Jesse3Names
Established
Hi everyone,
I've never had a reason to look into RFs, but I just acquired my great-grandfather's ~1958 Nikon S3 RF body with 35, 50, and 135 mm lenses (marked in cm, of course). I don't know the backstory on how my great-grandfather purchased the camera, as they were never distributed in the US, I believe. However, after 65 years of light to moderate use and heavy storage, the glass was fungus-free, scratch-free, and fully operational. The body had a malfunctioning film advance lever (fixed) and a broken rangefinder (fixed), which probably explains why I couldn't see any parallax shift when I shot with it prior to repair. I just focused by copying it off my 24-105/4L lens on my 5D II body, stepping it off by foot to people subjects, or calculating it with the DOFMaster iPhone app for landscapes for the one roll of Kodak 400TX 135-36 I burned through as a tester on my friend's engagement shoot and hiking around some waterfalls.
Anyway, I've done quite a bit of research on the history of the camera, but one thing I really don't know for sure is what lenses I can use with it. I believe the mount is the Nikon S-mount, but they only made the 3 lenses I own as far as I know. I want to know if there are wider lenses than the 35 mm focal length I have, such as an 18 or 24 mm focal length, that I could shoot with. I would love to do wide to ultra-wide landscapes with this camera. It's a beautiful piece of machinery and I would love to take it out into nature and give it a workout. As much as I enjoy digital photography and its benefits, there's something about film that's so simple, yet so profound. I would just like to keep it alive in my photographic work for as long as possible.
Cheers,
Jesse
I've never had a reason to look into RFs, but I just acquired my great-grandfather's ~1958 Nikon S3 RF body with 35, 50, and 135 mm lenses (marked in cm, of course). I don't know the backstory on how my great-grandfather purchased the camera, as they were never distributed in the US, I believe. However, after 65 years of light to moderate use and heavy storage, the glass was fungus-free, scratch-free, and fully operational. The body had a malfunctioning film advance lever (fixed) and a broken rangefinder (fixed), which probably explains why I couldn't see any parallax shift when I shot with it prior to repair. I just focused by copying it off my 24-105/4L lens on my 5D II body, stepping it off by foot to people subjects, or calculating it with the DOFMaster iPhone app for landscapes for the one roll of Kodak 400TX 135-36 I burned through as a tester on my friend's engagement shoot and hiking around some waterfalls.
Anyway, I've done quite a bit of research on the history of the camera, but one thing I really don't know for sure is what lenses I can use with it. I believe the mount is the Nikon S-mount, but they only made the 3 lenses I own as far as I know. I want to know if there are wider lenses than the 35 mm focal length I have, such as an 18 or 24 mm focal length, that I could shoot with. I would love to do wide to ultra-wide landscapes with this camera. It's a beautiful piece of machinery and I would love to take it out into nature and give it a workout. As much as I enjoy digital photography and its benefits, there's something about film that's so simple, yet so profound. I would just like to keep it alive in my photographic work for as long as possible.
Cheers,
Jesse
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
The Nikon RF system from the S on through the very last of their rangefinders had a very wide array of lenses available.
The original Nikkors were marked in cm as you've probably seen on your 35, 50 and 135.
By the way, can you tell us what the maximum aperture on that 3.5cm lens is? The f/3.5 is older and decent. The f/2.5 is excellent and was produced all the way to the end. The f/1.8 is a lens that outclassed most other optics and still can hold its weight to this day. It's a truly special lens.
I digress.
The widest Nikkor produced was the 2.1cm but it is a valuable collector's item these days. You can find the Cosina Voigtlander 21mm f/4 in Nikon S mount for not much (mine is coming up for sale soon.)
Nikon made a 2.5cm that is rare and really cool in that it is a Topogon copy and sits almost perfectly flat against the camera. You have to use the focusing wheel on the camera to focus the lens, there is no where to grab it to use your fingers.
Then they made a 2.8cm f/3.5, the 3.5cm lenses I mentioned, a bunch of 5cm lenses from f/3.5 to f/1.1, a few 8.5cm lenses one of which helped put Nikon on the map, the legendary 10.5cm f/2.5 and also a slower one which was lighter and smaller. The 13.5cm you have and then they had a system of optical lens groups which fit into a focusing helicoid which then sat on a mirror box to turn the RF into a rather ungainly SLR. These went up to maybe 1000mm if I recall correctly.
The 18.0cm, the 25.0cm and the 40.0cm of the first generation of these also had auxilliary focusing mounts which could enable them to be used on Bronica 6x6 medium format cameras. Also called S mount but it was no relation to the rangefinder S mount.
I'm digressing again, but I'm fascinated by old camera system arcania, especially the Nikon system which was incredibly diverse.
These days if you want to use a 21, 25, 28, 35mm on your Nikon RF and don't want to spend the time and money searching for a good sample of a 50 year old formulation, the Cosina Voigtlander SC mount lenses are the way to go. They make some stellar optics and the SC mount lenses are incredibly built. I've owned many of the Nikon RF lenses and the CV lenses are just about on-par in build quality with the old brass of the Nikon originals. The optics are different but definitely more modern. Modern coatings and CAD of the formulation gives results that are hard to beat, even by the likes of Leica.
Check out the head bartender's site cameraquest.com for more information than you probably ever wanted to know about cameras. It's a great tool. I've been coming back to it for over 10 years now just as a reference.
There are others here on RFF that will chime in about lenses and the Nikon RF system but all will agree you've got a great shooter there.
Phil Forrest
The original Nikkors were marked in cm as you've probably seen on your 35, 50 and 135.
By the way, can you tell us what the maximum aperture on that 3.5cm lens is? The f/3.5 is older and decent. The f/2.5 is excellent and was produced all the way to the end. The f/1.8 is a lens that outclassed most other optics and still can hold its weight to this day. It's a truly special lens.
I digress.
The widest Nikkor produced was the 2.1cm but it is a valuable collector's item these days. You can find the Cosina Voigtlander 21mm f/4 in Nikon S mount for not much (mine is coming up for sale soon.)
Nikon made a 2.5cm that is rare and really cool in that it is a Topogon copy and sits almost perfectly flat against the camera. You have to use the focusing wheel on the camera to focus the lens, there is no where to grab it to use your fingers.
Then they made a 2.8cm f/3.5, the 3.5cm lenses I mentioned, a bunch of 5cm lenses from f/3.5 to f/1.1, a few 8.5cm lenses one of which helped put Nikon on the map, the legendary 10.5cm f/2.5 and also a slower one which was lighter and smaller. The 13.5cm you have and then they had a system of optical lens groups which fit into a focusing helicoid which then sat on a mirror box to turn the RF into a rather ungainly SLR. These went up to maybe 1000mm if I recall correctly.
The 18.0cm, the 25.0cm and the 40.0cm of the first generation of these also had auxilliary focusing mounts which could enable them to be used on Bronica 6x6 medium format cameras. Also called S mount but it was no relation to the rangefinder S mount.
I'm digressing again, but I'm fascinated by old camera system arcania, especially the Nikon system which was incredibly diverse.
These days if you want to use a 21, 25, 28, 35mm on your Nikon RF and don't want to spend the time and money searching for a good sample of a 50 year old formulation, the Cosina Voigtlander SC mount lenses are the way to go. They make some stellar optics and the SC mount lenses are incredibly built. I've owned many of the Nikon RF lenses and the CV lenses are just about on-par in build quality with the old brass of the Nikon originals. The optics are different but definitely more modern. Modern coatings and CAD of the formulation gives results that are hard to beat, even by the likes of Leica.
Check out the head bartender's site cameraquest.com for more information than you probably ever wanted to know about cameras. It's a great tool. I've been coming back to it for over 10 years now just as a reference.
There are others here on RFF that will chime in about lenses and the Nikon RF system but all will agree you've got a great shooter there.
Phil Forrest
Jesse3Names
Established
Hi Phil,
I believe the 35 mm lens I have is an f/3.5 - so not bad! I'd love the 35/1.8 from what it sounds like, but if the optics are top notch, then they'll be ridiculously hard to get ahold of on a Master's student budget. I don't have the camera with me at the moment; it was just repaired as I said and my parents had it fitted into a protective hard case and are about to send it to me.
Thank you so much for the information. It's sporadic at best online, but I will check out CameraQuest for all the data my heart desires. Since you seem to have a decent amount of experience with these RFs, I have another question for you. Since the viewfinder wasn't functioning properly when I used this camera prior to its repair, I don't know what the parallax shift looks like when you bring things into focus. Where should I be looking/what should I be looking for in a properly functioning viewfinder for the parallax to become apparent? Also, is there a good site for parts/accessories for this kind of camera like body or lens back caps? One more thing - I have been looking into a Bronica SQ-Ai so that's good to know I may be able to find a few lenses that would be interchangeable between that 6x6 and the Nikon RF!
Edit - Do you happen to know what the effective focal length of the total viewfinder size is? I'm not talking about the frame lines, but the edge of the viewfinder glass.
I believe the 35 mm lens I have is an f/3.5 - so not bad! I'd love the 35/1.8 from what it sounds like, but if the optics are top notch, then they'll be ridiculously hard to get ahold of on a Master's student budget. I don't have the camera with me at the moment; it was just repaired as I said and my parents had it fitted into a protective hard case and are about to send it to me.
Thank you so much for the information. It's sporadic at best online, but I will check out CameraQuest for all the data my heart desires. Since you seem to have a decent amount of experience with these RFs, I have another question for you. Since the viewfinder wasn't functioning properly when I used this camera prior to its repair, I don't know what the parallax shift looks like when you bring things into focus. Where should I be looking/what should I be looking for in a properly functioning viewfinder for the parallax to become apparent? Also, is there a good site for parts/accessories for this kind of camera like body or lens back caps? One more thing - I have been looking into a Bronica SQ-Ai so that's good to know I may be able to find a few lenses that would be interchangeable between that 6x6 and the Nikon RF!
Edit - Do you happen to know what the effective focal length of the total viewfinder size is? I'm not talking about the frame lines, but the edge of the viewfinder glass.
furcafe
Veteran
As you will probably discover after reading up on the various models, the framelines on the S3 don't move to correct for parallax (only the SP had that feature). So at least that was not something broken.
On any rangefinder, you know the focus point is in focus when the double image lines up.
Pacific Rim Camera has a scanned copy of the S4 instruction manual online (http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/nikon/brochures/s4ib/s4ib(1).htm ), & since the S3's RF works the same way (only the framelines are different), you can get an idea of how to use your camera by taking a quick look.
Also, unlike the S4, I think the S3 was exported to the U.S. & was used by quite a few photojournalists (like Bob Jackson, who took the famous shot of Jack Ruby shooting Lee Harvey Oswald).
On any rangefinder, you know the focus point is in focus when the double image lines up.
Pacific Rim Camera has a scanned copy of the S4 instruction manual online (http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/nikon/brochures/s4ib/s4ib(1).htm ), & since the S3's RF works the same way (only the framelines are different), you can get an idea of how to use your camera by taking a quick look.
Also, unlike the S4, I think the S3 was exported to the U.S. & was used by quite a few photojournalists (like Bob Jackson, who took the famous shot of Jack Ruby shooting Lee Harvey Oswald).
Jesse3Names
Established
There must have been something else not working with the viewfinder. I am interested to see if the double image shift is more apparent (i.e. visible at all) now that the camera has been repaired. I have borrowed my friend's Hasselblad 500c medium format camera and I really like the center parallax alignment dot. I know Leicas and other cameras feature that focusing indicator, but I guess I will have to just adjust to this double image shift.
Phil - I may be interested in your Cosina Voigtlander 21mm f4 SC lens when you decide to sell it. Please make a note of my username and send me a message when you do - it sounds like a great lens if yours is in good shape. I would love a wide angle for those landscapes like I mentioned. Do you usually have to stop down these lenses to reduce/remove aberrations like CA or coma, or are they good wide open at f/4? Usually I'd shoot landscapes at f/5.6 or (more likely) f/8, but in sunrise/sunset shots, it would be nice to know it performs well at f/4, too.
Jan Van Laethem
Nikkor. What else?
First of all congratulations on getting such a nice camera and on your intention to use it for it what it was meant to be : taking pictures.
The 21mm Voigtlander is a good alternative to the much rarer and expensive 2.1 cm Nikkor. Another alternative to consider is the 2.5cm Nikkor, but it will inevitably be more expensive than the 21mm Voigtlander and you loose a bit on the wide end.
"I have been looking into a Bronica SQ-Ai so that's good to know I may be able to find a few lenses that would be interchangeable between that 6x6 and the Nikon RF!"
I have a Bronica SQ-A as well, but the MF Nikkors and Zenza Bronica lenses are made for the medium format of 6x6 cm. There is no way an S lens for the Nikon RF system could cover medium format, nor a way to attach a Zenza Bronica lens to a Nikon RF.
I have a link somewhere to an S3 instruction book, I'll send it to you when I find it.
The 21mm Voigtlander is a good alternative to the much rarer and expensive 2.1 cm Nikkor. Another alternative to consider is the 2.5cm Nikkor, but it will inevitably be more expensive than the 21mm Voigtlander and you loose a bit on the wide end.
"I have been looking into a Bronica SQ-Ai so that's good to know I may be able to find a few lenses that would be interchangeable between that 6x6 and the Nikon RF!"
I have a Bronica SQ-A as well, but the MF Nikkors and Zenza Bronica lenses are made for the medium format of 6x6 cm. There is no way an S lens for the Nikon RF system could cover medium format, nor a way to attach a Zenza Bronica lens to a Nikon RF.
I have a link somewhere to an S3 instruction book, I'll send it to you when I find it.
Jesse3Names
Established
Hi Jan,
Thank you! I try to walk the line avoiding being a 24 year old RF-hipster and an '80s baby who doesn't like anything without batteries.
Yeah, I really enjoy wide/ultra-wide landscape shots. I have the Canon 16-35/2.8L II lens to use with my astro- and spectrum-modified 5D II body, which gives me fantastic ultra-wide to wide images of anything. I purchased a early-/mid-'90s Canon EOS A2 35mm body just to use that lens on film and be able to attempt long exposures with film, but that doesn't mean I don't want to shoot solid primes on the Nikon S3 while I travel!
Something seemed fishy about the image circle size. I know the Nikon RF image circle is way smaller than what's necessary for the 6x6. I've read you can interchange "Nikkors with Bronicas" for their medium format cameras, but it never directly stated it was the MF Nikkor lenses only. I had my suspicions, but went on good faith.
I've done some pretty in depth soul-searching online, but all I've managed to find in terms of a Nikkor F- to S-mount adapter (to use F-mount lenses on S-mount bodies like my S3) is one tutorial on a guy cutting up a m4/3 mount and modifying it to convert F- to S-mount. Are there any on the market where I don't need a precise lathe to achieve this? I feel F-mount lenses could save me quite a bit of money in some cases and open up doors to new focal lengths (like below 21mm). Also, when you use an adapter, doesn't that change the focal length since you're pushing it further away from the film plane?
Thanks,
Jesse
Thank you! I try to walk the line avoiding being a 24 year old RF-hipster and an '80s baby who doesn't like anything without batteries.
Yeah, I really enjoy wide/ultra-wide landscape shots. I have the Canon 16-35/2.8L II lens to use with my astro- and spectrum-modified 5D II body, which gives me fantastic ultra-wide to wide images of anything. I purchased a early-/mid-'90s Canon EOS A2 35mm body just to use that lens on film and be able to attempt long exposures with film, but that doesn't mean I don't want to shoot solid primes on the Nikon S3 while I travel!
Something seemed fishy about the image circle size. I know the Nikon RF image circle is way smaller than what's necessary for the 6x6. I've read you can interchange "Nikkors with Bronicas" for their medium format cameras, but it never directly stated it was the MF Nikkor lenses only. I had my suspicions, but went on good faith.
I've done some pretty in depth soul-searching online, but all I've managed to find in terms of a Nikkor F- to S-mount adapter (to use F-mount lenses on S-mount bodies like my S3) is one tutorial on a guy cutting up a m4/3 mount and modifying it to convert F- to S-mount. Are there any on the market where I don't need a precise lathe to achieve this? I feel F-mount lenses could save me quite a bit of money in some cases and open up doors to new focal lengths (like below 21mm). Also, when you use an adapter, doesn't that change the focal length since you're pushing it further away from the film plane?
Thanks,
Jesse
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Jesse,
The Sq Ai are not the types of Bronicas that use the lenses from the Nikon short mount system. Those were the focal plane Bronica S, S2a and EC/ EC-TL.
They were upgrades on the Hasselblad 1600 system and were very innovative. I've owned two of those bodies in the past and a bunch of lenses but the short mount Nikkors were always out of my price range. Besides, look up the Leica Visoflex and the Nikon mirror box which are the gadgets that turn rangefinders into SLRs. They are a bit crazy and in today's era of SLRs, one would have to be either just having fun with it for sake of doing so or be a masochist to use one.
I hear you on the graduate student budget. Last year I graduated with my BA and I've been lackadaisical in heading towards grad school. Funds have been tight though, to say the least.
The 3.5cm f/1.8 is that lens that people own a Nikon SP or S2 just to shoot. It is cheaper to find in Nikon S mount than Leica thread mount (by a factor of three) so it's easier to get the Nikon RF and just let the lens live on there. One recently sold here in the classifieds for $800 which is a fantastic price for a near mint copy of that lens.
You can get a 35mm that's a stop faster than your lens by grabbing a chrome 3.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor. They aren't as pretty or light as the later black painted versions but the optics are the same and it is a great lens. It's actually the lens that pushed me over the edge from Leica to Nikon rangefinders after I did a test last summer that really surprised me.
Read about accessory viewfinders and how you will need them for lenses like your 135 and any lens wider than 28mm.
You want to keep that 135 for landscapes too. It is the focal length where you start to get a bit of compression and it's the only game in town for reaching out and catching a bighorn sheep on a mountainside in Colorado, for example. (Last summer I was in the very high mountains of Colorado with family, shooting with a Nikon S2, SP and the 28, 35 and 50mm lenses. I wished so much I had that 135 with me at the time.)
Have fun with that great camera!
Phil Forrest
The Sq Ai are not the types of Bronicas that use the lenses from the Nikon short mount system. Those were the focal plane Bronica S, S2a and EC/ EC-TL.
They were upgrades on the Hasselblad 1600 system and were very innovative. I've owned two of those bodies in the past and a bunch of lenses but the short mount Nikkors were always out of my price range. Besides, look up the Leica Visoflex and the Nikon mirror box which are the gadgets that turn rangefinders into SLRs. They are a bit crazy and in today's era of SLRs, one would have to be either just having fun with it for sake of doing so or be a masochist to use one.
I hear you on the graduate student budget. Last year I graduated with my BA and I've been lackadaisical in heading towards grad school. Funds have been tight though, to say the least.
The 3.5cm f/1.8 is that lens that people own a Nikon SP or S2 just to shoot. It is cheaper to find in Nikon S mount than Leica thread mount (by a factor of three) so it's easier to get the Nikon RF and just let the lens live on there. One recently sold here in the classifieds for $800 which is a fantastic price for a near mint copy of that lens.
You can get a 35mm that's a stop faster than your lens by grabbing a chrome 3.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor. They aren't as pretty or light as the later black painted versions but the optics are the same and it is a great lens. It's actually the lens that pushed me over the edge from Leica to Nikon rangefinders after I did a test last summer that really surprised me.
Read about accessory viewfinders and how you will need them for lenses like your 135 and any lens wider than 28mm.
You want to keep that 135 for landscapes too. It is the focal length where you start to get a bit of compression and it's the only game in town for reaching out and catching a bighorn sheep on a mountainside in Colorado, for example. (Last summer I was in the very high mountains of Colorado with family, shooting with a Nikon S2, SP and the 28, 35 and 50mm lenses. I wished so much I had that 135 with me at the time.)
Have fun with that great camera!
Phil Forrest
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
There were two F-S adapters available but you will lose rangefinder focusing since they don't couple with the focusing helical inside the camera.
Therefore they were usually only used with the F mount 21mm Nikkor O which still runs more than the CV lens runs new.
Phil Forrest
Therefore they were usually only used with the F mount 21mm Nikkor O which still runs more than the CV lens runs new.
Phil Forrest
furcafe
Veteran
Maybe there's some miscommunication going on? I'm not a Hassie guy, but I don't know what a parallax alignment dot is. Parallax is caused by the taking lens & VF/RF being physically separated, i.e., what you see in your VF doesn't match up w/what the lens is "seeing"--this is primarily a problem at closer distances, so on nicer RFs like the Leica Ms & the Nikon SP, the framelines move to adjust for parallax as the focus distance changes. On an SLR like a Hasselblad 500 series, you're already looking through the lens so there's no need to correct for parallax. Perhaps you mean a split-image focus aid where you line up the top & bottom halves of an image within a circle? The RF patch in a RF camera works similarly, that's what I meant by "double image". Again, take a look at page 4 in the S4 manual: http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/nikon/brochures/s4ib/s4ib(5).htm for what I'm talking about. Some RFs, like the Kodak Medalist & Ektra, used a split image, just like you see on some SLR screens (match top & bottom of the split image), but most RFs use the super-imposed type RF patch like you see in the S4 manual.
Jesse3Names
Established
Ohh, my fault. I was using the word incorrectly. Sadly, I understand parallax but failed to make the proper connections in my brain. So what I mean to say is I like how the Hasselblad 500c (and Leicas from what I've seen) show you focus. Yes sorry I mean the small circle in the middle of the viewing prism that lets you be sure your focus is spot on by aligning two halves of the image up with each other. Sorry I forgot the 500c was a MF SLR, but you should get the general idea now of what I mean. I can't wait to work with the camera after the viewfinder has been prepared, it should show me a double image now I hope. One of the guys at a camera shop in Raleigh said he saw it shift, but it was so slight he could barely tell. And of course I had never looked through a RF before, so I just believed him and then did the best I could on that roll of film.
furcafe
Veteran
No worries; once you mentioned the Hassie, I figured you were talking about the split image aid, not parallax, but wanted to make sure.
1 downside about the S3 (& some of the other Nkon RFs) is that the rangefinder patch can be dim & difficult to see compared to a Leica M of the same vintage. Not a big deal if you're mainly a daylight shooter, but makes it difficult to focus in low light.
Enjoy your "new" camera!
1 downside about the S3 (& some of the other Nkon RFs) is that the rangefinder patch can be dim & difficult to see compared to a Leica M of the same vintage. Not a big deal if you're mainly a daylight shooter, but makes it difficult to focus in low light.
Enjoy your "new" camera!
Jesse3Names
Established
Yeah, I'll do the best I can. Unfortunately with RFs it doesn't matter how wide open of a lens you have, your viewfinder brightness is fixed. Short of a miraculous retro-fitting job, I don't see you being able to fix that about any Nikon RF camera. And thank you! It's always nice to learn this fully mechanical technology, which I find technically more impressive than processor-driven cameras like my 5D II.
furcafe
Veteran
True, the overall VF brightness is pretty much fixed (unless you have new window glass put in), but if you have enough $$/time, a good repairperson can probably replace the original mirror for the beam-splitter (that's the part that creates the double image) in the RF (which is probably partially oxidized & dimmed w/age) w/a newer, brighter one. I've never had it done on a Nikon RF, but have had the procedure done on other RFs w/the same basic mechanism & it made a big difference.
Jesse3Names
Established
Interesting. Like I've said the camera was just repaired, but if it turns out that I'm having THAT much trouble, then I'll consider it. I would like to think that when this guy took apart my S3, he made sure that wasn't a big issue. Everything (including each lens) was disassembled, cleaned, and reassembled with only the VF/RF and film advance lever being repaired. So that's not too bad of condition for 65 years old - definitely less malfunctioning parts than any 65 year old human would have!
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Being a bit of a Nikoholic (about 15 bodies and 40+ lenses!) I still think that the S3 is the best of the bunch. No complex rangefinder (the SP is a nightmare to get fixed). Often a low contrast rangefinder patch can be cleared up with just cleaning.
As for lenses:
21f4's: Nikon original Rf 21f4 is simply too expensive - the Voigtlander 21f4 is a much better alternative and a very good performer. Another alternative is the Zeiss Biogon 21mm f4,5 - not cheap but one of the best 21's made with extremely low distortion. The slight mis matched focus between a Contax and a Nikon is easily swallowed by the 4.5 maximum aperture.
The Nikon F 21f4 with an adapter would probably end up costing as much as two VC 21/f4's or a Biogon 21f4.5. Only advantage with the adapter is that you can also use the F-mount 12f5.6 and the 15f4.5 lenses on the S3.
25f4 Nikkor is fun, great 60's look to the image - but rather dramatic vignetting and fragile aperture blades. The VC 25f4 is a more modern lens and much more even illumination.
28f3.5 Nikkor: one of my favourites - compact and lightweight and surprisingly flare free for a rathe old design. The VC 28f3.5 is great - probably the best rendition of any wide lens in black/white - but the Nikkor 28 just feels right!
35mm Nikkors: The 35f3.5 is good, a "modest" lens size and price wise - but with good tonality and good sharpness. Alternative would be the 35f2.8 Jupiter-12 from the Kiev camera or the VC 35f2.5 S-mount (again a modern lens with up to date coatings)
Nikkor 35f2.5: Really good, in many ways rivals the early versions of the Leica Summicron. The chrome version is heavy - the black one less so. One of my preferred 35's overall.
Nikkor 35f1.8: a bit of a legend and, yes it is very good - but I think the f2.5 is a better performer overall (except for the SP 2005 35f1.8 - the upgraded coating makes it a stand alone performer).
Nikkor 50's: A bewildering selection to put it mildly - but stick with the 50f2 or 50f1.4 and you can't get too wrong. Voigtlander made a very nice 50f2.5 Color Skopar - very competent lens - but you can get several 50f1.4 Nikkors for what these cost today!
Nikkor 50f1.1 - I have limited experience with this lens, never really liked it. Aperture blades are fragile and it is HEAVY. At the time when it came out, films were slower - 400 iso was a fast film - so it had some practical use. A good f1.4 today will outperform it!
Nikkor 85f2: Good lens, in its chrome form - heavy - in the rarer black alloy form it is lighter. The alternative is the Voigtlander 85f3.5 Apo Lanthar, which is better - but slower, or a Zeiss Sonnar 85f2 (chance of focus shift - particularly at f2 and f2.8).
Nikkor 105f2.5: Must have lens - still one of the great portrait/landscape lenses. The combination of 28 or 35, a 50 and the 105 will allow you to do most everything you desire. The 105f2.5 is portable - but you know you are carrying it!
The Nikkor 105f4 is a strange lens, very light, simple construction - and a collectible in the Rf mount. Not very good at f4 - OK from 5.6 onward.
Nikkor 135's. I have them and rarely use them - I never was a 135 shooter anyway. They are good lenses, the chrome ones can be used to beat off muggers and wild animals!
With S3's I tend to favour the 35/50 combination - and if the situation warrants it - the 105f2.5.
Nikons are a bit of a "hobby" for me. Iwas - and still am - a Leica M user, but the Nikon Rf's are my alternate cameras. I usually dedicate a month for them, cycling through the bodies and some of the lenses. Most shots get uploaded to Flickr - under the tag "Nikon Rf month". You can find sample shots with various lenses there.
For now, in your shoes, I would just load the camera and shoot away. Going to a rangeinder is a bit of a change, no exact framing, no zooms etc - but also something light and fast to focus - and quiet - and it uses film which means no more "machine gun" bracketing - a more contemplative shooting.
Dedicate 10-20 rolls to what you have now -once you shot that you will know what you need, or want, later. Don't worry about the 35f3.5 being slow - you can handheld the S3 at 1/15's if needed.
Key pint to remember - always have the camera set at infinity and the lens set at infinity before putting a lens on the camera - or removing it!!!!
Enjoy the world of Nikon Rf's - and if you really want to know everything - get Robert Rotoloni's "Nikon Rangefinder Book" - and join the Nikon Historical Society - and in 2014 the NHS bi-annual meeting is in San Francisco. Good fun and you suddenly realize that you are not alone in the Nikon Rf world.
As for lenses:
21f4's: Nikon original Rf 21f4 is simply too expensive - the Voigtlander 21f4 is a much better alternative and a very good performer. Another alternative is the Zeiss Biogon 21mm f4,5 - not cheap but one of the best 21's made with extremely low distortion. The slight mis matched focus between a Contax and a Nikon is easily swallowed by the 4.5 maximum aperture.
The Nikon F 21f4 with an adapter would probably end up costing as much as two VC 21/f4's or a Biogon 21f4.5. Only advantage with the adapter is that you can also use the F-mount 12f5.6 and the 15f4.5 lenses on the S3.
25f4 Nikkor is fun, great 60's look to the image - but rather dramatic vignetting and fragile aperture blades. The VC 25f4 is a more modern lens and much more even illumination.
28f3.5 Nikkor: one of my favourites - compact and lightweight and surprisingly flare free for a rathe old design. The VC 28f3.5 is great - probably the best rendition of any wide lens in black/white - but the Nikkor 28 just feels right!
35mm Nikkors: The 35f3.5 is good, a "modest" lens size and price wise - but with good tonality and good sharpness. Alternative would be the 35f2.8 Jupiter-12 from the Kiev camera or the VC 35f2.5 S-mount (again a modern lens with up to date coatings)
Nikkor 35f2.5: Really good, in many ways rivals the early versions of the Leica Summicron. The chrome version is heavy - the black one less so. One of my preferred 35's overall.
Nikkor 35f1.8: a bit of a legend and, yes it is very good - but I think the f2.5 is a better performer overall (except for the SP 2005 35f1.8 - the upgraded coating makes it a stand alone performer).
Nikkor 50's: A bewildering selection to put it mildly - but stick with the 50f2 or 50f1.4 and you can't get too wrong. Voigtlander made a very nice 50f2.5 Color Skopar - very competent lens - but you can get several 50f1.4 Nikkors for what these cost today!
Nikkor 50f1.1 - I have limited experience with this lens, never really liked it. Aperture blades are fragile and it is HEAVY. At the time when it came out, films were slower - 400 iso was a fast film - so it had some practical use. A good f1.4 today will outperform it!
Nikkor 85f2: Good lens, in its chrome form - heavy - in the rarer black alloy form it is lighter. The alternative is the Voigtlander 85f3.5 Apo Lanthar, which is better - but slower, or a Zeiss Sonnar 85f2 (chance of focus shift - particularly at f2 and f2.8).
Nikkor 105f2.5: Must have lens - still one of the great portrait/landscape lenses. The combination of 28 or 35, a 50 and the 105 will allow you to do most everything you desire. The 105f2.5 is portable - but you know you are carrying it!
The Nikkor 105f4 is a strange lens, very light, simple construction - and a collectible in the Rf mount. Not very good at f4 - OK from 5.6 onward.
Nikkor 135's. I have them and rarely use them - I never was a 135 shooter anyway. They are good lenses, the chrome ones can be used to beat off muggers and wild animals!
With S3's I tend to favour the 35/50 combination - and if the situation warrants it - the 105f2.5.
Nikons are a bit of a "hobby" for me. Iwas - and still am - a Leica M user, but the Nikon Rf's are my alternate cameras. I usually dedicate a month for them, cycling through the bodies and some of the lenses. Most shots get uploaded to Flickr - under the tag "Nikon Rf month". You can find sample shots with various lenses there.
For now, in your shoes, I would just load the camera and shoot away. Going to a rangeinder is a bit of a change, no exact framing, no zooms etc - but also something light and fast to focus - and quiet - and it uses film which means no more "machine gun" bracketing - a more contemplative shooting.
Dedicate 10-20 rolls to what you have now -once you shot that you will know what you need, or want, later. Don't worry about the 35f3.5 being slow - you can handheld the S3 at 1/15's if needed.
Key pint to remember - always have the camera set at infinity and the lens set at infinity before putting a lens on the camera - or removing it!!!!
Enjoy the world of Nikon Rf's - and if you really want to know everything - get Robert Rotoloni's "Nikon Rangefinder Book" - and join the Nikon Historical Society - and in 2014 the NHS bi-annual meeting is in San Francisco. Good fun and you suddenly realize that you are not alone in the Nikon Rf world.
Jesse3Names
Established
Tom,
Thanks for that fairly extensive, yet rather concise list! I'll be sure to refer back to it later on when I'm prepared to shell out the cash for extra lenses. I do have a question for you, though. I know my S3 is a Nikkor-S mount for its lenses. However, whenever I type in the focal length and aperture to Google, I can't seem to find the specific S-mount lens you speak of. I know there exists Nikkor-H and -O designations, but what Nikkor designations will technically work just fine with my Nikon S3 RF body? There are so many designations it's hard to keep them all straight or make sense out of them to begin with.
I'll pick that book up soon, thanks it sounds like a pretty comprehensive guide to my new interest. I'm mad I never considered RFs in the past - SLRs and DSLRs (primarily) are just so dominant in the consumer markets. The RF producers need to grab younger people's attention better. I think the RF holds superiority in some ways - especially in the field of optics. You can slam the glass up against the film plane and avoid distortion, where as in the SLR the mirror gets in the way and you have to do crazy weird optics to create a low-distortion ultra-wide angle lens that stops at the front of the body!
Thanks,
Jesse
Thanks for that fairly extensive, yet rather concise list! I'll be sure to refer back to it later on when I'm prepared to shell out the cash for extra lenses. I do have a question for you, though. I know my S3 is a Nikkor-S mount for its lenses. However, whenever I type in the focal length and aperture to Google, I can't seem to find the specific S-mount lens you speak of. I know there exists Nikkor-H and -O designations, but what Nikkor designations will technically work just fine with my Nikon S3 RF body? There are so many designations it's hard to keep them all straight or make sense out of them to begin with.
I'll pick that book up soon, thanks it sounds like a pretty comprehensive guide to my new interest. I'm mad I never considered RFs in the past - SLRs and DSLRs (primarily) are just so dominant in the consumer markets. The RF producers need to grab younger people's attention better. I think the RF holds superiority in some ways - especially in the field of optics. You can slam the glass up against the film plane and avoid distortion, where as in the SLR the mirror gets in the way and you have to do crazy weird optics to create a low-distortion ultra-wide angle lens that stops at the front of the body!
Thanks,
Jesse
James24
Well-known
Roland Vinck has now added Nikon rangefinder lenses (S Mount) to his his excellent lens resource pages.
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#RF-wide
There are plenty of other resources - obviously Rotolonis rangefinder book is a must buy for any budding enthusiast. You could also pick up a vintage Nikkor lenses brochure. Some are extremely expensive but others not so.
Cameraquest has some more information.
http://cameraquest.com/classics.htm
There are only a handful of S mount Nikkors so it doesn't take long to get a handle on them. Have fun!
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Jesse, the S-mount designation is mainly used with other manufacturers making Nikon Rf compatible lenses (Voigtlander/Zeiss). To google, just use "Nikkor 105mm f2.5" or whatever lens you are looking for. The H and O etc - are indication of how many elements the lens contains.
Roberts book will give you more information than you will ever need - great night time reading too.
Sometimes search engines get confused between Nikon and Nikkor. Nikon is the camera brand and Nikkor generally designates lenses.
Roberts book will give you more information than you will ever need - great night time reading too.
Sometimes search engines get confused between Nikon and Nikkor. Nikon is the camera brand and Nikkor generally designates lenses.
Jesse3Names
Established
But, the S-mount and F-mounts are clearly different flange designs. Are all the Nikon Nikkor RF lenses from that time going to work on my S3? I can't see why they ALL would.