Nikon FM2 needs a forever lens

2821515732_09cfc56164_z.jpg


:cool:
 
"Forever lens"?

This is film, after all, and the extra speed will mean the difference between using it and not--aside from film speed, this ain't no Leica; the mirror slap creates quite the vibration.

I'd have to second the Nikkor 50/1.2, still the fastest Nikon SLR still lens made. Got that low contrast craziness at ƒ/1.2 although by ƒ/2, haze clears and resolution is top-notch. It's still the sharpest Nikkor 50 beyond ƒ/2 after all these years.

The CV 2/40 is superb, likewise the CV 1,4/58 (great color but FL a hair too long for all-around use). The ZF 2/35 should also be considered; an amazing optic.

For 50mm? the ƒ/1,2 has character in gobs, rock-solid build, extra speed when you need it and unbeatable performance (slightly) stopped down.
For 35/40? Zeiss 2/35 ZF or the CV 2/40.
 
james.liam said:
"Forever lens"?

This is film, after all, and the extra speed will mean the difference between using it and not--aside from film speed, this ain't no Leica; the mirror slap creates quite the vibration.
.
Click to expand...
I have used Pentax S1a, Sv, Spotmatics, since the 60's.
I am yet to see "Vibration" causing any blur!
My 6x7 indeed at certain speeds, did show vibration!
 
I bought an FM2 with a 50 f1.2 on it. Foolishly traded the camera off but kept the lens.
I'd opt for the 50 1.2 as it gives you the speed which along with the shutter speeds of the FM2 gives you a lot more options IMO.
That being said, I have to force myself to take the Micro Nikkor 55 2.8 off my A7ii, just to keep the other lenses exercised.
It's surprising to me that I've managed to collect most of the Nikkors mentioned in this thread. I must be learning something by reading RFF!
 
Which Konica AR lens is it that you favor? Starting there and looking for a Nikkor with the same formulation would be ideal.
As for you not liking the 50mm f/1.4 AF, switching to the AIS is not going to do you any favors as the lenses are the same optical formulation. The handling of the AIS lens is nicer but if anyone says the AIS offers any optical advantage to the AF, they may also have oceanfront property in New Mexico for sale. Ok, not quite but the same formula is the same formula. The AF may have a miniscule, almost immeasurable amount of decentering due to the AF "slop" but you'd need a microscope to see the difference, as AF Nikkors have been used for 30 years now and offer some of the best performance out there.
The lens choice is also dictated by what you want to shoot. If up to 1:2 magnification is something you want, you should look at a 50mm Micro-Nikkor, probably the f/2.8 since you're looking for an all-rounder, carry everywhere lens. I love mine but I'd go for something wider and/or faster for an everywhere, everyday lens.
If you're looking for lightweight, you'd want to find a 45mm GN Nikkor or the aforementioned 50mmf/1.8. Even the series E is pretty good, compared to modern optics. Build quality is better than most consumer lenses.
If you want a more portrait oriented lens, the 85mm f/1.8, f/2 or the monster f/1.4 are all good.
The best combination between performance and lightweight is probably the Ai 50mm f/2.
I'll get back on topic though, as you said you'd like a 50mm or 35mm.
For 35mm, the f/1.4 N-Nikkor is fantastic. Same formulation as the new one but the older N-Nikkor has a thorium-glass element and I think it is my most "3D" lens. It reeks of coma in the corners wide open at night but stop down to f/2 and those point light sources are no longer swallowtails, but more mushrooms. By f/2.8, the coma is gone. This and the later 35mm f/1.4 are heavy lenses but both are unique. The signature of the lens is very unique and not unpleasant at all. I love my N-Nikkor for black and white work, it is really stunning.
The 35/2 is almost as big and a great performer but if I were to be shopping for this focal length, I'd go with the f/1.4.
Other than those, you could look at adapting a Leica or Contax lens to the Nikon. My old Contax 50mm f/1.4 Planar MM was stunning. It had the build of a 1960s lens but was from the 90s. Fantastic image quality on my old RX when I used that system fifteen years ago.
Anyway, I'd start with that Konica AR lens you want to emulate, find the formulation and go from there with a similar Nikkor.

Phil Forrest
 
All the Nikon 50's I've used have been very good and well built.

That said, the Voigtlander lenses I have are a full step up in build quality. I cannot say they are optically better than Nikon's, but I'm sure they are no compromise whatsoever.

If I were picking a use-forever manual focus lens for Nikon gear, I would go Voigtlander. Whatever focal length you prefer.
 
If you can manage to have that camera and just one lens, let all of us know your secret. No matter what you buy, figure on adding a couple more over the years. The 50 1.2 ais is a wonderful lens and not too big for its capabilities. There are also a couple of zooms of the proper era that are worth considering. If you prefer wides, the 25-50 f4.0 ais is wonderful. On the longer end, the 50-135 f3.5 is also a great lens. If you get a larger lens, you may find the FM2 balances better with an MD12.
 
The Voigtlander seems to be an excellent choice. I've shot 40mm quite a bit on my Contax and Yashica (and Fuji xe1), a Zeiss cy mount. Really like that focal length and size of lens. I wouldn't mind a zeiss for the fm2 (!) but not sure I'll stretch. At any rate, I'm spending the evening checking the availability and prices on some of these lenses. I like shooting the fm2 and the led lights work for me. Not sure I understand all the variations of the 35mm.

@b2: will look into the 28mm. Always willing to revisit my preferences based on good advice.
 
Thanks for a thoughtful answer. I go back to AR 50mm 1.7, not sharp but nice colours and contrast. The 40mm I liked less. One surprising lens was the 135mm 3.2; had a creamy look that attracted me. The 21mm f4 was interesting and the 35mm 2.8 was fine. I do have several CY lenses but nothing expensive. But certainly good enough.

I have normally stuck with 35 and 50mm, often picking up a 24mm. Then it a jump to longer zooms. What I did find out when I used my legacy glass on Fuji xe1 or Olympus m4/3 was that I enjoyed shooting street/people with longer than 50. Sometimes hard to get the shot inside with a ~80 to 100 but it was portraiture on the move...


Phil_F_NM said:
Which Konica AR lens is it that you favor? Starting there and looking for a Nikkor with the same formulation would be ideal.
As for you not liking the 50mm f/1.4 AF, switching to the AIS is not going to do you any favors as the lenses are the same optical formulation. The handling of the AIS lens is nicer but if anyone says the AIS offers any optical advantage to the AF, they may also have oceanfront property in New Mexico for sale. Ok, not quite but the same formula is the same formula. The AF may have a miniscule, almost immeasurable amount of decentering due to the AF "slop" but you'd need a microscope to see the difference, as AF Nikkors have been used for 30 years now and offer some of the best performance out there.
The lens choice is also dictated by what you want to shoot. If up to 1:2 magnification is something you want, you should look at a 50mm Micro-Nikkor, probably the f/2.8 since you're looking for an all-rounder, carry everywhere lens. I love mine but I'd go for something wider and/or faster for an everywhere, everyday lens.
If you're looking for lightweight, you'd want to find a 45mm GN Nikkor or the aforementioned 50mmf/1.8. Even the series E is pretty good, compared to modern optics. Build quality is better than most consumer lenses.
If you want a more portrait oriented lens, the 85mm f/1.8, f/2 or the monster f/1.4 are all good.
The best combination between performance and lightweight is probably the Ai 50mm f/2.
I'll get back on topic though, as you said you'd like a 50mm or 35mm.
For 35mm, the f/1.4 N-Nikkor is fantastic. Same formulation as the new one but the older N-Nikkor has a thorium-glass element and I think it is my most "3D" lens. It reeks of coma in the corners wide open at night but stop down to f/2 and those point light sources are no longer swallowtails, but more mushrooms. By f/2.8, the coma is gone. This and the later 35mm f/1.4 are heavy lenses but both are unique. The signature of the lens is very unique and not unpleasant at all. I love my N-Nikkor for black and white work, it is really stunning.
The 35/2 is almost as big and a great performer but if I were to be shopping for this focal length, I'd go with the f/1.4.
Other than those, you could look at adapting a Leica or Contax lens to the Nikon. My old Contax 50mm f/1.4 Planar MM was stunning. It had the build of a 1960s lens but was from the 90s. Fantastic image quality on my old RX when I used that system fifteen years ago.
Anyway, I'd start with that Konica AR lens you want to emulate, find the formulation and go from there with a similar Nikkor.

Phil Forrest
Click to expand...
 
The Pentax LX and the Nikon FM2 are similar cameras. The Voigtlander 40/2 Ultron SL is my favorite walk around lens on the LX. It is my favorite go-to lens when shooting Adox CMS II and want the best resolution I can get. I would expect that the Nikon version performs as well.
 
presspass said:
If you can manage to have that camera and just one lens, let all of us know your secret. No matter what you buy, figure on adding a couple more over the years. The 50 1.2 ais is a wonderful lens and not too big for its capabilities. There are also a couple of zooms of the proper era that are worth considering. If you prefer wides, the 25-50 f4.0 ais is wonderful. On the longer end, the 50-135 f3.5 is also a great lens. If you get a larger lens, you may find the FM2 balances better with an MD12.
Click to expand...

Actually, a great companion to the 50/1.2 whole be the compact Nikkor 75-150/3.5 E. If you can find a later version with tighter zoom mechanism (less slippage) it can be had for next to nothing. Punches way above its weight.
 
HWA_1809.jpg

If 50mm is your game, I would agree with the previous posts on the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2. If 35mm is more to your liking, then I would also agree with previous posts on the Zeiss .ZF or .ZF2 35mm f/2 lens. I'm a 35mm kind of guy and that is where my heart belongs. The 35mm Zeiss is absolutely amazing and stays on my Nikon F3 as a permanent fixture. It is the last 35mm focal length lens you'll ever need! I searched for the perfect lens for a year and this was my reward!!!

Pros: Everything (Sharpness, Micro-contrast, Character, Pop, Etc.)

Cons: Definitely on the heavier side of things...

Wish you the best on your hunt!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom