Opinion on W-Nikkor 3.5cm F3.5

N

nomadia

Established
Local time
4:58 AM
Joined
Oct 19, 2013
Messages
127
I am looking at getting a wide angle for my Nikon RF and narrowed down to either the 35mm 2.5 or the 3.5. I read that the 2.5 is a fantastic lens, but there's not much reviews on the 3.5. Any regular user of this lens? What's your opinion re: this lens? Worth the buy or get a 2.5 or 1.8 instead? Sample photos? Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The 35/1.8 is an awesome lens. I may have a Nikkor 35/3.5 somewhere at home, but I have never used it.
 
I've got the W-Nikkor 3.5mm f2.5 and it's a great lens. I've seen different articles that say the f2.5 is optically superior to the f3.5, although I've never had an f3.5. And the best of the old Nikkor rangefinder 3.5mm lenses is the f1.8. Just have never been able to afford one.

Best,
-Tim
 
Thank you everyone. The 1.8 is out of the question for now. I checked Rotolini's book re: the 3.5 and all it says is it's a "proven design." I'll check the links. Again, thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
nukecoke said:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159606

Some sample photos from @farlymac with the 35/3.5
Click to expand...

Beat me to it! My opinion though is it's a good lens. I've never shot it in a comparison with the 2.5, but now I'm thinking about it. The 3.5 is a four element Tessar type, while the 2.5 has six elements in a symmetrical design. I got good results from both the LTM and S version I have of the 3.5, and just on a quick thought can say the 2.5 gives a slightly different look, but not something I really concern myself with. I'm more after the proper composition and exposure.

My LTM version of the 3.5 does not have a filter mount, and I shoot it without a hood as it is fairly deep set in the barrel. The 2.5 is great for when it is cold, because I can adjust the aperture by clasping the screw-on hood while still wearing gloves, which is the same for the 3.5 in S mount. But the 1.8 (and some late version 2.5's) have a regular aperture control ring on the barrel.

PF
 
I have all three. The f/2.5 may be better than the f/3.5 in the far corners and at wider stops, but the f/3.5 has a more "classic" rendering and interesting out of focus area, so pick your poison. The f/1.8 is sharpest at moderate apertures but also has wonky bokeh at wider stops.
 
a974346fcb0cc59546806429a62da898.jpg


Will test the 3.5 over the weekend with some HP5s. Will be posting sample photos when it's done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Let's see if my eye can live up to the setup. Most likely not, but I'm sure it will be fun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I may be wrong, but I think that the Nikkor 35 f2.5 is the same as the Nikonos and series E 35mm, so you could buy it with an EM or an FG for cheap cheap... of course its not a rangefinder.......
 
The LTM/S-mount W-Nikkor 3.5cm F2.5 and Nikonos W-Nikkor 35mm F2.5 are the same 6 elements in 4 groups optical formula, but the E-Series Nikon 35mm F2.5 is a completely different lens (5 elements in 5 groups). It has to be to clear the mirror/meet the backfocus requirements of an F-mount body.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom