Photos taken with Nikkor-O 2.1cm 1:4 - POST HERE

Raid, you will probably like the Nikkor 21f4. It has a distict look to its images. Another advantage is that it uses 52 mm filter (and with a deep red one - the edges are dark, really dark - but looming sky too).
 
FrankS said:
So what's the diff between this lens and the later improved f3.5 and f2.8 versions?
Click to expand...

Less distorsion and less vignetting due to the old Biogon symmetrical design.

The later 20/3.5 UD, 20/4 Ai, 20/3.5 Ai-S and 20/2.8 Ai-S are all retrofocus design lenses with mandatory compromises re. distorsion and corners illumination.

The 20/2.8 Ai-S can give you a serious headache due to its huge pincushion distorsion.
 
So the "improved later versions" are not really improved if there is more distortion. Did I get it right?
 
raid said:
So the "improved later versions" are not really improved if there is more distortion. Did I get it right?
Click to expand...

They are really improved because you can use them as genuine SLR lenses, without being forced to lock the camera body mirror up, to guess focus and to use an external offset viewfinder.

Now you must buy a Nikkor-UD 20/3.5 and a Nikkor Ai-S 20/2.8 so that you can compare them all.
 
Highway 61 said:
The 20/2.8 Ai-S can give you a serious headache due to its huge pincushion distorsion.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If I remember correctly, it has some barrel distortion in the center and changes to pin cushion distortion toward the edges, so a sort of moustache distortion, which is a PITA to correct in post processing.

I expect Raeed's thorough lens tests will determine precisely just how wavey this particular moustache is!
 
I meant to say that if optically the older Nikkor is a better lens, then the newer lenses are (optically) not really better if the main advantage was not needing mirror lock-up. Tom once said that he found the Nikor to be a sharper lens than the W-Rokkor, so I will look into it since I now have both lenses. I don't want to buy any other wide angle lenses now.

I wonder how the 21mm lenses compare with the Canon 19mm lens.
 
raid said:
I wonder how the 21mm lenses compare with the Canon 19mm lens.
Click to expand...

Do you have the Canon so that you can compare it with the Minolta ?

I also expect you to scientifically compare the Nikkor-O 21/4 with the old original Biogon 21/4.5 once mounted on a Nikon rangefinder camera body. I own the latter but sometimes feel some attraction towards the Nikkor-O.
 
Highway 61 said:
Do you have the Canon so that you can compare it with the Minolta ?

I also expect you to scientifically compare the Nikkor-O 21/4 with the old original Biogon 21/4.5 once mounted on a Nikon rangefinder camera body. I own the latter but sometimes feel some attraction towards the Nikkor-O.
Click to expand...

I do not own the Biogon but have the Canon lens.
I do not do any scientific comparisons. ;)
 
I have the vintage Biogon 21mm f4.5 as well as the F-mount 21f4. The biggest difference between them is the almost perfect rectilinear rendition with the Biogon. Edge fall off is slightly less too - and it does couple to the rangefinder. However - from user stand point - the F-mount with the VC adapter wins hands down. The Biogon 21 is heavy and the focus/aperture indexes are virtually unreadable in bright light (tiny numbers in black on a bright chrome barrel. Either one of these lenses is good, very good in fact. Both are quite dramatic in their rendering and both are sharp. The Nikkor is a bit less prone to flare and it does have the 52 mm filter thread. This means you can actually make a vestigal hood for it by knocking the glass out of 2-3 filters and stack them together. I dont know if there ever was a hood for the old Biogon - at least I have never seen one.
I did have the Canon 19 but for some reason I did not get along with it.
 
Raid, I have the elusive F -S adapter. It works fine with the F-mount 21, though you have to 'fiddle" a bit with it to get it on. The "tab" can be difficult to get in position - once locked in it stays put.
 
I got my SLR version of this lens today, with its finder. Both parts are very clean.
Is it possible to use an F-M adapter without hurting M film cameras?
 
I followed your steps, and tne lens mounted very nicely on the F2. I just need to get a flsh mount next.
Why notuse super glue and attach a hotshoe on the prism finder?


enasniearth said:
The 2.1 cm f4 in Nikon slr version is an odd bird .
The Nikon f / f2 and some nikkor mats have the tab in the camera body that makes use of this lens possible .
The lens has more in common with a canon fd breechlock mount than a Nikon f .
The lens has a tab that mates with a tab in the Nikon body .
You set the lens so the tab is behind the lens mount ring. ( there is a clickstop and set focus so the tab is in proper position)
You drop the lens onto the body , rotate the outer chrome ring until it locks .
The Nikon f f2 is made for the use of this fine lens .
The problem with the voigtlander f- s and f to Leica m adapters is that they lack this tab that is standard to the production Nikon f . ( cameraquests original listing for the f- s adapter stated it would not work for the 2.1 cm f 4 nikkor in Nikon f mount )
So there is no way to align the lens so it functions properly . Posts refer to using duct tape to accomplish this .
The Nikon f requires the finder to be mounted over the rewind crank so it makes for a large package .
You can modify the f , by removing the prism and installing a reduced height shoe , you also modify the finder to Leica shoe mount type.
I posted my adapted Nikon f ( pawnshop buy $45 mirror lazy not good )
Much laughter ( well the camera can not be used as an slr now )
You can buy the rf coupled unit ( 298 produced ) or purchase the 21 zeiss biogon ( like performance to the nikkor )
The Nikon f type is the same as the rf type , lacking only rf coupling
Well the nikon f body is 3/4 inch longer , however with modified finder is the same height or lower than an s 3. The locked up mirror gives titanium shutter sp performance ,iit is a guess focus 2.1 cm , wide open depth of field is from 4.5 feet to infinity .its pretty easy
I can guess focus this ,
Click to expand...
 
raid said:
Why not use super glue and attach a hotshoe on the prism finder?
Click to expand...

Didn't you get the F version of the lens with its original matching finder ?

If so, the original finder just slips onto the F2 flash shoe. Why the hell would you want to destroy the F2 finder top leatherette with super glue ? :eek:

If the finder you received has a male shoe and cannot mount on the F2 flash shoe, then you got the finder for the S version of the lens.
 
The F2 has no flash shoe. I may get an adapter. The finder that I got may have been made for the RF camera, as you said.
 
raid said:
The F2 has no flash shoe. I may get an adapter. The finder that I got may have been made for the RF camera, as you said.
Click to expand...

Assuming the finder has a six digit serial number (6xxxxx) on the base and looks like this, you hit the jackpot. This finder alone is worth a few hundred dollars.

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • finder 01.jpg
    finder 01.jpg
    36.8 KB · Views: 0
  • finder 02.jpg
    finder 02.jpg
    29 KB · Views: 0
  • finder 03.jpg
    finder 03.jpg
    38.6 KB · Views: 0
raid said:
The F2 has no flash shoe. I may get an adapter. The finder that I got may have been made for the RF camera, as you said.
Click to expand...

I am suddenly thinking of a Nikkor-O 21/4 outfit in F-mount recently sold on eBay ; the finder was the original F-mount one but had been hacked (the original female shoe had been cut off and an home-made male shoe had been installed instead).

Is it that one which you bought ? In that case you didn't hit the jackpot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom