NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: PeterN on December 04, 2015, 11:11:27
-
If there is one place in the world to ask this question, it must be here.
But let me give a bit of background first. Currently I use the D750 with a collection of G and Art lenses. All 'state of the art' with all modern gimmicks. I am currently investigating what to add to the image-shooting experience next year.
Although initially I thought to add a Sony RX1 or Leica Q, recently I've been thinking about adding a Df to the collection with a set of "vintage" lenses with "character" in the 20-135mm focal length range.
Now my question: What set of prime lenses with "character" are your favorites (and perhaps why) would you recommend that I could use with the Df?
Let's assume they have to be reasonably priced (if not being a steal these days)? AF is preferred, but MF is acceptable too. I do realize that the word "character" is a highly subjective term, so feel free to interpret it in the way you want.
Example Photos are very welcome!
Thank you so much for your advice.
-
35/1.4 Ai-S: Temperamental and with character from f/1.4-2.0. Sharp and easy from f/2.8 ->. Background needs to be watched wrt. OOF rendering.
-
One lens is considered to be mandatory: a 105 mm f/2.5 from the late '70s is simply a 'must'. I said this before but bears repetition: the optical engineers of the 105 must have unconsciously known that the Df eventually would emerge and designed the lens accordingly. The 105 and the Df are synergetic. They are made for each other.
-
As Bjørn says the 105/2.5 is the one to go for. (attached)
I never liked that lens on my D700 and rarely used it, but now I do on the Df :)
I also like the 45P, 28/2 and the 16/3.5 fish-eye.
Most of all I probably use the 85/1.4 AF-D.
-
Any of the many 'normal class' lenses (ie. 45 to 58 mm) should be considered as well. Do note that most of them, except the elusive Noct-Nikkor, can rendered the out-of-focus background on the harsher side. Either the 50/1.2 AIS or the latest 50/1.4 AIS is better in this regard. Besides, they are very sharp lenses when stopped down a little. The 50/1.2 has more temperament and might need to be kept on shorter reins than the f/1.4.
Some users here on NG swear to the pancake-type 45 mm f/2.8 Nikkors. They are cute optics giving nicely drawn images, but might be tricky to handle if your fingers aren't thin. Hopeless with gloves in the winter of course.
-
On the wider side, the 20/2.8 AIS is better with the Df than I thought initially. Of course the new 20/1.8 bests it in sharpness terms, but not in handling and usage pleasure with the Df. The f/2.8 does flare easier though.
This night scene from Amsterdam was shot with 20/2.8 and the Df at ISO 25600.
-
Would be an easy choice for me, the 50/1.2 Ai-S, my main lens on the D3s back in 2010 and one of my last remaining Nikkor lenses.
Loads of character wide open and razor sharp when stopped down. Would be a nice set with the 35/1.4 and 105/2.5 mentioned above, I did play with those but didn't own them.
From my favourite local pub
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8002/7479661750_5dae7548ed_o.jpg)
D800E & 50/1.2 wideopen, Amsterdam 2012
Cava in the making
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2701/4518516067_7dbc0b318e_o.jpg)
D3s & 50/1.2 wideopen, Catalunya 2010
Petter at f/2.8 in Bergen
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4013/4662531591_45ecca687e_o.jpg)
D3s & 50/1.2, Norway 2010
And razor sharp at f/5.6
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3311/4615529225_5b5e5126c0_o.jpg)
D3s & 50/1.2, Norway 2010
Also at f/5.6
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5242/5313923766_16535c3300_o.jpg)
D3s & 50/1.2, Copenhagen 2010
-
You will never get enough recommendations for the Nikkor 105mm F/2.5. It has not disappointed me from a D700 to Fuji X-T1, even with infrared modified cameras...
-
Thank you so much for recommendations and photos. So this might be a nice set of lenses to start with:
1. 20/2.8 AIS (not the AF-D?)
2. 28/2 AIS or 35/1.4 AIS
3. 50/1.2 AIS or 50/1.4 AIS
4. 105/2.5 AI. Bjørn, I assume you refer to this version because it was produced until the late 70s?. So should I skip the AI-S version?
With the 85/1.4 AFD as another good option. But I feel I don't need that one with the 105 in the bag. Right?
I will look more into these lenses.
BTW: no 24mm lens? And what about non-Nikon lenses?
Thanks again for your advice. I love the photos! The 50 1.2 looks spectacular!
-
Out of all the non Nikon lenses, just get the 60 mm Coastal Optics and you're set! :D (my dream lens)
-
Nah. The 60 might be a fine optic, but its build is not Nikkor quality. I know from personal experience.
-
Would you say the same for the CV 125 then :)
-
The reason for selecting the '70s version, and specifically the AI 105/2.5, is simple: it is the best of them, all things considered. The focusing throw is long to give very precise focusing feel, the aperture blades are not straight-edged so bokeh improves, and it isn't bothered with the wobbling slide-out hood of the AIS.
-
Would you say the same for the CV 125 then :)
I'd say 'yes' unless you have Erik as your close friend and willing to fix the lens for you ...
-
Then peter, I have difficulties advising on a non Nikon lens.
No CO 60mm and CV 125mm, unless you would like to go the unorthodox route and acquiring a Heligon or Zenit :D
(although I am certain that there are plenty Zeiss and Sigma lenses out there)
-
Back to Peter's question:
the AF version of the 20/2.8 is not better optically than the AIS, has a noisy screwdriver-type AF, manual focusing is imprecise, and is very plastic-feeling all over. It simply lacks all the qualities you would wish for a Df lens.
A good-performing sample of the 24/2 AIS works well on a Df, but is not easy to locate. I found one after years of testing. The f/2.8 model is OK, but lacks pizzazz.
-
Then peter, I have difficulties advising on a non Nikon lens.
No CO 60mm and CV 125mm, unless you would like to go the unorthodox route and acquiring a Heligon or Zenit :D
(although I am certain that there are plenty Zeiss and Sigma lenses out there)
Perhaps I can move to Norway? I admit that the Voigtlander APO Lanthar 125mm (I had to check that one is casually called CV 125) is one of my dream lenses. No, I won't start about the Zeiss 135 f2 apo sonnar this time.
Thanks for the addtl clarification(s)
-
No Peter, don't move to Norway!
In Norway the lenses get broken.
In Denmark they get fixed :)
-
No Peter, don't move to Norway!
In Norway the lenses get broken.
In Denmark they get fixed :)
Ah. So I buy in Norway but live in Denmark? ;-)
I must say that the posts about kens repairs and adaptations Did open a new world for me!
-
I like to add the Nikkor 85/1.8 (K), Nikkor Micro 55/3,5 (1963 model) and Nikkor 50/1.4 auto (1969) to the above mentioned list
-
I do not have many but so far I really enjoy the 135 f2.8 Q (factory Ai'd) more than the 135 f2.8 Ais. I have not made up my mind between the 105 2.5 Ai and the Ais. I prefer the 28 f2 Ai to the Ais. The 85 1.4D gets more use and I've not had the DC105 f2D long enough to really see what it is best at. Funny, I've used it more on the Sony a7II, as MF, than the Df but that will change with the Christmas function and party season soon upon us.
I tried quite hard to find the C/V 125 2.5 Lanthar and did find one in India, but just more than I wanted to spend. I'm now looking at the C/V APO Lanthar 90 3.5 for either the Df or a7II. The Leica mounts , particularly the LTM, are easier to find than the Nikon F and cheaper. I finally put the idea of the Zeiss ZF.2 135 f2 behind me, just too heavy to MF (for me) :( . A friend keeps trying to sell me a 135 f2 Ais....
Lots of fun for the Df with the added fun of different manufacturers/mounts for the a7II ;)
Tom
-
Just to add what I see is obviously missing so far;
Nikkor 180mm ED 2.8 Ais needs no introduction, so impressive optics, not a Df man myself but as far as I can tell most likely the longest/largest lens to use, finally found one again for my D3X and D200 IR...
I believe that the 28mm 2.8 Ais is the one to get, not the 2.0 - depending on temperament I guess.
Micro Nikkor 105mm 4.0 Ais
If vintage is the look your after the 50mm 1.2 Ai has some more vigneting than the Ais.
Life teaches us; Don't let the looks fool you - Coastal Optics 60 and Voigtlander APO 125 build quality is OK for normal use, both are victims of long extension so use with care... :o ::) ;D
-
The CV125 is truly a joy to own and use, somehow the stars aligned in 2014 allowing me to source a brand new copy in Canon EF mount for the €600 it was initially sold for.
From the outside the build quality is top notch which can't be said about the internal mechanics which need regular maintenance when used in the field professionally. As the first user of this lens combined with being a simple amateur whom uses his lenses only few times a year while travelling the globe mine should last me until the end of days.
In case it does fail our residential lens doctor can patch it up again as he has done with several copies over the years, including modding a Canon version to a Nikon mount ;D
And it looks so damn sexy on my little Trinitron camera
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2903/14359582395_dcb222e0c3_c.jpg)
iPhone 5 with Hipstamatic photo app
-
My take: Nikkor 105/2.5 (I confirm Bjørn's theory), 50/1.2, 28/2, 20/3.5 UD despite its weaknesses. Also 180/2.8 AIS, despite weight and size. 50/1.4: not initially my favorite, but I am changing opinion.
Zeiss: 35/2, esp. For Night photography
Voigtlander: 40/2, also 58/1.4
500/8 reflex more usable with Df than with any other camera.
35/1.4 AIS also quite interesting but more difficult to find; I could only shoot some test pics.
Noct seems overpriced; I had several opportunities to buy one but never made the jump.
the PC 28/3.5 is a bit expensive, esp. Considering its average performance, but it is well built, fun to use and a good teacher in slow photography. The PC 35/2.8 is usually cheaper and optically better, but less 'creative'. If you like that FL, go for it.
-
I really appreciate your advice!! The list in my spreadsheet is getting longer. ;-)
What about the 75-150/3.5 zoom?
-
Peter, if you are interested a longer lens, I would recommend Ai or Ais 400/5.6 IF ED. I had a good experience with it on D610, so I'm pretty sure it performes nicely on the lower-res Df, which should be confirmed by Bjørn.
-
Peter, if you are interested a longer lens, I would recommend Ai or Ais 400/5.6 IF ED. I had a good experience with it on D610, so I'm pretty sure it performes nicely on the lower-res Df, which should be confirmed by Bjørn.
Thanks Akira. but 135 will probably the maximum I am looking for. I want to use the Df and the vintage lenses primarily for documentaries and series. If I need to go longer than 135 I will probably use my AF telelenses. But I've made a note! Thanks!!
-
Put the 50-135 Zoom-Nikkor on your list as well.
-
Any of the many 'normal class' lenses (ie. 45 to 58 mm) should be considered as well. Do note that most of them, except the elusive Noct-Nikkor, can rendered the out-of-focus background on the harsher side. Either the 50/1.2 AIS or the latest 50/1.4 AIS is better in this regard. Besides, they are very sharp lenses when stopped down a little. The 50/1.2 has more temperament and might need to be kept on shorter reins than the f/1.4.
If the 50/1.2 is too expensive, consider the AI 50/1.8 or early AIS 50/1.8 (long nose) - both have the same optics. They are very sharp and the bokeh is better than the optics used in the 50/1.8 series-E / AIS New / AF / AFD variants. Bokeh is relatively smooth centrally but becomes a little harsher towards the edges.
For the Df there is plenty of good glass to choose from:
- AI 20/3.5 - amazingly small for the focal length, and pretty resistant to flare.
- K 28/3.5 (AI converted) - sharp and resistant to flare. Big front element vignettes easily when using filters
- K 24/2.8 (AI converted) - not used much since I had 20 and 28mm, seems to be sharp with nice rendition but green flares when shooting into the light.
- AIS 28/2.8 - no barrel distortion, great if you are into wideangle closeups
- AI 28/2 - a bit soft and low contrast wide open, but very sharp stopped down and resistant to flare
- K/AI 35/2.8 (early) - sharp, compact and low distortion, bokeh is average
- AI 35/1.4 - a character lens at wide apertures, extremely sharp stopped down
- AI 50/1.8 - talked about this already
- AIS 85/2 - compact and fast short tele. AI version focus throw is too long. Bokeh is not quite as smooth as the 105/2.5 but it's otherwise an excellent lens
- AI 105/2.5 - classic portrait lens
- E 100/2.8 - great if you want the smallest, lightest possible telephoto. Contrast is lower than the 105/2.5 due to simpler coatings and bokeh not as smooth but otherwise surprisingly good
- AI 135/3.5 - very sharp even wide open, bokeh is average. AIS version has shorter focal throw and shorter built-in hood. Older K 135/3.5 with different optics is also very sharp - very similar smooth rendition to 105/2.5, but the 1.5m close focus limits its usefulness
- AIS 135/2.8 - used this for many years as a compact alternative to 80-200/2.8 zooms. Maybe lacking in sharpness a bit wide open but otherwise excellent, and rendition is very nice. The older pre-AI versions also have a good reputation but minimum focus of 1.5m is restrictive
- E 75-150/3.5 - One of my most used lenses - relatively small and fast for a telephoto, good sharpness, mostly good bokeh, and focuses close. Some samples have very lose zooming (zoom creep) but mine is still tight - I think the chrome ring version is a little better in this regard.
I don't often use longer lenses very often, 150mm is about as big as I want to carry, and as long as I can hand-hold comfortably. Although the Df can accept pre-Ai lenses, usage will be much easier if the lens is AI converted.
-
Regretfully I have owned and sold the AIS 135/3.5 and 75-150/3.5 when leaving the film cameras behind. There were both excellent.
Not sure about the prices in Europe but here these lenses used to be almost give away just a few years ago. Not so much anymore, what one could get for $30 - $60 is going for $150 to $500 these days!
-
Blame the Df.
-
I have a love for the 50/2. My 1972 H-C version is excellent in sharpness, easy to focus, and renders the out-of-focus areas, not that much smoother, but different. And more to my liking.
-frank-
-
The f/1.8 to f/2 'normals' should be within financial reach for most people .... My favourite is the long-nose early AI 50/1.8, but the predecessor 50/2 AI is very good as well.
-
I have a mint 75-150/3.5 for sale which doesn't see much use with the CV125 in the bag.
Just send me a PM when interested :)
-
The 75-150 is very easy to CPU-modify.
Erik and I plan to offer CPU modification service ("chipping") as a regular part of future NG gatherings.
-
Zooms to add to the list:
25-50mm superb on Df
28-50mm tiny, sharp, quite low distortion, very cheap but not super special
36-72mm flares easily but really really good reversed and very cheap. Very long minimum focus
50-135mm just crisp, nice bokeh, almost APO like and works very well on Df and D800E - as the Bear recommends and probably the best of the lot
75-150mm cheap, sharp nice bokeh, get silver ring edition and samples vary. Not great for me on D800E but good on Df
JJ
-
My own experience with Nikon MF lenses on digital is limited, but here's what I've found. All this was done on a D7000 (16MP) so I didn't get any feedback on FX performance (edges, corners).
The Zeiss 28/2.8 and Voigtlander 90/3.5 give wonderful renderings. They're not vintage but they'd be a priority for me if I were using a Df.
The Nikkor 50-135 AIS was very sharp across the field and gave excellent performance. I had the pleasure of using a chipped version (http://legacy2digital.com/nikon/ (http://legacy2digital.com/nikon/)).
Two copies of the Nikon 75-150 were both very sharp in the middle and soft at the edges, and this was in DX in a number of test shots. Focusing was done via enlarged live view on a tripod, mirror up, self timer or remote. This is a very handy lens, though. I wish I'd had it decades ago when my only telephoto was a very slow and crummy Vivitar zoom.
The 300/2.8 AIS is outstanding but is definitely for the tripod.
The UV-Nikkor is absolutely beautiful as a visible-light lens for flower photos but is too precious to carry around for ordinary use. Fortunately, the one time I really dropped a lens (attached to a camera, no less) it was an ordinary 28-105 zoom.
The Nikkor 25-50/4 and 105/4 macro were favorites of mine on film but I've not used them on digital... yet.
-
Well, after posting here I put the DC105 f2D on the Df when I took my wife to the Police Station ;) . While I was waiting I took a couple of watches to my old friend for new batteries. I really needed and ultra wide since his tiny shop is a wonderland. Erik, I think he is getting on to start learning to Chip a lens but he does have a middle aged son who was also there :) .
Just some very quick PP and sort of messing about as usual. Probably not more than a square metre of floor space and two other customers so no room to frame an image with a 105mm.
(http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/data/11158/medium/DF1_7809.jpg)
f2,1/160,iso 720., +.3 EV
I will do one with CNX2 in B&W
He was happy to see me after a few years :)
Cheers,
Tom
-
Roland, Alex, Frank, JJ, Bill, Tom, Jan-Anne and Bjørn: thank you!
The list gets longer. ;-)
The possibility of chipping lenses is appealing.
I guess I need to do some homework to make up my mind... and try to find an affordable Df.
-
The 85mm F/1.4 Ais Nikkor has not been mentioned yet...
-
Thank you, Eddie!
-
A slightly different but related question:
I do have 2 Tamron adaptall-2 lenses. One is a 35-70 3.5 and a 300mm 5.6 lens. Esp. the 35-70 seems to be a nice lens. Does anyone have experience with the 35-70 and what would be a good adaptall2nikon adapter?
-
A slightly different but related question:
I do have 2 Tamron adaptall-2 lenses. One is a 35-70 3.5 and a 300mm 5.6 lens. Esp. the 35-70 seems to be a nice lens. Does anyone have experience with the 35-70 and what would be a good Adaptall2toNikon adapter? The only one I saw being available was a Fotodiox at Amazon.
-
Whatever lens you consider for a Df, do ensure it works with fully automatic features such as aperture control and light metering.
In the current embrace of the mirrorless principle, in which the usage of almost any lens is considered an advantage and proof that this approach is the future, people gladly accept being technologically thrown back to the '50s. Not being able to meter at full aperture and loss of aperture automation is a condition that should be the extreme exception instead of the new normal. One really needs native or fully compatible lenses to any system. My experience so far with the Sony A7 just remembered me of this ignored fact.
-
Whatever lens you consider for a Df, do ensure it works with fully automatic features such as aperture control and light metering.
In the current embrace of the mirrorless principle, in which the usage of almost any lens is considered an advantage and proof that this approach is the future, people gladly accept being technologically thrown back to the '50s. Not being able to meter at full aperture and loss of aperture automation is a condition that should be the extreme exception instead of the new normal. One really needs native or fully compatible lenses to any system. My experience so far with the Sony A7 just remembered me of this ignored fact.
So when I select aperture on lens, shutter speed on camera and use auto-iso, the camera does not calculate ISO based on the light that comes through the lens, but based on aperture value communicated by lens. Hence, when there is no communication, ISO value is off? So basically I need to set all values manually and check the result? IF so, that works different from the mirrorless camera I was used to (Fuji).
So thanks for reminding.
For the Tamron this would mean: chipping or checking if there is any form of communication between lens and camera via adapter? Or am I totally offtrack? (I am a true novice in this field).
-
Metering accuracy suffers when you need to stop down the lens to the actual taking aperture. (in a mirrorless camera, you get much more noise in the EVF and finding the focus becomes far less easy, so on a system level not a panacea at all).
The Df will allow you metering at full aperture if the attached lens has aperture control via the camera. Thus even old Nikkors work. However, for pre-AI lenses, you need to set the aperture to the intended value both on lens and camera as there is no direct linkage. Thus the metering procedure becomes more complex, but you can still enjoy an automatic aperture even with these old Nikkors from the '60s.
If the camera's full potential is to be unleashed, you need CPU-enabled lenses as this will allow all metering and exposure modes.
-
An EVF does not magically make focusing at f/8 easy. It is torture to have to manually open for focusing, a then stop down for taking.
Many enthusiasts say: "I can put any lens on my ______mirrorless camera!"
"It's more like traditional, old-time photography...besides, I'm using a tripod and working slowly!"
I say: Be careful what you wish for...
-
The reason why I use adapted lens on mirrorless (X-T1) is that I know they are fairly fast and already good wide open, and easier to MF (Nikkor 28mm f/2 and 105 f/2.5 mostly) than native lenses. I really enjoy MF. On top of that, I have them and don't need to invest further!
I mostly use them wide open or nearly. If I want to shoot at f/8 or 10 where metering and EVF will suffer, virtually any lens will be good enough for my use, so no need to look for adapted ones.
-
With crop sensor cameras, the need for stopping down partly vanishes, essentially because most FF lenses are pretty good in the center at f/2.8, and the lesser quality of the corners does no longer matter because they are cropped away. In practice, using the OM-Ds, I rarely stop down beyond f/4. EVF is seldom noisy at such apertures. For sure, down in the cellar, MF remains a problem, no matter the technology.
In addition, the focussing aids (loupe, focus peaking) help to get rid of uncertainties. There is no such thing happening as a to-and-fro between wide open and stopped down. Bottom line, using Canon FDs and Nikkor AIs is pure bliss, despite the absence of coupling.
-
I wish I could say the same with the Sony A7. The lack of automated features with non-native lenses is maddening. Even more so as the focus peaking isn't very accurate and the focus magnifier system is created entirely without any intelligence and user relevance. Even the Panasonics have solved this much better.
-
...... Does anyone have experience with the 35-70 and what would be a good adaptall2nikon adapter?
I have Tamron's 300/2.8 and have used(briefly) their 180/2.5 lens.
The 300/2.8 is difficult to focus on the D70s(focus screen is crap), but easy on the D300 and D800.
I only tried the 180/2.5 on the D70s and decided against getting it(stupid me .. didn't think I'd update camera to a better one at any point tho! .. major regret)
.. anyhow, you should be able to find a genuine Tamron Adaptall2 to Nikon adapter somewhere on ebay. They're fairly common.
I can't give any info on how other brands will operate tho. I don't have a spare(any longer) but can assure you that full aperture control will be available with your Adaptall lens(es).
I have no (obvious)issue with metering, and the aperture control is auto with the 300/2.8. I also have two of Tamron's T/C's, the higher quality 1.4x and the lower quality 2x from long ago.
Again, no issues with aperture, nor metering on the cameras that can be programmed with lens info.
(the D70s can't, so Manual mode must be used for the camera to operate .. but aperture is automatically controlled).
I have no experience with a Df, other than a brief test drive in a store(didn't like the grip) so can't offer any insight as to how well your combo would feel.
As for chipping any adaptall lens .. the issue is the intermediate nature of the adapter. You can't simply chip the lens as it won't physically connect to the camera(the adapter does this), and the adapter dimensions appear a bit marginal to take a chip itself(especially if you want a relay system of connections to the lens itself).
If you're looking for a genuine Tamron Adaptall2 mount, it should be called a N/Ai adapter(so you'd be searching for the term 'Tamron adaptall2 N/Ai')
The N/Ai doesn't describe non Ai as it does in some instances of Nikon lenses .. I think it simply means Nikon/Ai.
I've never seen an Ais version of the adapter tho .. may try a search to see if one exists.
hope that helps.
-
It certainly does! Thank you
-
Instead of bothering with a Tamron 35-70, why not do yourself a service and get a nice 35-70 Nikkor? The f/3.5 version (72mm threads) is excellent. Price tends to be good too. And it is easy to CPU-modify.
-
I wish I could say the same with the Sony A7.
The A7 is full frame, a less favourable case. I have yet to test one of these.
-
NEX models behave similarly.
-
Fisheye-Nikkor 8mm f/2.8
Fisheye-Nikkor 16mm f/3.5
Nikkor 18mm f/4
Nikkor-UD 20mm f/3.5
Nikkor 24mm f/2
Nikkor 28mm f/2
Nikkor 28mm f/2.8
Nikkor 50mm f/1.2
-
A slightly different but related question:
I do have 2 Tamron adaptall-2 lenses. One is a 35-70 3.5 and a 300mm 5.6 lens. Esp. the 35-70 seems to be a nice lens. Does anyone have experience with the 35-70 and what would be a good adaptall2nikon adapter?
Adaptall lenses are fully functional when the lens stub is used with one of the adaptall system camera adaptors.
I own one of those lenes, a 28-70 type 44A, which close focuses to 30cm at 70mm focal length, and a matching N/Ai Adaptall.
It worked on the D-700 and does so on the Df.
-
Instead of bothering with a Tamron 35-70, why not do yourself a service and get a nice 35-70 Nikkor? The f/3.5 version (72mm threads) is excellent. Price tends to be good too. And it is easy to CPU-modify.
The only reason is that I have one dusting on the shelf. iI tried to sell it earlier this year with a Pentax to Fuji mount but I got no response. Therefore I thought I might as well try it withe the Nikon. so if there is anyone out there interested, let me know and I am happy to stick to Nikon (and Zeiss and VL).
-
There are two Zeiss wide angles you can look into. The ZF/ZF.2 versions of the 25/2.8 and the 35/2. The 25/2.8 focuses down to 17cm, which is 6cm from the front lens. The 35/2 is the sharpest of the two. The 25/2.8 has some curvature of field, but is still very nice.
-
The 105/2.5 is a top choice from antiquity. A 105/2.5 Nikkor-P was my second lens back in 1970 or 1971. The AIS version is best used with an HS-8 or HS-14 hood or even the HN-7 but not the built in.
The 20/3.5 and 28/2.0 in AI or AIS can be turned into the sun without fear of flare and ghost. I almost sold my 20/3.5 AI after buying a 20/2.8 AIS until I read Bjørn's review on his old site. I still own both the 3.5 and 2.8.
I guess for character it's fun to own both the AI or AIS and the pre-AI version.
Best,
Dave Hartman
-
The 15/3.5 Nikkor performs particularly well on the Df wide open in dimly-lit interiors at medium distances (five to fifteen meters). I have not tried it with the Df under better lighting conditions or at longer distances.
-
The 15/3.5 is special in many regards. The lens is huge, beautifully built with an exquisite surface finish, and makes an imposing sight when attached even to the pro-calibre cameras. For not-so-close subjects the drawing geometry is nearly perfect and straight lines stay ruler straight. However, there are other aspects to consider. Up close, the CRC system generates a lot of barrel distortion. It flares easily and for many camera systems is almost impossible to focus with any kind of precision.
I have the earlier f/5.6 versions plus the f/3.5 and love them both.
Here is an example of the straight-line rendition (captured on a D800 though);
-
Here another shot with 15/3.5 and this time the Df, to show how you can combine near and far within a deep depth of field (lens at f/22).
-
All 1.8/85mm Nikkors, esp. the "D" and "G".
I guess I took 100.000 shots with these.
Although, sorry to intrude, I still prefer the D600 over the Df
-
PS: I had the 2.5/105mm on the D70. WOW. What a lens.
I get the same feel today on the D600 with a 4/200mm Micro.
-
We must not forget the *long* lenses for a Df. One might have to search a little for some of them, but price tends to be quite acceptable as an added bonus.
Here is a 1200 mm f/11 Nikkor ED-IF. It belongs to an era in which tripod mounts were done properly.
(http://www.fotozones.com/live/uploads/monthly_04_2014/post-15-0-95791200-1398646649.jpg)
Although optically much shorter than the 1200 Nikkor, this 800 mm f/8 Nikkor ED is physically much longer (reason: it is not a telephoto design).
(http://www.fotozones.com/live/uploads/monthly_04_2014/post-15-0-50697400-1398646842.jpg)
Both deliver excellent image quality in combination with a Df.
-
Oh, Bjørn, you are extremist!!! :D :o :D
Don't you own that Reflex 2000/11?
-
Only the 1000/11 Reflex-Nikkor :D but it deals well with a 2X TC.
-
Only the 1000/11 Reflex-Nikkor :D but it deals well with a 2X TC.
Good to know that. :) Mounting the combo solidly on the tripod could be a bit tricky, though...
-
No problem with the ENG-2 Sachtler range. I have shot up to 4000 mm focal length setup with them.
-
No problem with the ENG-2 Sachtler range. I have shot up to 4000 mm focal length setup with them.
Oh, I forgot that the 1000/11 had the built-in tripod colar. It's 9:13 AM. Time to sleep...
-
The 15/3.5 is special in many regards. The lens is huge, beautifully built with an exquisite surface finish, and makes an imposing sight when attached even to the pro-calibre cameras. For not-so-close subjects the drawing geometry is nearly perfect and straight lines stay ruler straight. However, there are other aspects to consider. Up close, the CRC system generates a lot of barrel distortion. It flares easily and for many camera systems is almost impossible to focus with any kind of precision.
I have the earlier f/5.6 versions plus the f/3.5 and love them both.
Here is an example of the straight-line rendition (captured on a D800 though);
i gave quite a number of examples of this combination in the lens thread http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,1061.0.html (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,1061.0.html)
-
We are in the 'fortunate' situation of having a veritable information overload. No lack of interesting stuff being presented all the time on NG.
-
The 15/3.5 photos are remarkable.
As I don't have a truck yet, the 800-1200mm lenses are too long for me. ;-)
But it looks impressive (the tripod even more so)
-
It belongs to an era in which tripod mounts were done properly.
ROTFL
-
A lens that can do excellent service on a Df, or indeed most Nikons, is the 300 mm f/4.5 ED-IF Nikkor. The ED non-IF is probably sharper, but very elusive and hard to track down (I used several years to find a good sample). The IF design imparts some CA that was not a big problem in the film days, but do show up with digital cameras. However, most is easily removed in a good RAW converter.
What the 300/4.5 ED-IF scores on is its smallness, portability, and ease of use. The focusing ring rotates butter smooth and quick, and the lens is easy to hand held if you need to, but the lens does thrive better on a sturdy tripod no small part due to its outstanding tripod collar.
The 300/4.5 ED-IF focuses close, to 2.5 m, and adding a PN-11 helps improve the near limit further.
Here are some hibernating whooper swans that were very slow in getting my message thus I had to repeat several times ....
"Sorry can you please repeat - I didn't get your meaning"
-
the grain reminds me of film :o :o :o
what ISO is this if you dont mind ::)
-
Probably 100. The scene is very low in contrast. It was snowing a lot.
-
It seem to me that the df behave exellent no matter what you put in front of it. That camera is the one I grab in most situations. It has a undescribable quality in all its quirkyness. Sorry for the OT :)
-
I think that the Df's excellent sensor has a lot to do with its good handling of the older lenses, plus the fact that it has a sensible number of megapixels (a useful 16MPx, not a squillion MPx).
The Df sensor is a tweaked version of that found in the D4 - I am guessing that its sensor performance may therefore be somewhere between that of the D4 and D4S. Wonder what the Df MkII will come with?
-
Hugh, I'm with Børge on grabbing the Df. When I recently went to Rajasthan I did not hesitate which Nikon body made the cut.
All of my lenses work very well on the Df. One of my 105mm lenses normally is a first choice ( I prefer the 2.5 Ai to the Ais but often reach for the DC105 f2D) . The 58 1.4G ( obviously not vintage ;) ) spends a lot of time on the camera. I prefer my 28 f2 Ai to the 28 f2 Ais. I often have the 75-150 3.5 E or the 135 2.8 Q with me. I use the 85 1.4D and sometimes think about an older 85mm but cash has many things tugging at it, D500, DC135 f2, Leica 135/180 3.4 etc.
My only complaints are the Focus Point spread and the 1/4000. If 2017 does bring a Df2 to the table I would be very happy with the same sensor since I love the output. A 179 (or more) spread would certainly get my attention. I'm sort of interested a focus assist light for shooting very dark functions but I've used some work arounds so not critical. With constant use, all of my small niggles have gone long ago.
If it is a really big event for Nikon they may really surprise us :) .
Tom
-
It's not quite a recommendation, but I hardly use AF-lenses on my Df; only MF-lenses.
I have a nice (scalloped) MF-collection which fit's perfectly on my (panda) Df.
Nikkor-UD Auto 1:3.5 f=20mm
Nikkor-NC Auto 1:2.8 f=24mm
Nikkor-NC Auto 1:2.0 f=28mm
Nikkor-OC Auto 1:2.0 f=35mm
Nikkor-N Auto 1:1.4 f=35mm (9-blade version)
Nikkor-SC Auto 1:1.4 f=50mm
Nikkor-SC Auto 1:1.2 f=55mm
Micro-Nikkor-PC Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm (not scalopped, but afaik there isn't a Nikkor one, only Nippon Kogaku Japan)
Nikkor-HC Auto 1:1.8 f=85mm
Nikkor-PC Auto 1:2.5 f=105mm
Nikkor-QC Auto 1:3.5 f=135mm
Nikkor-QC Auto 1:4 f=200mm
All factory AI-d (except the 85, I have to find an AI-ring for that one) and all in pristine condition.
They're from 1971 - 1974
Next step is to have them chipped (the 105 already is and the 20 and 28 are on their way to Copenhagen :D).
-
Micro-Nikkor-PC Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm (not scalopped, but afaik there isn't a Nikkor one, only Nippon Kogaku Japan)
If it's a Nikkor-P.C, then it's marked "Nikon" and not "Nippon Kogaku Japan". They are all "Nikkors" :)
-
In addition to lenses mentioned by Chris,
- 15 mm f/3.5 Nikkor (better than the f/5.6 version as there is more even colour rendition across the frame)
- 24 mm f/2 Nikkor AI or AIS (get a clean sample ; check that its rear focusing cell is in proper position or needs to be tightened. This cell apparently tends to work itself looser over time)
- 35 mm f/3.5 PC-Nikkor
- 50 mm f/1.8 Nikkor AIS (early long nose)
- a number of other 50 mm lenses, for example the latest 50/1.4 AIS
- 55 mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor (beware of oil contamination to the aperture blades)
- 58 mm f/1.2 Noct-Nikkor AI/AIS (if you are lucky and own it, using it with the Df is the way to go)
- 85 mm f/1.4 Nikkor AIS (perfect handling and balance on the Df)
- 105 mm f/1.8 AIS
- 135 mm f/2 Nikkor AI/AIS
- 200 mm f/2 ED-IF (AI or AIS)
- 200 mm f/4 Nikkor AI (slighlty better handling than either the early QC or later AIS)
- 300 mm f/4.5 ED-IF (or, quality-wise even better: 300/4.5 ED non-IF, but that lens is very elusive)
- 400 mm f/3.5 ED-IF AI or AIS
The list of zoom lenses is much shorter, though. Most of such designs were inferior to the primes of their time any way.
The following have proved their value, however;
- 25-50 mm f/4 Zoom-Nikkor
- 28-50 mm f/3.5 Zoom-Nikkor
- 35-70 mm f/3.5 Zoom-Nikkor AI (72 mm filter thread, near limit 1 m. The successor with 62 mm filter thread has "macro" mode, but otherwise inferior performance compared to the first version)
- 36-72 mm f/3.5 Zoom Nikon SE (inconvenient 1 m near limit, otherwise excellent. Can also be reversed for close-ups)
- 75-150 mm f/3.5 Zoom Nikon SE (the second of the SE zoom lenses that gets an approval. My decision on the bigger 70-210/4 is not finalised)
- 200-400 mm f/4 ED Zoom Nikkor (non-IF). The perfect landscape lens if there ever was one, but unfortunately scarce and expensive.
I very rarely use AF/AFS lenses on my Df, so the distribution of its focus points is not of interest to me.
I have replaced the stock focusing screen with a K3 (purchased from focusingscreen.com) that makes even weary eyes better enjoy manual focusing.
-
If it's a Nikkor-P.C, then it's marked "Nikon" and not "Nippon Kogaku Japan". They are all "Nikkors" :)
What I meant to say, there's no Nikon scalloped Micro 55/3.5 (as there is a Nippon Kogaku Japan).
-
i miss a few nikkors: 50mm f/1.2, 180mm f/2.8ed, 50-135mm f/3.5
may be interesting to include some non nikkors on the list
-
Non-Nikkors:
Any Zeiss (50/1.4 not that seductive though)
Voigtländer : 40/2 and 58/1.4
Tamron: 90/2.5 (52B or 52BB); 500/8 reflex is funny and cheap too;
Angénieux: 35-70/2.5 ; 180/2.3 (hard to find)
-
i miss a few nikkors: 50mm f/1.2, 180mm f/2.8ed, 50-135mm f/3.5
may be interesting to include some non Nikkors on the list
50/1.2 was on Chris' list? If not we agree to put it on the well-worth-to-use-on-Df list.
I forgot the 50-135/3.5 I stand corrected. 180/2.8ED is also good.
Apart from the Voigtländer APO trio 90/3.5-125/2.5-180/, all of which are usable on a Df, I have little overview of the playing field.
-
The former F3AF AIS Nikkors 80/2.8 and 200/3.5 perform good on the Df as well ;)
-
The former F3AF AIS Nikkors 80/2.8 and 200/3.5 perform good on the Df as well ;)
They certainly do, but the imprecise feeling and backlash with manual focusing is an acquired taste for sure.
-
And to the above lists, additional to the 105 f1.8...
One lens is considered to be mandatory: a 105 mm f/2.5 from the late '70s is simply a 'must'. I said this before but bears repetition: the optical engineers of the 105 must have unconsciously known that the Df eventually would emerge and designed the lens accordingly. The 105 and the Df are synergetic. They are made for each other.
...
So this late 1970s model 105 complements the Nikkor-PC Auto 1:2.5 f=105mm ?
Should not the 80-200 4.5 AI and 80-200 AIS also make the list of exemplary zooms to pair with the Df? Among so much of the material on NikonGear i have learnt a great deal from the thread on these solid zooms.
Based on accolades I’ve read, there are also 2 FLs of Nikon’s classic ultra-wides, namely the 18 f3.5 AIS and 20 f4 AI/AIS (1977-1984). There’s a recent thread on the latter….
Cannot wait to engage with a Nikon Df paired with some of these classics! :-)
thank you for sharing all these nuggets of experience and wisdom
-
There are nearly limitless number of candidate Nikkors. Some fade from memory after not being used recently. This reflects more the human mindset and functionality than their optical excellence per se.
The change of the 105/2.5 optics to the newer 'gauss' configuration and soon thereafter, introduction of multi-coating, made the 'K' and AI versions of this old Nikkor classic into terrific performers. More bang for the buck as our friends across the pond would call it. My preference is for the AI as it has very precise focusing and lovely handling on the Df. The 'K' is optically more or less identical except for having f/32 as its minimum aperture. Either version is a first choice companion for any df.
I never was a fan of the 18/3.5, but it admittedly does function pretty well on the Df. However, in this focal class I am partial to the 18/4 both for its gentle optical 'drawing' with pastel colours and its nice handling and excellent workmanship. the 18/4 is excellent when shooting into strong light sources too (provided its front is immaculate, but that can be said for all wide lenses). It also has low geometric distortion as far as wide angles go. An example is presented below.
Regarding the zoom lenses, the 80-200 f/4.5 is not bad, but again I never felt it to be excellent with the Df, just merely very good. The same goes for the f/4 model, but it has better performance at the widest apertures, at least evaluated from my copies of these lenses (I have several of the f/4.5s). I'm sure protests will be heard regarding this description of these two zoom Nikkors, but never mind. If one is pleased with either lens, by all means use it extensively and ignore my comment. The impressions of such lenses are never to be regarded as set in stone.
-
Beautiful shot, Bjorn :)
-
Some inspiring photos here. Owning a Df myself I am really happy with the output and feel of the images. As to lenses to use, one of my Df favourites (not mentioned yet) is the mid 1970's Vivitar 70-150mm f//3.5 'close focusing'. I was out in the garden today with it and for the price they sell at (mine was £2 in mint condition) completely belies the quality of the lens. Only one warning - don't put the sun in the frame as it will flare.
Here are three on the Df.