The Nikkor-SC 5cm F1.5 lens- article

Sonnar Brian

Sonnar Brian

Product of the Fifties
Staff member
Local time
6:48 AM
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
19,776
View My Gallery
This is the article I wrote for the Nikkor-SC 5cm F1.5. I've posted as a thread years ago, but Images posted get deleted and moved.

Here it is in PDF form, now that we can upload PDF files to RFF.

I will be doing a sequel to this story. I have a 5005 series 5cm F1.4 LTM on the way in. I will compare it with the Nikkor-SC 5cm F1.5, and try to see what DDD did not like about it.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Thanks, Brian, this was interesting. I bought a Nikon SP a few months ago and have the 5 cm f/1.4, about which I have no complaints on B&W film. Given the rarity of the f/1.5 Nikkor I suspect I will never see one, let alone own one so I appreciate your comprehensive comparison of that with the Zeiss Sonnars that I am more familiar with.
 
 
Reminded me to get my "This is War" First Edition and move back to my Home Office.
The Photography and Writing to go with it is incredible.
 
Brian, did you ever get around to investigate the 1.4 vs the 1.5 Nikkors? I have a 5005 myself and I was shocked how close it is in rendering to a much later (but still "Tokyo") lens. It's a great lens, not my favorite, but one has to commend Nikons consistency. (Pre-war) Zeiss certainly could have taken a note...
 
I have a 5005 in LTM coming in. I have one of the first "NKJ" in LTM that still has the smaller diameter elements and fixtures.

SO- sequel coming, and I will include a 255xxxx 5cm F1.5 Sonnar T in the mix. Mine is converted to LTM...
 
I am curious if there's any reason why you chose the 255xxxx specifically? I assume it's just period correct and also one of the first officially coated lenses?
 
@TenEleven
It's a version 3, coated Sonnar, pre-war. Marked F11, but stops down to F16.
It is from the same time frame that Peter Dechert states that the Nikkor was formulated. SO- I figure this is as close to the Nikkor 5cm F1.5 that I have.
 
That makes a lot of sense, thank you for explaining. To be clear, I didn't mean the question to sound antagonistic. I was just curious as to your reasoning.
And to be clear "I happen to like that lens" would have been just as valid to me ..
 
@TenEleven
No offense taken at all, and glad to explain my logic! I also have an uncoated Sonnar from the same batch, same condition, and converted to LTM. But that coated one...
L1006456.jpg
5cm F1.5 Sonnar "T", wide-open on the M9.
 
These early Sonnars don't make for the best landscape lenses with their curvature of field... (the wartime lenses improve on this aspect quite a lot as your article states)... but for people shots and other mid-distance work they are just so good ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom