Nikon F: which 50?

The 50mm Summicron-R 1/2 cam is my favorite Leica lens. As an all around lens for a Nikon F body I would choose a 55mm f3.5 Micro-Nikkor.

mfogiel said:
"Nikkor-H.C 2/50

Very sharp, totally useable at f2. Excellent contrast and flare resistance.
Cheap."

As Harry Lime has pointe out, this lens is somewhat of a milestone 50mm from Nikon. I have been reading the latest Erwin Puts' book today, and here is what he says about it while commenting on the 1st version of Summicron R 50:
"This lens (Summicron), together with the Nikkor-H 2/50 were the best of their class and became the standard for the type. It is remarkable that the R lenses never achieved the high esteem that the M lenses were given, even if the R lenses had sometimes better imagery."
In other words, he is suggesting that the Summicron R together with the Nikkor H were better than the then (1964-1976) available Summicron M (3rd version), which is quoted today between 900 and 1400 USD on the secondary market.
Click to expand...
 
rlouzan said:
... As an all around lens for a Nikon F body I would choose a 55mm f3.5 Micro-Nikkor.
Click to expand...

I'm with you on that one. I hardly use the 50mm f/1.2 very much, the Micro-Nikkor is almost always on the camera. So much so that I've been thinking of selling the Nikkor 50/1.2.
 
The old pre AI vintage lenses that look right on an F can be got very reasonably these days. I would also suggest you start with a 50/2 HC - my copy has been with me since 1975 while a lot of other lenses have come and gone . You can always add others later.
 
So a few hours ago I had decided that I would like to start with the 50mm HC f2...

But I went to my camera store down the street and they had a 58mm f1.4 for $225 in "very good" condition. I looked at it and it seemed like a keh.com bargain which is really "excellent" in my opinion. Well I've heard great things about that lens, how does it rate? Keh.com has them for about $340 (in ex condition) so I would expect that a bargain wone would cost maybe $275 or so.

A few more questions:
1. For a mechanical F/F2 any manual focus Nikon lens should work?
2. How much does it cost to get a lens AI'd (incase I want to adapt it to later F's in the future).
3. Any "disadvantages" of having a lens AI'd? AI'ing a lens just allows you to mount and use more exposure features, correct?
 
msbarnes said:
A few more questions:
1. For a mechanical F/F2 any manual focus Nikon lens should work?
2. How much does it cost to get a lens AI'd (incase I want to adapt it to later F's in the future).
3. Any "disadvantages" of having a lens AI'd? AI'ing a lens just allows you to mount and use more exposure features, correct?
Click to expand...


1. Yes - no restrictions for a non metered F or F2. If you wish to meter with an F Photomic or early F2 Photomic you need any lens with a coupling prong. (Later F2A and F2AS Photomics need AI or AIS lenses to meter at full aperture).

2. US$25 but if this is your intention you might as well buy a lens that has already been AI'd.

3 If you buy a lens such as the 58/1.4 getting it AI'd will affect its value as a collectible lens. No disadvantage as far as usability is concerned.
 
I used for years the 50/2 and the 55/3.5. Both lenses are superb.
Of course, I also used the 105/2.5.
 
I also like the HC 50/2 Nikkor. It works well, and simply looks "right" on the old Nikon bodies. I also like the AIS 50/1.2, it is a bit soft wide open, but is sharper when stopped down to f/1.4 than the Nikkor 50/1.4 at the same aperture.

My usual lens on the old F is the 35/2 Auto Nikkor, the example I have works very well.

One of the good things about the old Nikkors is that zillions were produced, and you can find a good deal if you look long enough.
 
Absolutely. I've got both the 50/1.2 AIS and 50/1.8 AIS as well as a pre-ai 50/2.0 HC. The HC is by far my favorite. I use it on my F6 all the time.
 
i have the 50mm f2. i acquired the 55mmf3.5 Micro-Nikkor. this is one really sharp lens. Loved the Puts quote about the "R" lenses and Nikon. My Collapsible Summicron not that bad compared to Nikon 50mm f2.0
My Nikons appear sharper, but personally think more higher contrast.
Love my 105mm f2.5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom