The Ai here was under $200. Prices are probably double that now. Performance over the center 2/3rds is better than the 50/1.4 of the day.
Doddle
Established
I think the best portrait lens ever made is the Nikkor 85/2 rangefinder lens. But in SLR territory the best contenders are Takumars just because you have so many different looks to choose from. Anything from Planars, Sonnars and weird Ernostar types with or without multicoating. Nikon SLR lens lineup is kind of sparse but very solid. No Sonnar at 85 is a big glaring hole, again my solution was to convert a Zuiko 85/2 with a Leitax kit, very easy to do. Much better than shooting critical focus on an OM-1 or OM-2 because no matter what focus screen I used I never got that pop like you do with a Nikon F2 and H2.
ZF lenses.. honestly if you're going for a set of 3, it might be cheaper to invest in a film EOS because in my neck of the woods the ZE ones are wayyy cheaper than ZF. Like 150-250 EUR less on all of them.
ZF lenses.. honestly if you're going for a set of 3, it might be cheaper to invest in a film EOS because in my neck of the woods the ZE ones are wayyy cheaper than ZF. Like 150-250 EUR less on all of them.
F
former member
Guest
Nikkor-PC 8.5cm F2 LTM, wide-open on the M Monochrom.
This one is at 1/30th second:
On the Leica- you can use the 75mm framelines at 2m and farther for accurate framing.
It is sharp. Over-corrected for spherical aberration, so the background can be a little busier than the 10.5cm F2.5. Nikon just could not get this lens to clear the mirror for F-Mount.
Same lens on film, with the Canon 7-
For a Jupiter-9: you can buy them in F-Mount, and would be easier to focus than using it on a Leica M3.
This one is at 1/30th second:
On the Leica- you can use the 75mm framelines at 2m and farther for accurate framing.
It is sharp. Over-corrected for spherical aberration, so the background can be a little busier than the 10.5cm F2.5. Nikon just could not get this lens to clear the mirror for F-Mount.
Same lens on film, with the Canon 7-
For a Jupiter-9: you can buy them in F-Mount, and would be easier to focus than using it on a Leica M3.
Dogman
Veteran
Alex (OP), my only real suggestion is to hold onto the 50/1.4 Nikkor. It's really a great lens in the way it renders images. It's not perfect, not sharp at wider apertures and it's got plenty of aberrations that give it that "look". It's not a perfect portrait lens but it will do pretty well.
As for 85mm Nikkors, I've owned four--manual focus 85/1.8, 85/1.8 AF-D, 85/1.4 AF-D and the current AF-S 85/1.8G. They're all excellent in my opinion. The AF-D 85/1.4 is my favorite based on the creamy look, the current AF-S 85/1.8G is the sharpest.
As for 85mm Nikkors, I've owned four--manual focus 85/1.8, 85/1.8 AF-D, 85/1.4 AF-D and the current AF-S 85/1.8G. They're all excellent in my opinion. The AF-D 85/1.4 is my favorite based on the creamy look, the current AF-S 85/1.8G is the sharpest.
AlexBG
Well-known
I've never seen an F mount version, I could get a m42/l39 mount and adapter though. See how badly it focuses on my M3 and use it on my FA.
AlexBG
Well-known
I would keep it if I didn't have a Nokton for my M3, does everything I could want from a 50mm lens.
In my head I'm thinking a three lens and camera kit, Fuji Xt1 and 16-55 for all round shots, then my FA with 35mm lens and M3 with 50mm lens. Then maybe an 85mm for the Nikon. I do have a 35mm goggled Summaron for my M3 but I do like to shoot an SLR, I like aperture priority and I can focus faster.
F
former member
Guest
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Jupiter-9-...IKON-F-mount-INFINITY-IS-8503984/274580828502
Some Russian sellers are hacking J-9 lenses into F-Mount, probably were M42 to begin with. I would wait for someone else to buy and review. I've seen some great Hacked Jupiters, and some that were unusable.
A few months ago I came across a black Nikon S-mount 85/2 Nikkor (Sonnar) in black, these are relatively rare compared to the chrome models. In fact it was the very first black 85 I'd ever seen in person.
It was perfect in every way including the hood and caps.
The dealer that had it for sale, priced it at what chrome models typically sell for, so I got it for an extremely good price.
I put it on my digital and did some direct comparisons to my 85/2 AI.
I was rather amazed at the similar rendering. I don't know the optical configuration of the AI but I wouldn't be surprised if it is indeed some sort of Sonnar-relation.
In any case, because of the similarity in rendering I decided to keep the AI and sell the S-mount since the rangefinder lens is worth about 8x what the AI is worth.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
