NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Michael Erlewine on April 04, 2016, 13:01:23
-
The Nikkor-O 55mm, f/1.2 CRT Oscilloscope
The Nikkor “O” (for oscilloscope) or CRT-Nikkor, as it is called is perhaps the most “different” lens that l own. This lens was made for monitoring CRTs and has trouble with daylight, which is part of its charm, since all kinds of wonderful color variations can be expected. This is not an APO lens or anything close to it because it has been corrected to render phosphorus colors, and is said to be optimum at f/4 and f/5.6.
The CRT or Oscilloscope Nikkor first appeared in the mid-1960s as an industrial lens designed for photographing oscilloscope displays and cathode-ray tubes, thus the nickname (CRT Nikkor). It was designed with a fixed focus and has no helicoid or focusing ring. However, it is very fast, with an aperture of f/1.2 wide-open. The maximum sharpness is said to be f/4. As mentioned, the lens is very, very sharp. It is listed as having f/1.2, but keep in mind that all ratings are for a lens at infinity, and this lens is designed for close-up range, so the f/stop would be more like f/1.4.
Even, so the lens is about as sharp as anyone could want. As for bokeh, the CRT-Nikkor is over the top, bokeh on LSD, which I particularly love. The CRT Nikkor can help you get out of the box to become more creative. At least that has been my experience.
This lens is not designed to be mounted on a standard Nikon DSLR, but rather uses the Leica M39 thread mount. The M39-to-Nikon F-mount adapters can be readily found on Ebay. Many people prefer to use an M39-to-T2, and then a T2-to-Nikon-F-mount adapter to mount the lens on a DSLR. This works well for images and close-up work less than 1:1. For macro work above 1:1, use a 52mm reversing ring. There are two versions, the first released in 1964, with the only difference being that the second version is marked (red engraving) “M=1/5.”
As pointed out, this was a lens built to photograph computer monitors, CRTs, the old ones with a curved face. The lens also has a corresponding curve, and so this is anything but a flat copy lens. In this way, it distinguishes itself from almost all other industrial lenses. At f/1.2 it is fast and allows plenty of light in the viewfinder, which is great for old eyes. It has a narrow depth of field at its sharpest and I consider it a specialty lens, although the specialty is very desirable, that of allowing for sharp resolution in parts of the frame, but a Zen-like blur instead of standard bokeh, that, and the ability to make whole areas of color just go wild, well beyond a gradual decline.
As mentioned earlier, there is no focusing ring, but there is an aperture ring with 12 blades. The scalloped aperture ring as stops: 1.2, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, and 11, all measured at infinity. The lens components were designed for handling particular phosphorus colors, I am told.
The CRT Nikkor can be used either on a DSLR (and focus rail) or attached to a bellows. The lens is made for 1:5, which means that even with the smallest adapter-extension, perhaps you can only reach something like 1:4. I use it on a focus rail.
If you a looking for an all-around lens, this is not it. As mentioned, this is a specialized lens, with all kinds of flaws. The contrast is average, and there is definitely lateral chromatic aberration a-plenty, and even some amount of longitudinal chromatic aberration. Since I usually only use APO lenses, why have one?
I love this lens because it forces me out-of-the-box despite myself. It is like a lens on an acid trip. The lens is very sharp when used correctly. As for myself, I tend to use it fairly wide open to record razor-thin depth-of-field, and I stack that depth of field (with many layers) to put the part of the image I want accented in high focus. Then, I let the rest of the image go wild with flare and bokeh. I happen to like that effect, but some don’t.
Perhaps the reason I like it is that it combines that part in me that wants to be exact, even scientific, with another part of me that has glimpses that this life we live is very ephemeral, like a dream we are having. So the flaring, surprise colors, and crazy bokeh represent the dreamer (and meditator) in me – something like that. Call it the Zen in me.
The lens has a long, Leica-mount thread (39mm) and comes with a jam nut. They turn up on Ebay fairly regularly for between $600-$1100 (2015).
In summary, with the CRT Nikkor, wide open (and fast), I can layer just the tip-of-the-top of some object, pushing that into focus. Then I contrast this with the rest of the image with is all bokeh -- out of focus. At least for me, this lens can be very much hit or miss, meaning that sometimes the results are miraculous, while at other times, only too average. In other words, this is lens is a little bit difficult to predict or control. With a little care, predictable (and desirable) results can be expected.
There is probably more I could say, but I will let the images do the talking. Here is a sample of what I have done with this lens. I hope you enjoy them. However, the lens is so flexible that of course you will develop your own style.
Focal Length: 54.3 mm
Widest Aperture: f/1.2
Narrowest Aperture: f/11
Aperture Blades: 12
Filter Size: 52mm
Hood: None standard
Close Focus Distance: 417.1mm overall working distance
Reproduction Ratio: 1/5x
Weight: 385g
Color: Not corrected, 0% vignetting, 1.14% distortion
Rear Mount: M39
Resolution: 250 lines/mm
Image Area: 24x36
Standard wavelength: 400 - 650 milli-micron
Construction: 8 elements, 6 groups
Standard Magnification: 1/5.5X – 1/4X
Sharpest at f/4
Chromatic Aberation: Mild at center, more severe in the corners.
Axial CA: Some on out-of-focus details.
-
Michael, you need to know that I am thoroughly enjoying your posts of flowers. This is no exception. The colors, the sharpness, the bokeh has your name written all over it. Thank you.
-
I agree with most of these comments. It is a lens one has to learn in order to utilise and unleash its potential.
However, once again the assertion that the lens has "non-standard 52 mm threads" is posited. I have no idea where that statement originated. All 55 mm f/1.2 Nikkor-O I have examined or used, have had ordinary 52 mm filter threads.
A K5 ring is perfect as a lens shade for the Nikkor-O.
The lens is indeed optimised for 1:4.4 to 1:5 reproduction, however, nothing prevents its use on say a mirrorless camera to get a wider reach. Be aware of the proliferation of curved image field and excessive spherical aberration, as indeed is to be expected from its design. On-axis sharpness keeps well up towards infinity, but elsewhere the frame gets very soft due to the field curvature and spherical aberrations.
First example is Wood Anemones against the Norwegian Flag, captured with a D3X. This shows the exquisite bokeh the CRT is capable of and the fact it illuminates the entire FX frame at around 1:4 scale. Nothing unexpected there except for the surprisingly good rendition of red colours.
Next example is a contrast between two kinds of dead trees, taken with the 1V1 (CX format). On a CX or m43 camera, the CRT can focus to infinity, but the aberrations caused by the lens being abused far outside its design domain are very evident. Sometimes even these wild artefacts can be used in a creative fashion, though, but keep in mind they can never be avoided no matter how far the lens is stopped down.
-
Bjørn: I first learned of this lens from your work, and was first inspired to get out-of-the-box with it thanks to Akira, who posts here.
With your permission, I will add some of your corrections and notes to my post. It is a collection of what I have been able to find. People can pick from it what they find interesting.
Thanks for the note and thanks for what you have done for the community and my work!
Here is one I took with the CRT yesterday.
-
Thanks Michael.
The CRT-Nikkor has the invaluable ability of rendering out-of-focus highlights as beautiful perfect circles. This is hoar frost on a spruce branch (Nikon D3X, 55 mm f/1.2 Nikkor-O).
-
A K5 ring is perfect as a lens shade for the Nikkor-O.
This is just so great! I just put the K5 Ring on my CRT and it rocks! Thanks!
-
Thank you for the information and the photos. I enjoyed reading it.
-
A street scene to illustrate the weird rendition of the CRT-Nikkor even on the small CX-format camera.
NB: there is nothing "wrong" with the lens, it is deliberately being abused by yours truly. Thus don't hold this drawing against the CRT-Nikkor, its inherent qualities shine once the lens is treated with more respect for its design domain.
-
Michael, I'm humbled to be mentioned in this context. But it is true that the CRT-Nikkor is one of the more inspiring lenses carrying the brand name.
I have used this optical gem for various formats from m4/3 to APS-C to full-frame, and have never gotten bored. I used HS-10 hood originally designed for Ai 85/2.0 when I put the lens on the m4/3 or an APS-C bodies.
This is one of my favorite shot with the CRT via M2 tube on D7000, stopped down to f4.0.
-
And this was shot on Panasonic G1 during the effort of figuring out how Bjørn had done the trick posted above. :)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4129/5144703428_d8102efbf5_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/8QBX6f)Mirabilis japala (https://flic.kr/p/8QBX6f) by Akira (https://www.flickr.com/photos/akiraphoto/), on Flickr
-
Thanks for the effort! Some lovely samples Michael et al
Just a bit of info:
This lens is not a 'Micro-Nikkor' so maybe you should correct that,,,
To my knowledge there are at least two main versions; Nikon Nikkor-O and a Nippon Kogaku Nikkor-O.
I have never seen a Nikkor-CRT could be it was just a project name,,, like the Micro-Nikkor 5Cm f/3.5 (Rangefinder) that had the project name R-Nikkor for Reproduction-Nikkor, actually the first 'Micro-Nikkor'
There are also two different coatings at least,,,
The Non-Nikon 52mm threads appear many places,,, I have seen a mention on a reverse adapter with bayonet mount, on the Mir site where it's stated as it was not the usual Nikon,,,
-
Erik, I realize that the "CRT-Nikkor" is rather a vernacular name of Nikkor-O 55/1.2, to avoid the confusion with the more common Niikkor-O 35/2.0 maybe?
Mine is a Nippon-Kogaku version bought from Vivek at a friendly price. It has the most common 52mm filter thread which accepts any 52mm filters and BR-2A reverse-mount adapter ring with absolutely no problem
-
Akira, I just remembered that I have actually seen that reference before that the O is actually for 8 elements! Like the ordinary F-Mount lenses -So the “O” (for oscilloscope) is wrong i believe.
Otherwise it would be an O-Nikkor!!! Noct-Nikkor, Fisheye-Nikkor,,, etc
BTW it has 13 aperture blades, not 12 ;)
-
I just found it again;
http://www.nicovandijk.net/55specials.htm
Seems he's right on the money, also standard 52mm threads,,,
-
Akira, I just remembered that I have actually seen that reference before that the O is actually for 8 elements! Like the ordinary F-Mount lenses -So the “O” (for oscilloscope) is wrong i believe.
Otherwise it would be an O-Nikkor!!! Noct-Nikkor, Fisheye-Nikkor,,, etc
BTW it has 13 aperture blades, not 12 ;)
I believe that the O suffix of pre-AI lenses is about the number of blades in the aperture (there is also H, hepta, P, penta, and so on).
But the Nikkor-O 55/1.2 is not part of that series of lenses for reflex cameras and the O indeed stands for oscilloscope.
-
Nix. The "O" is for "Octo", 8, and refer to the number of elements. It is also NOT a 'Micro-Nikkor', as correctly pointed out by Erik.
This practice of marking the lenses according to number of elements was used by Nikon for many decades, so nothing special with the Nikkor-O 55/1.2.
Nikon stopped this labelling somewhere in the late '70s. Perhaps the lens designs then became complex enough without the added Latin specifier, or people no longer cared, or they tried to save money on engraving, or what do I know.
Back to the Oscilloscope lens. I have been ruminating through my clippings files to find the photo of the first Oscilloscope lens I saw on a Nikon camera, but to no avail. I distinctly recall the article reported its effective aperture was not the marked f/1.2, but f/1.4, as (we know by now) f-numbers are always defined for infinity focus and this was 1:4.4. The outline of that lens was more similar to the first-generation Nikkors having scalloped rings and chrome barrel. What I did find, however, were several brochures showing the Oscilloscope rig as part of a Nikon F system. These were from around 1969 and obviously the intended lens had to be in direct F mount or mounted by using the BR-15 adapter.
My analysis based on the meagre data available is as follows: Initially, early '60s, there was an industrial lens design for capturing traces on CRT displays such as the then contemporary oscilloscopes. A fast lens was required due to the weak traces and its curvature of field had to be "negative" to compensate for the curvature of the CRT surface to give sharpness all over the frame. This first model was the Nikkor-O 55 mm f/1.2. I can only guess what kind of camera or measuring device these first models aimed at. Perhaps they figured as an optical component of a large device recording oscilloscope traces on cine film and the long 39 mm Leica thread and its locking nut was used to align the focus and then secure it for production runs? This model must have been replaced by a similar lens using F-mount and the outward appearance of a 'normal' (50mm) Nikkor of the time. Repair facilities still have similar-looking items used for calibration and testing, these typically lack focusing helicoid. It might be the latter model that had the designation 'Oscilloscope-Nikkor' and was referred to in the article clipping I still haven't found. I do recall it was published in a Swedish photomagazine in the late '60s, though.
-
| No. of Elements | Designator Letter | Origin of Designator |
| 1 | U | "Uns" |
| 2 | B | "Bini" |
| 3 | T | "Tres" |
| 4 | Q | "Quatour" |
| 5 | P | "Pente" |
| 6 | H | "Hex" |
| 7 | S | "Septem" |
| 8 | O | "Octo" |
| 9 | N | "Novem" |
| 10 | D | "Decem" |
| 11 | UD | "Uns" and "Decem" |
For example, a lens with eight elements would be marked "Nikkor-O", and a lens with eleven elements "Nikkor-UD".
-
There's always room to be proven wrong (just to clear any possible misunderstanding, I am referring to me).
So the numbering comes from Latin not Greek...
-
Akira, I just remembered that I have actually seen that reference before that the O is actually for 8 elements! Like the ordinary F-Mount lenses -So the “O” (for oscilloscope) is wrong i believe.
Otherwise it would be an O-Nikkor!!! Noct-Nikkor, Fisheye-Nikkor,,, etc
BTW it has 13 aperture blades, not 12 ;)
Erik, apparently the 55/1.2 is one of the rare industrial Nikkor that shares the designation for the usual Nikkor lineups.
I realized that the Latin numbering couldn't distinguish between 4 (quattuor) and 5 (quinque) or 6 (sex) and 7 (septem).
-
I realized that the Latin numbering couldn't distinguish between 4 (quattuor) and 5 (quinque) or 6 (sex) and 7 (septem).
Yes, these are the exceptions where they resort to Greek.
-
BTW it has 13 aperture blades, not 12 ;)
Can you confirm that? I had 12 recorded in my database but happy to change it...
BTW, there are two series:
- the first with serial nos 720001 up to 7224xx, possibly higher.
- second with serial nos from 820001 up to at least 8214xx. This one is marked "M=1/5"
It's possible the number of aperture blades changed between the two versions.
As for the name, I agree that "Nikkor-O" refers to the number of elements, O = Octo = 8 elements (in 6 groups)
Among the industrial lenses it is unusual in not having a prefix on the name such as "CRT-Nikkor"; although it is known as the oscilloscope or CRT lens, it is not actually named as such!
-
I counted the blades of the aperture in my 55/1.2 Nikkor-O and arrived at 12 every time.
Sn. 720169.
-
Yours is quite early, so the first version has 12 blades at least... Anyone with an 82xxxx series lens?
-
Yes, mine is #820716.
-
So, how many blades?
-
12 blades. It is marked "M=1/5", as described by Roland.
-
FWIW, my sample (Nippon Kogaku, Ser. No. 721371) has 12 blades.
-
Nippon Kogaku, #722387, 12 blades, not marked. I appreciate the information from Michael and Bjørn about how to use this lens properly and what to expect. I just picked it up recently and haven't made use of it yet.
-
Thanks everyone, glad to know my database is accurate. Maybe Eric needs counting lessons :o
-
As the M39 mounting thread is quite long, even more so if the retaining ring is absent, it is important to make sure the mounting thread does not protrude too much in the F mount. If it goes too far, the diaphragm actuation lever will hit it and will shave the metal. Real life experience, harmless in the end but I had metal flakes flying around the shutter box for a whole session. Not something I'm willing to do too often.
Going deeper is interesting to get closer to the nominal magnification but is not possible on the F mount. A Nikon 1 or Sony E with a M39 adapter and some fiddling or a short helicoid easily allow it.
-
Put the lens on a BR-15 adapter or its equivalent and there is no danger of seating the lens too deep.
If the retaining ring is missing, get a few M39-42 rings and add them as a substitute. Such format conversions rings are extremely cheap and anyone dabbling with M39/M42 lenses should have a handful of them in a drawer anyway.
-
The jam nut is necessary when mounting the 55/1.2 on a Nikon body using BR-15. Without the jam nut, the rear edge of the long M39 thread will interfere with the aperture lever in the mirror box. I learned that from my own experience. :(
On the Canon full-frame DSLR (EOS 5D Mk III in my case), you can use the 55/1.2 and BR-15 combo via Nikon F to Canon EF mount adapter without the jam nut.
-
Thanks everyone, glad to know my database is accurate. Maybe Eric needs counting lessons :o
That seems to be the case then ;) Sorry!
-
No need to be sorry, Erik. When a lens has this many aperture blades, counting them is difficult. I counted three times and took the average :D
-
When I count the aperture blades, I often lose where I started. This time I was just lucky. :o
-
When I try this, I stop down the lens about half the way and rotate it so one blade edge is level horizontally on top. Then, ensure a strong light filling the lens pupil to maximise contrast, and start counting clockwise until you reach the upper edge again.. Repeat three times, take average.
-
I count three or ten times, dvide by 100, subtract 3, add 5, take the square root and then ask Bjørn Rørslett :)
-
The Oracle speaks ...
Well, I think the question of number of aperture blades has been settled.
I' currently trying out the Nikkor-O on my Sony A7 through the appropriate adapters and a focusing helicoid. The lens *will* focus to infinity on this camera. However, if there is any quality at all left remains to be seen. This observation certainly will secure a continued interest for the Sony A-series from my point of view. I had nearly given up the system at this point.
-
When I try this, I stop down the lens about half the way and rotate it so one blade edge is level horizontally on top. Then, ensure a strong light filling the lens pupil to maximise contrast, and start counting clockwise until you reach the upper edge again.. Repeat three times, take average.
Same I do; repeat only if >10 blades ;-)
-
No need to be sorry, Erik. When a lens has this many aperture blades, counting them is difficult. I counted three times and took the average :D
I think I got 11 more than 12. After a few elevens which puzzled me, I found the two blades I'd been counting as one thanks to a quirk in the lighting. Then I counted twelve twice to confirm.
-
When I try this, I stop down the lens about half the way and rotate it so one blade edge is level horizontally on top. Then, ensure a strong light filling the lens pupil to maximise contrast, and start counting clockwise until you reach the upper edge again.. Repeat three times, take average.
I did exactly the same. 8) 8) 8)
-
Erik, I realize that the "CRT-Nikkor" is rather a vernacular name of Nikkor-O 55/1.2, to avoid the confusion with the more common Niikkor-O 35/2.0 maybe?
Mine is a Nippon-Kogaku version bought from Vivek at a friendly price. It has the most common 52mm filter thread which accepts any 52mm filters and BR-2A reverse-mount adapter ring with absolutely no problem
This is what I was secretly wondering, from the other thread (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,6799.0.html), so thanks for answering my question (without knowing it was my question ;) ).
Coin Imaging confirms it has a different thread mount, but that you can reverse, yet they don't rate this lens too high (http://coinimaging.com/nik-o55.html), mainly due to corner sharpness issues, but I understand this guy is a coin freak, and is looking for clean across-the-board images and is unconcerned about bokeh, etc.
Still, if you look at Coin Imaging's "Hall of Fame (http://coinimaging.com/hall_of_fame.html)," the lens ranks in their Top 10 (overall) up to 4x lifesize, when reversed.
Also found Michael's e-Page (http://dharmagrooves.com/pdf/e-books/MacroSop%20CRT%20Nikkor.pdf) about the lens, which is an extension of this thread ... but with a lot more pictures.
I am becoming seriously interested in this lens.
-
Also found Michael's e-Page (http://dharmagrooves.com/pdf/e-books/MacroSop%20CRT%20Nikkor.pdf) about the lens, which is an extension of this thread with a lot more pictures.
I am becoming seriously interested in this lens.
Well, Jack, I have to warn you and this is meant in the best of humor. IMO, becoming enamored of the CRT Nikkor 55mm is a sign (my friend) that the "artist" in you is moving into the passing lane. Why? Because this is a lens that (at least wide open) distorts both color and form, which is anything but natural science, unless there is a modern science I am not aware of. LOL. I first learned about this lens from nfoto, but it was Akira who converted me to it, so be careful.
Shot with the CRT Nikkor
-
I know I seem to be more of a 'forensic' (just-the-facts, ma'am) type of photographer ... but I do have artistic inclinations.
I actually used to shoot a ton of flowers, when I first got into photography ... back when I had the lowly 7D and the 100mm macro :)
Wildflowers used to form my primary interest when I first got into photography, but back then I lived in north Florida, just below the Panhandle ... which was replete with wildflowers ... so I had a whole host of fabulous flower subjects to choose from ... on a daily basis ... compared to where I am now in dry, arid So. CA.
Nice image, BTW ...
Here is a wildlflower image I shot more than a decade ago ... similar to your own style ;)
-
I know I seem to be more of a 'forensic' (just-the-facts, ma'am) type of photographer ... but I do have artistic inclinations.
I actually used to shoot a ton of flowers, when I first got into photography ... back when I had the lowly 7D and the 100mm macro :)
Wildflowers used to form my primary interest when I first got into photography, but back then I lived in north Florida, just below the Panhandle ... which was replete with wildflowers ... so I had a whole host of fabulous flower subjects to choose from ... on a daily basis ... compared to where I am now in dry, arid So. CA.
Nice image, BTW ...
Here is a wildlflower image I shot more than a decade ago ... similar to your own style ;)
Who would' think it?
"Here is a wildlflower image I shot more than a decade ago ... similar to your own style ;)"
Awwww. Now you're talkin' my language. Now that I see that image, it's OK with me if you get the CRT Nikkor.
Another image with the CRT Nikkor.
-
Who would' think it?
Awwww. Now you're talkin' my language. Now that I see that image, it's OK with me if you get the CRT Nikkor.
Another image with the CRT Nikkor.
Heh-heh ...
Gorgeous image; the shapes and colors!
I have to go back to work ... but I rummaged though my archives and found another you might like (ironically taken 8 years ago, to the day: 11/17/09!), with the EOS 50D and the original 100 macro:
I will post some more this evening or over the weekend ... though I fear my own images are off-topic :(
If I obtain the Nikkor-O 55mm f/1.2 perhaps my additional flower shots will be more appropriate. Let these images, then, be my 'proof of interest' ;)
-
quite an esoteric thread for me with some wonderfully Magic examples. Thank you all for extending the options!
-
Michael, you need to know that I am thoroughly enjoying your posts of flowers. This is no exception. The colors, the sharpness, the bokeh has your name written all over it. Thank you.
++1
-
How would this lens work if it's mounted on the Techart Pro autofocus adapter for the Sony mirrorless camera (http://techartpro.com/product/techart-pro-leica-m-sony-e-autofocus-adapter/)?
The Oracle speaks ...
Well, I think the question of number of aperture blades has been settled.
I' currently trying out the Nikkor-O on my Sony A7 through the appropriate adapters and a focusing helicoid. The lens *will* focus to infinity on this camera. However, if there is any quality at all left remains to be seen. This observation certainly will secure a continued interest for the Sony A-series from my point of view. I had nearly given up the system at this point.
-
How would this lens work if it's mounted on the Techart Pro autofocus adapter for the Sony mirrorless camera (http://techartpro.com/product/techart-pro-leica-m-sony-e-autofocus-adapter/)?
I have doubts. That CRT Nikkor 1.2/55mm does have LTM (Leica M) threads, however the flange focal distance is not according to Leica standards. If a specifically made adapter would solve that, would have to be based on experiments.
-
How would this lens work if it's mounted on the Techart Pro autofocus adapter for the Sony mirrorless camera (http://techartpro.com/product/techart-pro-leica-m-sony-e-autofocus-adapter/)?
A rough estimate using my lens delivered approx. 28mm from end of lens to image plane. Leica-M register is 28.8mm, so from that it is not that far away. Give it a try and report here!
-
Klaus, I'm new to photography and still learning the basic principles. I found this lens in a lot of old cameras that I bought for $50...lucky me! I'd like to use it for portraits of my son, not for macro/close-ups (although that would also be fun if I had the time). From what I know, pushing the lens away from the sensor makes it good for macro, and putting it close to the sensor would make it better for portraits (is that correct?). The Techart Pro adaptor costs $350, so I'm not going to buy it unless I know for sure that it works. However, I did buy a basic M39-NEX adaptor for $8 to test out the 28.8mm flange distance and see how well that works for portraits (I'll stack a few M39 adapter rings to fine tune the flange distance). I have a question: if this lens has a fixed-focus distance optimized for its original use, would changing its focus distance (by moving the lens away or towards the sensor, and subsequently moving the subject accordingly to get it in focus) cause distortions/other problems?
Why do I want to use this lens for portraits? Because it's F1.2!!! Thanks for your input.
A rough estimate using my lens delivered approx. 28mm from end of lens to image plane. Leica-M register is 28.8mm, so from that it is not that far away. Give it a try and report here!
-
I have a question: if this lens has a fixed-focus distance optimized for its original use, would changing its focus distance (by moving the lens away or towards the sensor, and subsequently moving the subject accordingly to get it in focus) cause distortions/other problems?
Why do I want to use this lens for portraits? Because it's F1.2!!! Thanks for your input.
Yes it will cause distortion and color fringing when used outside the design magnification. If you are taking portraits at a distance where the magnification is 1:5 then you will find it to be quite well corrected and sharp.
That may or may not be what you are looking for in a portrait lens. In fact, it is different from what people typically look for in a portrait lens. The typical portrait lens is usually designed to be faithful and kind to the human face. It need not be incredibly sharp (as most prefer their spots and pores and wrinkles and scars to be somewhat veiled. The portrait lens also is a bit longer than a normal lens to remove the proportional exaggeration which comes with close subjects. Portrait lenses also seek to have soft and smooth out of focus areas so as not to distract from the main subject.
The O Nikkor does not have those characteristics. It is nearly the opposite of what a portrait lens usually is.
As such it may be perfect for you, or just terrible.
Please show the results of your experiments!
-
Klaus, I'm new to photography and still learning the basic principles. I found this lens in a lot of old cameras that I bought for $50...lucky me! I'd like to use it for portraits of my son, not for macro/close-ups (although that would also be fun if I had the time). From what I know, pushing the lens away from the sensor makes it good for macro, and putting it close to the sensor would make it better for portraits (is that correct?). The Techart Pro adaptor costs $350, so I'm not going to buy it unless I know for sure that it works. However, I did buy a basic M39-NEX adaptor for $8 to test out the 28.8mm flange distance and see how well that works for portraits (I'll stack a few M39 adapter rings to fine tune the flange distance). I have a question: if this lens has a fixed-focus distance optimized for its original use, would changing its focus distance (by moving the lens away or towards the sensor, and subsequently moving the subject accordingly to get it in focus) cause distortions/other problems?
Why do I want to use this lens for portraits? Because it's F1.2!!! Thanks for your input.
Lucky you!! That lens is around $500-600 now on ebay!!
I would get a focusing helicoid to try it out on your NEX camera, but you need two more pieces for that: a lens adapter ring M39-M42 and a camera adapter ring NEX-M42 to fit it to a slim M42 Helicoid. All available on ebay
-
Klaus + Jack, thanks for the input. Should I get the shorter helicoid instead of the longer one? I attached pics to confirm with you before buying.
Lucky you!! That lens is around $500-600 now on ebay!!
I would get a focusing helicoid to try it out on your NEX camera, but you need two more pieces for that: a lens adapter ring M39-M42 and a camera adapter ring NEX-M42 to fit it to a slim M42 Helicoid. All available on ebay
-
Klaus + Jack, thanks for the input. Should I get the shorter helicoid instead of the longer one? I attached pics to confirm with you before buying.
Today I experimented with a thin M39 to m4/3 adapter and my CRT combo. The m4/3 mount is too small for the M39 to go through, and the end of the long M39 stopped at the opening of the m4/3 adapter. So, the distance between the mount of GH5 and the end of L39 thread of CRT was about the thickness of the adapter (a bit less than 2mm, I assume).
The combo turned out to be impossible to focus anything: near or at infinity. I guess the CRT was too close to the sensor, well past infinity.
The combo described above should correspond to the 12-19 helix, M42-NEX adapter and M39-M42 combo. Considering that the flange back of Sony NEX mount is about 2mm shorter than that of m4/3, and the M39 thread of CRT could pass through the opening of the mount, the 12-19 helix might be too short to focus to any portrait distances, perhaps even at infinity.
On the other hand, when the CRT (without the retaining ring) is mounted via Nikon BR-15 and F-to-m4/3 adapter, the lens will focus at around 1:5. So, 35-90 helix could be too long and only for even larger magnification.
-
I tried with the shortest helicoid I have here, 12-20mm and it allowed from a bit over infinity to approx. 60cm (2 ft), on my Panasonic GH4 (a mft camera). Since the Sony-E register is 18mm and mft is 19.25mm, it will focus not as close and even a bit over infinity, but stil portraits shoudl be doable!
-
I tried this a few years ago on a Nikon V1. I used a very small helicoid and could focus to infinity or near infinity, not really sure. I think I remember I had to add a spacer or two. The V1 register is 17mm.
I could not get interesting results and have not tried again since.
-
If it focuses at/near infinity, wouldn't that minimize the bokeh, which is ideal for portraits?
I tried with the shortest helicoid I have here, 12-20mm and it allowed from a bit over infinity to approx. 60cm (2 ft), on my Panasonic GH4 (a mft camera). Since the Sony-E register is 18mm and mft is 19.25mm, it will focus not as close and even a bit over infinity, but stil portraits shoudl be doable!
-
If it focuses at/near infinity, wouldn't that minimize the bokeh, which is ideal for portraits?
Not really. Almost every camera lens focuses at infinity if it is in the right position with regard to the imaging medium (film, digital sensor ...). Bokeh refers to the out of focus areas. It is qualitative, therefore you don’t really minimize or maximize it. You do get more depth of field the further you are away from an object, however, the object is smaller so you don’t really gain much by doing so. A portrait with the person a half mile away is rather useless.
I’m not sure what you are saying is “ideal for portraits”. Portraits can be wonderful if they are sharp and detailed, or soft and dreamy. There is no “ideal”.
It seems you are thinking that a very small depth of field is a good thing for portraits, therefore this lens shot wide open will be good. I am not expecting that you will be all that satisfied with it. But hope you try and show what you have achieved.
-
Not really. Almost every camera lens focuses at infinity if it is in the right position with regard to the imaging medium (film, digital sensor ...). Bokeh refers to the out of focus areas. It is qualitative, therefore you don’t really minimize or maximize it. You do get more depth of field the further you are away from an object, however, the object is smaller so you don’t really gain much by doing so. A portrait with the person a half mile away is rather useless.
I’m not sure what you are saying is “ideal for portraits”. Portraits can be wonderful if they are sharp and detailed, or soft and dreamy. There is no “ideal”.
It seems you are thinking that a very small depth of field is a good thing for portraits, therefore this lens shot wide open will be good. I am not expecting that you will be all that satisfied with it. But hope you try and show what you have achieved.
It has an adjustable aperture, so both would be possible ;-)
-
Sorry, I'm a newbie and not very eloquent. You're right...for portraits "I" would like a blurred background, which is achieved by close focusing instead of infinity focusing and aperture wide open. You're also right that this lens doesn't seem to fit the bill for portraits (after re-reading this blog a few times). I was not aware that these close-up lenses (without focusing rings) existed and was carried away by the F1.2 of this lens when I first saw it...my mind went immediately to portraits. However, since I got the lens essentially for free, I'll give it a try anyway, and if the portraits don't work I'll play around with close-up shots. I ordered the helicoid and adaptor ring, which will come next week. In the meanwhile, I put a FD-NEX adaptor on my Sony mirrorless, which has a big enough opening to fit the entire M39 end of the lens through. Holding the lens with my hand and moving it back/forth to get focus of my son, I took the attached shot...indoors, at night, F1.2, 1/100 sec, 800 ISO, no flash.
Not really. Almost every camera lens focuses at infinity if it is in the right position with regard to the imaging medium (film, digital sensor ...). Bokeh refers to the out of focus areas. It is qualitative, therefore you don’t really minimize or maximize it. You do get more depth of field the further you are away from an object, however, the object is smaller so you don’t really gain much by doing so. A portrait with the person a half mile away is rather useless.
I’m not sure what you are saying is “ideal for portraits”. Portraits can be wonderful if they are sharp and detailed, or soft and dreamy. There is no “ideal”.
It seems you are thinking that a very small depth of field is a good thing for portraits, therefore this lens shot wide open will be good. I am not expecting that you will be all that satisfied with it. But hope you try and show what you have achieved.
-
Holding the lens with my hand and moving it back/forth to get focus of my son, I took the attached shot...indoors, at night, F1.2, 1/100 sec, 800 ISO, no flash.
Looks successful! As long as you are having fun, you are doing it right.
-
I do have the Nikkor-O CRT and appreciate the lens, I am a real aficionado but not a great photographer, here are some photos:
My photos are uploaded to Flickr at 100% resolution
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51806779264_50a6e3805e_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mVZhy9)NIKKOR 55MM 1.2 O CRT Z6 TEST 00 _01 (https://flic.kr/p/2mVZhy9) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52439593847_e7ca27b0e7_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nTUChp)nikkor 55mm 1.2 CRT Z6 flower bee_01_02 (https://flic.kr/p/2nTUChp) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
The most unique lens I have is an R-Nikkor 5cm 3.5 serial 523002, the second prototype of the first micro-Nikkor. have not seen another one, only references to it. The R-Nikkor has 8 aperture blades, the 5cm Micro 3.5 has 7 blades. I will leave the lens to the Japan Nikon museum, if they want it. Do not have a box or papers for it. The guarantee cards are for the S2 and 5cm 1.4 that came with it. I have not used this lens much yet.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53236497087_7ae0f53e83_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2p7jXRr)R-Nikkor 5cm 3.5 micro Nikon S2 taken Rayfact mm 4_DSC9353 04 (https://flic.kr/p/2p7jXRr) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
This article was taken with the lens, the print itself is not very sharp but the lens is
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53161922319_fd7c7b2079_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2oZJKnz)Nikon R-Nikkor 5cm 3.5 Micro at 5.6 Z7 test article 01 (https://flic.kr/p/2oZJKnz) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
R-Nikkor is good at a distance too, but needs careful shading or it develops a hot spot, regular 5cm 3.5 Nicca shades do not work, an Ednalite shade did work but cuts a little into the corners.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53208215156_b7b30ec691_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2p4Q1BW)R-Nikkor 5cm 3.5 Z7 test ednalite shade home 5.6 (https://flic.kr/p/2p4Q1BW) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
Also have the second version of the 70mm 1:5, kind of the second lens on the progression to the Ultra-Micro Nikkors after the 5cm, it comes in the same wood box as some of the Ultra-Micros
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53117372260_d71b40bcda_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2oVNqc7)Nikon nikkor 70mm 5 micro Z6 90mm rayfact_3 (https://flic.kr/p/2oVNqc7) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53116965806_ff101e2c66_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2oVLknh)Nikon nikkor 70mm 5 micro Z6 90mm rayfact_1 (https://flic.kr/p/2oVLknh) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
I find the 70mm very useful on mirrorless and very sharp at many distances including infinity, it also has great OOF
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52297851553_b6edd82bf9_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nFoaeK)Micro-Nikkor 70mm 15 Cruising Grand august 19 2022 24 (https://flic.kr/p/2nFoaeK) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53211650654_92bfbf4ea0_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2p58BSE)Nikon Micro-Nikkor 70mm 5.0 Z6 Bee 12 (https://flic.kr/p/2p58BSE) by Rafael Batlle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rafabatlle/), on Flickr
-
Thank you for sharing the lens data and wonderful images of and with the lens! Really nice sharpness and overall rendering of all the lenses.
More information on the R-Nikkor:
https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/02992/02992.pdf
https://redbook-jp.com/redbook-e/koana/k20.html
-
Really beautiful results ! Thanks for posting !