Vics
Veteran
I have the Nikkor-O 1:2.0 and it's a very fine performer. I also bought the Nikkor-S 1:2.8 and found it to be inferior in two ways: One, it's slower by a stop therefore that much dimmer in the viewfinder and two, it's just not as sharp as the 1:2. I'm told that the 1:1.4 is the real superstar in this FL. I love all these old NAI optics!
Vic
Vic
sper
Well-known
No love for the 50mm 1.4? I love that lens on my D700. Nice and creamy highlights, and very pleasing low contrast.
Vics
Veteran
Nikkor 24
Nikkor 24
Man, you're gonna LOVE that 24! I have the 24 1:2.8 and it became my "normal" lens for a long time. I had to de-tox off of it!
Vic
Nikkor 24
Man, you're gonna LOVE that 24! I have the 24 1:2.8 and it became my "normal" lens for a long time. I had to de-tox off of it!
Vic
The Nikkor-N 24/2.8 was the First Nikon Lens to use a floating element. The 24/2.8 AI is a nice, compact design with a short-throw for the focus. The original lens has a long throw for the focus.... but just feels better. I have both.
Vics
Veteran
I didn't use mine much, so I gave it to my buddy to use on his Nikon DSLR (D40, 60, 80?) and he was able to use it. I've seen one picture from it, shot wide open. Great bokeh, great old Nikon color rendition. He says he likes it.
I always preferred the 1:2 Nikkor-H, but that mostly for its smaller size/lighter weight. When I was shooting with these, I was usually at around F8 anyway.
Vic
MXP
Established
MXP
Established
The "Passable" fixed-focal length Nikkors: Nikkor-H 28/3.5; 35/2.8 Nikkor-S; 5cm F2 Nikkor-S (The Nikkor-H is FAR superior); Nikkor-Q 135/2.8 (I like the F3.5 better) ; Nikkor-Q 200 F4.
I have them all.
I have them all.
MXP
Established
I also have many of these old lenes and can confirm that the Nikkor-H 50/2 is very sharp!
I have an AI'ed Nikkor-Q 200/4 and was surprised how good in was on the D2x.....even at full aperture. I have always avoided this lens because it had a bad reputation but I think it may be that many amateurs got the lens (because it was cheap) and used it hand hold with bad technique. Why would Nikon produce it for so many years if it was that bad?
I have an AI'ed Nikkor-Q 200/4 and was surprised how good in was on the D2x.....even at full aperture. I have always avoided this lens because it had a bad reputation but I think it may be that many amateurs got the lens (because it was cheap) and used it hand hold with bad technique. Why would Nikon produce it for so many years if it was that bad?
The D2x has a 1.5x crop factor, which cuts out the edges of the full-frame lens. You are getting the center 2/3rds of the image. The "passable" lenses tend to do poorly at the edges.
I love my Nikkor-SC 55/1.2- also a "horrible lens". But, if you look at the center 2/3rds of the image it is as good as the contemporary 50/1.4. The corner sharpness was poor. Put it on a D2x, it's great.
I love my Nikkor-SC 55/1.2- also a "horrible lens". But, if you look at the center 2/3rds of the image it is as good as the contemporary 50/1.4. The corner sharpness was poor. Put it on a D2x, it's great.
MXP
Established
Yes, it probably helps a bit that the sensor is smaller than 24x36 but even on film I have used the old lenses from time to time and like how it performs. It also depends on what kind of images the lenses are used for. Sometimes a bit soft corners does not harm the image.
There is a bit of information on the Nikkor 35/2.8's here:
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/nikkor/n38_e.htm
There is a bit of information on the Nikkor 35/2.8's here:
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/nikkor/n38_e.htm
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Nikkor-Q 135/2.8 passable?
Hardly...
Hardly...
Vics
Veteran
Nikkor 200/4
Nikkor 200/4
When I was looking for a 200-ish lens, I really wanted the 180 2.8 ED, but couldn't BEGIN to afford it, so I started looking at the 200/4 line. I read in the Nikon Compendium (I no longer have the book) that there was only one acceptable lens in the group, defined by serial numbers. I bought one, #845xxx, and I've only taken a very few pictures with it, but it is just great! It's all black (all the others I've seen were mostly chrome) and a bit smaller than the others. Great lens.
Vic
Nikkor 200/4
When I was looking for a 200-ish lens, I really wanted the 180 2.8 ED, but couldn't BEGIN to afford it, so I started looking at the 200/4 line. I read in the Nikon Compendium (I no longer have the book) that there was only one acceptable lens in the group, defined by serial numbers. I bought one, #845xxx, and I've only taken a very few pictures with it, but it is just great! It's all black (all the others I've seen were mostly chrome) and a bit smaller than the others. Great lens.
Vic
peterm1
Veteran
Nikkor-Q 135/2.8 passable?
Hardly...
"Hardly..."????
What's wrong with the Q verison? I think your photo looks good and my understanding is that the lens is generally well regarded by those who have catuially used it - although not so well regarded as the later AI/AIS versions.
I have one stripped down and am presently in the process of Ai converting it - in between shifting house etc. When it is done I look forward to using it on my D200 and am interested in comparing it to the later lens.
HEY! I'm tough on Nikon. I'm not just a cheerleader for "everything Nikon"! Tough and unbiased.
Hasn't anyone noticed my daughter is named NIKKI!
but- I have the 135/2.8, and prefer the 135/3.5. The compact version of the 135/2.8 went to a 5-element design, dropped size and weight, and is better. Same with the compact 200/4- smaller, lighter, and improved optically. I have a 20cm F4 Nikkor-Q and the 200/4 Nikkor-QC. I use them.
Hasn't anyone noticed my daughter is named NIKKI!
but- I have the 135/2.8, and prefer the 135/3.5. The compact version of the 135/2.8 went to a 5-element design, dropped size and weight, and is better. Same with the compact 200/4- smaller, lighter, and improved optically. I have a 20cm F4 Nikkor-Q and the 200/4 Nikkor-QC. I use them.
Last edited:
peterm1
Veteran
Shot on a pre AI 50mm f2. In this instance I used an adapter and mounted it on a Panasonic L1 4/3 camera. I have since AI convereted it for use on my D200. I like the tones in this rendition which are very smooth.
I have a Nikkor-H 50/2, and it is superb. I need to buy a beat-up one to take apart someday. According to a repair manual, the optics module pops out in a single piece. Might be possible to convert into an RF lens.
"Back in the Day" of the Nikon F and F2, the stand-out lenses to get were the 24/2.8, 50/2, 105/2.5, and 180/2.8 for longer work. This is the old focal lengths for a system should be in increments of 2x philosophy. If you did weddings, the 35/2 became a must. The 50/2 was sharper than the 50/1.4. These were not the most expensive lenses, but were noticeably better than those around them. I substituted the 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P for the 50/2 for a long time.
TWoK
Well-known
The Nikkor 50/2 is such a good lens. I loved my AI copy so much. It is sharper at f/2 than most f/1.4 lenses at f/2.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Yes...I used a f1-4 for years, nice lens - tho large, did'nt use it much wide open and traded it for the f2.....the difference was very noticeable! and now it works well as a '75' on digital.
Dave.