Opinion on W-Nikkor 3.5cm F3.5

[nomadia]

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

 

[jonmanjiro]

Get a W-Nikkor 3.5cm F1.8 and you're done. Its the best of the Nikon RF 35mm lenses. There's plenty of sample photos in this thread below.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107698

 

[raid]

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.

 

[Timmyjoe]

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

 

[ForestCap]

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159606

Some sample photos from @farlymac with the 35/3.5

 

[nomadia]

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

 

[farlymac]

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159606

Some sample photos from @farlymac with the 35/3.5

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

 

[Fraser]

I had the f3.5 when I first got my S3 but soon swapped it for a f1.8 nice and compact aperture was a bit tricky to adjust.
15fbpics3black01 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

 

[Corran]

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.

 

[underlord]

All shot with the W-Nikkor 35mmF3.5

Blemished by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

Narrow Moss Lane by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

Untitled by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

Picnic Area by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

Sefton Park Lake by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

Castle Street by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

 

[ForestCap]

All shot with the W-Nikkor 35mmF3.5

Blemished by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Narrow Moss Lane by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Untitled by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Picnic Area by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Sefton Park Lake by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Castle Street by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

That's really nice results for a Tessar-type wide angle.

 

[underlord]

That's really nice results for a Tessar-type wide angle.

Thanks. I love this 35mmF3.5! It's a beaut of a lens.

 

[nomadia]

All shot with the W-Nikkor 35mmF3.5

Blemished by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Narrow Moss Lane by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Untitled by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Picnic Area by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Sefton Park Lake by Philip McAllister, on Flickr
Castle Street by Philip McAllister, on Flickr

Wow. Looks like a good buy. Thanks for these.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[underlord]

You're welcome nomadia

 

[nomadia]

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

 

[Timmyjoe]

Nice looking set up.

 

[benlees]

Yup, clean looking lens you got there!

 

[nomadia]

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

 

[someonenameddavid]

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.......

 

[jonmanjiro]

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.