The Nikkor Rangefinder Lens Picture Thread

Biggles

Biggles

My cup runneth amok.
Local time
1:51 PM
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
667
For pictures *of* the lenses, mostly; as an aid to identification and grading of various, um, variants. They're not named the way Sonnars and Summicrae are, and my eBay and google image searches for "Nikkor 50*" just turn up a whole lot of SLR glass.

Pictures taken with these lenses would also be of value, especially if they display the lens's best or worst idiosyncracies.

So, to kick it off, can anyone oblige me with a picture or two of a rigid Nikkor 50mm f2, in S- or M39-mount?
 
CZeni said:
Howsabout 50/1.4s? With two different Nikon hoods?
Click to expand...

Sure. Please post 'em if you got 'em. Might come in handy to someone in the market for one.

This is a bit of an experiment here, I guess, but a collectibles forum I read does this all the time. "Show us your third-model, paper-cored Blanekatzers!" Quite useful to have a store of pictures in one thread to search though, when an opportunity to buy comes up.
 
Kind of an offbeat request, but I just took a couple snaps of my lenses. They represent nearly all of the commonly available user Nikkors in S mount (and mine are all daily users).

Clockwise from bottom right:
3.5cm f/2.5 chrome
3.5cm f/1.8, black (there are no chrome versions)
2.8cm f/3.5 black
2.8cm f/3.5 chrome (great lens ... I'll probably offer it for sale here very soon)
5cm f.1.4 black
8.5cm f/2 chrome
10.5cm f/2.5 black (there are no chrome versions)
13.5cm f/3.5 black

If you look through the Nikon forum threads, I (and Brian Sweeney and some others) have posted several shots taken with these lenses.

I also use a 2.1cm f/4.5 Zeiss Biogon in Contax mount, but it's not a Nikkor and so isn't in the picture. I don't use it all that often anyway.
 
By the way, Nikkors don't have a lot of names because there is pretty much one optical version of each lens. I honestly haven't much idea what the different 'chrons, 'luxes and chomosomes are all about in Leica glass. The Nikkors pretty much stick with one optical formula. Early lenses are in chrome and brass and are heavier. Later lenses are black and weigh considerably less. Variations do exist, but they're extemely subtle, like the spacing of f/stop numbers and changes in focus-ring texture and whatnot.

Another distinguishing factor is that the very early chrome lenses say MIOJ for "made in occupied japan" and these a bit more collectible.


Only the 5cm/50mm lenses were made in really large numbers. There is one significant variant in the lenses. A batch of a few thousand 5cm f/1.4s were made in the early 1960s for sale with black "Olympic" S3s. These are larger, use a different optical formula and are highly collectible.
 
The first's a photo taken with my 50/2 LTM Nikkor wide open, Tri-x @1600, Rodinal with partial stand develpment.

The next two are of the lens on a Canon P.
 
VinceC said:
Kind of an offbeat request, but I just took a couple snaps of my lenses...
Click to expand...

Offbeat? Well, when you kind gents reply to one of my newbie posts by saying "Get thee a mid-war Nikanon 55/1.3! Bit soft wide open but at 5.6 it will freshen your breath and boil your eyes!!", two questions immediately come to mind:

1) What are its optical characteristics?

and

2) Whatzit look like? Is it rigid/folding black/silver series/threaded big/little coated/uncoated tall/short slender/fat brass/aluminium cheap-looking/durable-looking?

Pictures like these are also a huge help to me in spotting something in a pawnshop or secondhand camera shop, even a badly-titled eBay auction, if I know what shape I'm looking for.

So, thank you all very much for the replies thus far. Please keep 'em coming.
 
here's a recent acquisition that i'm sending out to get a cleaning/overhaul tomorrow. nikkor 2.8cm f3.5 in LTM. it's the tiniest lens i have ever seen!! makes the summicron-c look big on the CL. it rounds out all i need in a compact kit (normal 40mm, and wide 28mm). the full viewfinder of the CL works VERY nicely as a 28mm field of view. i checked it against my wife's 28mm on SLR, and the framing was almost identical. shot a roll with this, but have not gotten the film processed yet. i wanted to do a before/after i get it cleaned. as far as handling...you can't beat the size. small, but not too small (for me anyhow) i think it looks really nice too (the photos don't do it justice as i have a crappy digi from 5 years ago). i was unable to show the nippon kogaku engraved around the inner lip of the lens. the only complaint is that the focusing throw is like 180 degrees or something...seems like it takes FOREVER to focus. anybody know any specs about these? i haven't seen many. for the record...this will be my first forray into nikon glass (rangefinder). i used to have an F2 in college w/ a couple of nikkors though. i have also wanted to try out a 50mm f2 LTM nikkor.
 
Biggles,
I don't know that you'll ever find a Nikon RF user telling you that if you don't get a particular lens, you'll hang your head forever in shame and be mocked by your offspring. ALL Nikkor lenses are outstanding, so there's no need to treat them like fine wine and attempt to learn their indescribable variations in quality and aspect. There are no Nikkor dogs. The lens with the weakest reputation is the 35mm f/3.5 (I've never used one and so can't confirm its repuations); but the 35mm f/2.5 is so sharp and affordable there's no reason not to get it instead.

EnochRoot;
The 28mm is one of my favorites (in Nikon RF mount, so mine's a bit larger). It's the lens that stays on my camera, so I recently bought a black version to save weight.
 
Buy 'um fast boys.

Me thinks the Nikkor prices on ebay will be jumping up if this thread continues much longer.
 
VinceC said:
EnochRoot;
The 28mm is one of my favorites (in Nikon RF mount, so mine's a bit larger). It's the lens that stays on my camera, so I recently bought a black version to save weight.
Click to expand...

good to hear vince! i bought this based solely on the size, and the "overall" nikkor reputation. i had not heard anything specifically about this lens. i was planning on getting a new zeiss m-mount 28mm, but this was had at half the price, and about half the size too. just seemed to fit my requirements better (the small factor). so it's nice to know it's up to par performance-wise. i can't wait to get the roll developed and check things out. out of curiosity...could anyone show a LTM nikkor 50/2 mounted on a CL, or next to one, or next to a summicron-c. i just wanted to get an idea of size.
 
It is a 50-year-old lens design, so it has light falloff (vignetting) toward the corners when wide open. Because it's f3.5, I do tend to shoot it wide open nearly all the time. However, it's super sharp and has what I consider to be very rich tones. My only real comparisson is with later Nikon SLR lenses, but it holds its own with them.

You never see much at all about this lens. Not many were made in LTM, and the great majoryity of Nikon RF owners seem to be collectors rather than users, so there's only a tiny, tiny user community out there.

RF Nikkors were designed for a variant of the Contax mount, which has long, long throw. And the nature of the mount requires that every lens have the same long throw -- about 270 degrees from infinity to 3 feet. Once you get used to it, it does allow for very precise focusing.

Attaching another pic showing the light falloff of the 28mm when wide open.
 
thanks for the info. yes...i searched hi and low, but could not find much about it. gandy just said it was as good or better than the canon (which he said was really good), but that's it. i'm fine w/ the falloff...and really...that isn't that severe at all. it's a shame most nikon RF people are collectors, and not users (or both). i would love to get an old nikon s3 or sp, but the prices are a bit much i think (for what i would want to spend). it's interesting to learn why the focusing throw is so long on this too. it wasn't *that* hard to get used to, but coming off of a summicron-c (which has a super short throw)...it startled me! of course...if you stop it down to f8...the entire world would be in focus it seems (from the DOF markings). but i tend to like to shoot wide open (especially on a f3.5 lens like this), so i guess the accuracy will help.

on a side not (re: a body)...i got all excited at the antique store the other week, as i saw a nikon rangefinder w/ zeiss tessar collapsible in the case. the price tag was $175 (and i figure i could talk them down to $150). upon further inspection it was an S (so not that great), the lens didn't "pull out" correctly, and the camera was trashed (rangefinder didn't couple/work...shutter would stick, etc). here i thought i was going to get an s2 or s3 at a steal, but nope. what a letdown!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom