Small 35's for F mount?

Juan Valdenebro

Juan Valdenebro

Truth is beauty
Local time
10:33 PM
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
4,353
Hi,

I want a manual 35mm lens for my Nikon bodies, and my only priority is small size.

I don't want the 45 2.8 P because I already have, carry, use, and love my 50 1.4 Ai. For the gap between my 50 and my 20 2.8 Ai-S, I want exactly a 35.

I'll use it well stopped down, around f/8-f/11 only. I don't care if it's slow, or if others have better build or image quality... I wouldn't mind if it's another brand, as long as it's very small and short... By those f-stops, I guess any 35 will be sharp enough for street shooting.

After a couple of days of web search, I feel I haven't found the right information including several brands or especially caring about small size.

Thanks a lot!

Cheers,

Juan
 
Thanks, Dwig...

That was the only relatively small option I had seen... I'm starting to think there are no shorter ones from any brand... Has anyone used it stopped down? How good is it there?

Cheers,

Juan
 
I think the new AF 35mm 1.8 is a a little longer than the series E 35mm. Never tried the series E but the 1.8 was very very good on my D200.
 
Dwig said:
The winner might well be the Nikon E-series 35mm f/2.5.
Click to expand...

+1 to that.

The F35/2 is a competent but not IMO outrageously great lens. It's adequate at f/4 and fine at 5.6, but wider than that it's not terrific. So if you gotta stop down anyway...

Note that the E-lens came in two versions, an orignal all-plastic one, and a later (1980+ ?) one with metal lens mount. That's the one you want unless you can find a really good deal on the earlier one. Neither one weighs anything. [Edited to add: there are a couple of 'em on that auction site for under a hundred bucks.]

There's a thread here.

Also, I know you said it's gotta be a 35, but you should still consider the C-V Ultron 40mm. That one is by all accounts a pretty sweet pancake lens. Plus it has as cool a low-profile hood as I've ever seen on any lens save for the Pentax 21 Limited.

As stompyq says, the 35/1.8 has a good reputation, too. I suspect it's considerably better than the f/2 AIS. The ZF 35/2 is apparently spectacular, but it is also huge, heavy, and not cheap.
 
Last edited:
Juan,

I have used the Nikkor 35/2.8 in a various versions, great lens and small enough in my opinion. I have negatives that I have wet printed full-frame on 16x20 fiber paper with very good results. At the print size there is some fall-off in edge sharpness even at f8 in extreme corners.

I used a Nikkor-S 35mm f2.8 and Tri-X to expose these negatives...

I printed this negative on 16x20 paper the detail is impressive...
2007_02_016_035_800.jpg


2007_02_016_036_700.jpg


The Series-E is very small, but I have never used it. There are plenty of old 3rd party 35's that could be had for a song and dance from brands such as Soligor, Vivitar, Sigma, Tokina... just to name a few. Best way to find a showcase would be do an eBay search for Nikon-mount 35's for film cameras.
 
I think in general series E lenses have acquired a bad rap possibly comparing their build quality to AIS/AI versions. This of course is not relevant nowadays since almost all lenses have a lot of plastic in them. I have tried the series E 75-150mm and 50mm 1.8 lenses (the 50 was very very small) and both were excellent on my D200. If you want small with good quality they are hard to beat.
 
stompyq said:
I think the new AF 35mm 1.8 is a a little longer than the series E 35mm. Never tried the series E but the 1.8 was very very good on my D200.
Click to expand...

Hi, stompyq... I think you are talking about a lens without aperture ring... I can't use it on my mechanical bodies...

Cheers,

Juan
 
semilog said:
+1 to that.

The F35/2 is a competent but not IMO outrageously great lens. It's adequate at f/4 and fine at 5.6, but wider than that it's not terrific. So if you gotta stop down anyway...

Note that the E-lens came in two versions, an orignal all-plastic one, and a later (1980+ ?) one with metal lens mount. That's the one you want unless you can find a really good deal on the earlier one. Neither one weighs anything. [Edited to add: there are a couple of 'em on that auction site for under a hundred bucks.]

There's a thread here.

Also, I know you said it's gotta be a 35, but you should still consider the C-V Ultron 40mm. That one is by all accounts a pretty sweet pancake lens. Plus it has as cool a low-profile hood as I've ever seen on any lens save for the Pentax 21 Limited.

As stompyq says, the 35/1.8 has a good reputation, too. I suspect it's considerably better than the f/2 AIS. The ZF 35/2 is apparently spectacular, but it is also huge, heavy, and not cheap.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, semilog... I'll take a look at the ultron...

Cheers,

Juan
 
P. Lynn Miller said:
Juan,

I have used the Nikkor 35/2.8 in a various versions, great lens and small enough in my opinion. I have negatives that I have wet printed full-frame on 16x20 fiber paper with very good results. At the print size there is some fall-off in edge sharpness even at f8 in extreme corners.

I used a Nikkor-S 35mm f2.8 and Tri-X to expose these negatives...

I printed this negative on 16x20 paper the detail is impressive...
2007_02_016_035_800.jpg


2007_02_016_036_700.jpg


The Series-E is very small, but I have never used it. There are plenty of old 3rd party 35's that could be had for a song and dance from brands such as Soligor, Vivitar, Sigma, Tokina... just to name a few. Best way to find a showcase would be do an eBay search for Nikon-mount 35's for film cameras.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the images, Lynn...

Cheers,

Juan
 
stompyq said:
I think in general series E lenses have acquired a bad rap possibly comparing their build quality to AIS/AI versions. This of course is not relevant nowadays since almost all lenses have a lot of plastic in them. I have tried the series E 75-150mm and 50mm 1.8 lenses (the 50 was very very small) and both were excellent on my D200. If you want small with good quality they are hard to beat.
Click to expand...

You must be right, stompyq... If not wide open, lenses have closer IQ... I'll give them a try soon...

Cheers,

Juan
 
From memory: the later Series E lenses were better ergonomics. I think the focus scale and grip was redesigned. I need to look it up though. The Series E 35 is the smallest you will find. I have the 35/2.8 and 35/2, neither is small- about the same size as a 50.

I also have the 35/2.8 Perspective Control. Not small, but well worth the size.
 
The 35mm F2.5 series is OK I have the version with the metal mount and ring. I don't have another 35mm prime to compare it to but if seems fine to me. It is a very small lens and I bought it to use on my FM2 more than anything else.



One from the 35mm 2.5 E Wide open if I remember.
 
Voigtlander makes a small 40mm lens (maybe too close to the 50mm) but IMHO FYI the Zeiss 2/35 is superb but large. (These are for manual focus.)
 
If you don't mind the trouble, try a converted Contax/Yashica Distagon 35/2.8. Weighs 245g - not particularly small but has top-notch optics.
 
This is similarly a problem for Canon users... In the end I have the CV Ultron 40 for those times when I really want to be small, and the Zeiss Distagon 35 for when I'm not so bothered. Usually when I lift the 35 to my eye I see what I was expecting in the finder. If I take a step back while raising the 40 I get about the same result.

The Ultron is very nice, the Distagon is sensational, but really 10 times longer and heavier than the Ultron!

Of course it means I still don't have my ideal 35mm lens. This is why I still keep this even after shooting no film for nearly three years.

125635768.4VgkxdJb.IMG_0216.jpg


If you can't find what you want you can borrow this if you like; it could do with some exercise!

Tom
 
Definitely it's between hard and impossible finding thin equipment when we think of SLRs once we've enjoyed RFs with flat lenses... Any small 35 for my Nikons makes a camera/lens twice as thick as my RFs... I don't know what I will do because anyway I can't make my cameras as flat as for keeping them inside a pocket... Only the 45P gets close, but that's too tele for what I want... And as I always carry the 50 1.4 for its speed, the 45P doesn't make so much sense... And as the 35 series E is a bit shorter but yet the camera is too thick with it, then I start thinking of getting instead a great 35 like the ZF: bigger but real quality... So, available lenses make me forget my original idea of getting a very small 35 for SLRs, and make me think of a pancake 35 on a RF, even if I already have a 28 and a 40 for them... Yet I wonder, if Nikon made that very flat 45 pancake, why didn't them or anyone, ever, make a 35 pancake for the best selling system, SLRs? What a shame...

Cheers,

Juan
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom