Nikkormat FTn

dave lackey said:
Wow, such great suggestions and some I never thought about!

KR hates my favorite Nikon lens so I may just look for the 43-86 just because it has character and because he hates it! Lol...:)
Click to expand...

The 43-86 was terrible. It's not sharp at any aperture or focal length. In the 70's the owner of the ad agency I worked for bought one on a Nikormat EL and I had to print some of the negs. It was simply terrible. I've never seen another lens that was as consistently bad. Don't wast your money unless you like soft images.

I'd suggest the 35 f2.8 it's excellent. I bought a like new for $35 and its excellent, small and light. Next I'd suggest any of the 105 f2.5's especiayly the first generation non AI. It's a classic sonnar design. Beautiful in every way. You should be able to find a really nice one for $65-100. The second generation isn't a sonnar but it's equally as nice. Next I'd suggest a 55 f1.2. They're not outrageous and wide open to f2.8 it has magic. The 50 1.2 is equally as fine but newer and more expensive. I love my 50 1.2. Stopped down to 2.8 and below its killer sharp. Next I'd say the non AI 85 1.8. It's sharp! There are 3 versions of the 24 f 2.8. All are good. I bought a non AI v1 on a nice Nikkormat FTn for $60. The 135 f3.5 is a bargain and fantastic in a ways. It's very sharp, small and light. I have a non AI 50 f2 that's killer good even at F2. In zooms the 25-50 f4 constant aperture, 75-150 f3.5 E, 70-200 f4.5 are all exceptional even by today's standards. They are very cheap as we with the 25-50 being the most expensive. I've used all of these on my Df and looking at files on a high grade monitor they are all beautiful.
 
The Nikkormat FTn is a fine camera.

Nikkormat FTn, Nikkor 50mm f/2, TriX.

Erik.

8489121781_9a1cfab5b7_c.jpg
 
Thank you, Erik. You are always such an inspiration. I am pulling my FTn out of the bag right now to fit it with the Nikkor 50mm 1.8!
 
David Murphy said:
Yeah, that's really a beautiful camera and lens and as much photographic capability for the money as I can possibly imagine.
Click to expand...

David, I could not agree more.

My own black FTn resides in its own bag, as of yesterday. I hope there is a 105mm lens residing on that camera body in the future. For now, the 50 1.8 will do nicely.:)
 
A nice feature of the Nikkormat FTn is the shutterspeed selector. You can use that lever without taking the camera from your eye. No other camera from that era has this feature AFAIK apart from the Leica M5.

Nikkormat FTn, Nikkor 50mm f/2, TriX.

Erik.

8501711024_9b43c0df6b_c.jpg
 
all of this nikkormat talk has made me get out my nikkomat (yes, nikkomat) ft2 with nikkor 50/2. i have been dry shooting it the past few minutes. what a smooth truck. i may have to put actual film in it, thanks to you guys. i have two rolls of ilford hp5 left ...
 
Erik van Straten said:
A nice feature of the Nikkormat FTn is the shutterspeed selector. You can use that lever without taking the camera from your eye. No other camera from that era has this feature AFAIK apart from the Leica M5.......
Click to expand...

OM-1 had it, as did the CL, and the Canon EF.

Feeling way too old knowing that....

B2 (;->
 
105 2.5 . Sonnar is not as good very close wide open. Otherwise the very similar.

50 1.8 50 2.0 are better for general use than faster lenses. 1.4 is kind of optimized for close range sacrificing far.

35 2.8 is better than 2.0 unless you want 2.0. More flair and posting with 2.0

28 2.8 that focuses to .7 meter has CRC (close range correction) ,almost no distortion, sharp into corners. I have two one I bought while the first was awaiting repair diagnosis after a fall. This was issued as a to die for lens with the designers given no limits.

Never used a 28 2.0 , but reports do not rate it as highly.

AiS lenses are best as they were the last of the manual focus lenses.
 
BillBingham2 said:
Leica M5 was 1971
OM-1 was 1972
Leica CL was 1973
Canon EF 1973
Click to expand...

OK, but the Nikkormat was the first. Apart from that, it had a very handy lever, the M5 and the EF had dials that worked only if you had a strong index-finger. The OM was not build to professional standards, but the Nikkormat was.

The CL doesn't count, that was a nasty toy.

Erik.
 
David Murphy said:
Yeah, that's really a beautiful camera and lens and as much photographic capability for the money as I can possibly imagine.
Click to expand...

Thanks, David. I bought one with the 50/1.4 back in '73, and kept it until '76 when I stupidly sold it to a friend of mine. Got a hankering for another one a couple of years ago, and wound up with three. First was an FT that came in a box lot, and two FTn's. The first FTn because of the lens on it, but it had mechanical issues, so I then got another FTn, which also has a good meter. I plan on keeping it in the F2S bag/kit, once I get some reorganizing done.

PF
 
BillBingham2 said:
OM-1 had it, as did the CL, and the Canon EF.

Feeling way too old knowing that....

B2 (;->
Click to expand...

Sorry Bill, but something is wrong.
The OM-1 doesn't have the shutter speed in the viewfinder and that's what Eric was talking about.
Unless you have some very special OM-1, I have 5 of them and I don't see that in any of them.

Just to confirm, please have a look at this page: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/om1/index.htm
It shows what one sees in the viewfinder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom