I was looking at some shots I did with my 50mm 1.2 back in the days and realized it's one of the reasons I kept my F6 after switching to Sony. Having said that, I put up a little blurb about it on my site to share my thoughts about it.
http://jorgetorralba.com/2014/09/12/ageless-nikon-50mm-1-2-film/
http://jorgetorralba.com/2014/09/12/ageless-nikon-50mm-1-2-film/
Clark.EE
Well-known
Love it.
A valuable lesson for pixel peepers.
A valuable lesson for pixel peepers.
VertovSvilova
Well-known
"You don’t find yourself doing the two step pixel peep dance. You just find yourself mesmerized or intrigued by the photo as you should be."
I miss those great 35mm images from the 50s-60s-70s. It seems like that was an era of photography that's now long gone and replaced instead with "where's the EXIF data?"
I miss those great 35mm images from the 50s-60s-70s. It seems like that was an era of photography that's now long gone and replaced instead with "where's the EXIF data?"
Yeap. I remember shooting film. It was rare to look at a photo and think why it was sharper than that other photo. it was all about composition, the grab and story behind it.
x-ray
Veteran
I completely agree. I'm in the process of rebuilding my film system and returning. To B&W film and vintage glass.
My wife gave me a new 50 1.2 AIS last Christmas. It's certainly one of my favorite lenses. It's dreamy wide open and incredably sharp at 2.8. The 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 have similar qualities. I have G glass for my digital that I use in business but my vintage primes are what I use for my personal work.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I have the same 9-blade AI-S model. It lives on my Nikon F, although I've also used it on the Sony A7. A lovely lens, one of the reasons I keep an F around.. It and the Nikkor-H 85/1.8 produce just wonderful results.
G
G
VTHokiEE
Well-known
I've always wanted the 50mm f1.2, hopefully someday I'll grab one. Nice post!
peterm1
Veteran
Thank you for your post I enjoyed it. I have been thinking about buying a Nikkor 50mm f1.2 (or 55mm possibly) for a while. I love the look. I long ago learned that lenses are like an artists paint brushes - you need different brushes for different tasks, they all have a specific "look" and the look produced by an f1.2 Nikkor shot wide open is iconic. Mind you, the 50mm f1.4 is good too. I love the gradation from fairly sharp at the point of focus to blur with soft bokeh.
DCB
Well-known
Great pics!
Might need one....
Peace
Might need one....
Peace
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
What would you folks consider a good price for one of these?
De_Corday
Eternal Student
I have an "-H" 85/1.8. Gorgeous, dreamy lens. lives on my F3 most of the time but holds its own in a real way on the digitals. I shoot vintage primes constantly, and nothing so exotic as a /1.2... great look.
Waus
Well-known
Here's a great review of this lens: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/nikons_jewel.shtml
I also own this wonderful lens!
I also own this wonderful lens!
VertovSvilova
Well-known
I paid $500 for a mint version but that was from a local retailer. B+H sells them new for $700. It seems the prices have gone up a bit with more people using manual AIS lenses on digital bodies. The eBay prices seem to be around $400-500.
The 35mm 1.4 AIS is also a unique lens. It seems best at close to mid-distances, and when used at 1.4 mid to long distances it acts almost like a Zeiss Softar.
Both the 50 and the 35 have interesting personalities depending on focus distance and aperture. (I found a mint 35mm 1.4 AIS from KEH for $600 which was probably kind of high. Although at B+H they currently sell for $1100 new
)Ljós
Well-known
Stunning picture. Somehow the term "facial expression" begins to not quite cut it. Also "still photography" does not really apply here Well done!!
Greetings, Ljós
Well done!!Greetings, Ljós
Robert Lai
Well-known
Why I sold mine
Why I sold mine
I've had the 50 1.2 and the 35 1.4 at one time. Both are big, heavy lenses for the focal length. They both have curvature of field, and low contrast wide open. At f/2 to f/4, they have higher resolution and contrast than their 50 1.4 and 1.8 brothers. The killer for me was that both had noticeable amounts of barrel distortion. Friends and family hated getting their picture taken with these two lenses, as they said it made them look "fat".
The much smaller and lighter 50mm f/1.8 AI or 55mm f/2.8 Micro serve as everyday normal lenses with no distortion for me. I haven't found any Nikon brand 35mm lens to be entirely satisfactory, so I've settled on their 28mm 2.8 AIS instead when I want a moderate wide angle.
Why I sold mine
I've had the 50 1.2 and the 35 1.4 at one time. Both are big, heavy lenses for the focal length. They both have curvature of field, and low contrast wide open. At f/2 to f/4, they have higher resolution and contrast than their 50 1.4 and 1.8 brothers. The killer for me was that both had noticeable amounts of barrel distortion. Friends and family hated getting their picture taken with these two lenses, as they said it made them look "fat".
The much smaller and lighter 50mm f/1.8 AI or 55mm f/2.8 Micro serve as everyday normal lenses with no distortion for me. I haven't found any Nikon brand 35mm lens to be entirely satisfactory, so I've settled on their 28mm 2.8 AIS instead when I want a moderate wide angle.
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
I paid $500 for a mint version but that was from a local retailer. B+H sells them new for $700. It seems the prices have gone up a bit with more people using manual AIS lenses on digital bodies. The eBay prices seem to be around $400-500.
The 35mm 1.4 AIS is also a unique lens. It seems best at close to mid-distances, and when used at 1.4 mid to long distances it acts almost like a Zeiss Softar.
Both the 50 and the 35 have interesting personalities depending on focus distance and aperture. (I found a mint 35mm 1.4 AIS from KEH for $600 which was probably kind of high. Although at B+H they currently sell for $1100 new
So it sounds like $200-275 for a 55 1.2 might not be too bad a deal then?
VertovSvilova
Well-known
That's about right for the 55mm 1.2 (non-AI or the later AI.) But that is a different lens. The one that's being discussed here is the 50mm 1.2 AIS nine blade lens.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I got mine from a local dealer some years ago. I think it cost me $350 or so. Bought a new Nikon hood for it too.
G
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
I realize the 55 is a different lens, but don't the number of blades only come into play when you start stopping the lens down?
Or am I messed up in my thinking?
Or am I messed up in my thinking?
Ljós
Well-known
No, you are totally right, they quite literally only begin to come into play when you stop the lens down. I think in this thread so far the repeat mention is not so much about the rendering/bokeh aspects ect. of different blade numbers, it is just one (readily visible and easy to check) factor to keep the different 50 and 55mm lenses apart. The OP started out to talk about the 50mm AIS, and one of the differences between the AIS and its predecessor, the 1.2 AS, is the number of blades: 9 versus 7.
(And I would assume one would be hard pressed to easily see the difference (in actual prints) between highlights rendered by 7 versus 9 blades. Once you go past 6 blades (hexagons can be distracting, in my opinion), you are almost golden.)