NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: stenrasmussen on July 10, 2015, 20:19:46
-
After reading Bjørn's tip on how to use this lens for macro work I decided to get one. Ordered from Japan and 5 days later tis on my Df. Cost: 286,- NOK incl. shipping!
Here at 36mm with a PK-12. Sure the lens has it's limits (1.2m shorts focal distance and less than good rendering of point light sources), it is no Lanthar or Otus but with some work I think it works :)
-
I got one a few years ago, when Bjørn posted his original article about using the lens reversed. I've still never shot with it 'right way around'!
-
I have just picked up one of these so have been reading about it. I am off on a short break this month to the Dorset coast and was thinking a zoom of high quality and useful focal length may be a good companion on my Df - I wonder if this is it? It seems to sell for a low amount used but maybe that is because it is under the radar as it were.
So is it good enough to be an 'all day' lens or no?
-
If you can live with the rather long 1.2m (4 foot) minimum focus distance, it's not too bad.
My favorite compact zoom is the AF 28-70/3.5-4.5. The zoom range to 28mm makes it a more useful and versatile lens. The build quality is not pro-grade but is fine. Manual handling is ok, the focus ring lacks the silky smooth feel of manual lenses but it's ok for an AF lens and at least the focus throw is long enough to enable precise focusing by hand. And it's an AF lens so you can let the camera do the work too! It has continuous focusing from infinity to 0.39m at all focal lengths so it can do casual closeups (the close range is marked orange for macro, but there are no macro switches, it just focuses close). The filter ring rotates when focusing (the series-E 36-72 is the same) which may be a problem if you use polarizers a lot, but I don't generally find it a problem.
-
The 36-72 Nikon SE is highly underrated. On a plus side this keeps its selling price very low, on the negative side, people lose out on a good lens.
The long minimum distance is a problem you can solve by adding extension. It can also serve as an excellent true 'macro' lens reversed. Besides visible light, it works great in IR, not so well for UV.
-
Thank you Roland and Bjorn for your input. I remembered that I had use of this lens about 8 years ago for just a few shots on one roll - never long enough to appreciate it of course - but I have found one of the photos I took and even on film it looks very encouraging. This would have been Fuji Reala 100.
-
This thread made me buy this lens.
First impressions are very promising. ESP the bokeh in shot #3 is favourables...
Handling is a bit tricky, because I do not use Zooms in general and the inverter makes the feel even stranger.
Looking through the Viewfinder and seeing the results later is more than rewarding.
I have to find a way to slow down or fixate the zoomtube, then I can go for tripod use. These were all handheld.
-
By coincidence I just acquired one of these in the last week for a very small outlay, some images attached from this morning's church shoot - John
-
Here they are
-
bigjay [no real name given]: You are the first to show here what this lens can do unreversed.
second: can you post some more tech info, please?
-
bigjay [no real name given]: You are the first to show here what this lens can do unreversed.
second: can you post some more tech info, please?
Not quite true but images still good :)
-
Sten: I have a birth defect sunset-photo-ignore condition
-
Sten: I have a birth defect sunset-photo-ignore condition
Hee, hee...and still, the first image in this thread is with the lens the right way...
-
Ok. Pluton said he never mounted it straight.
I thought it was you...
-
bigjay [no real name given]: You are the first to show here what this lens can do unreversed.
second: can you post some more tech info, please?
Hi, they were taken with a DF this morning, if you save the image the metadata is intact.
John H
-
Hi John.
There is a real name policy active in the Forum. You might want to consult the site guidelines...
Is there a good and fast EXIF viewer von Android?
I use the forum from my phone most of the time....
Thank you for your contribution and help
Frank
-
Sorry guys, name updated (successfully I hope!).
Sorry, didn't think about Android - all images taken with a Df, 400 ASA, either f/8 or f/11, hth
John
-
Thank you, John!
-
Bjørn or other lens gurus:
How can I tame the mechanics of this lens?
When its optical axis is not parallel or vertical to the ground the zoom and/or focus ring get moved by gravity.
i want to fixate MUP expose. Possibly even stack.
-
Gaffa tape comes to mind ...
-
Gaffa Tape on a rail to stack. Right?
I thought of that but it appeared quite inconvenient to me.
I was thinking more of a screw fixation or some other more elegant solution.
-
Stacking operates the best in my experience when you keep magnification constant. Ie. moving the lens assembly as a unit.
-
Stacking operates the best in my experience when you keep magnification constant. Ie. moving the lens assembly as a unit.
What do you mean by "moving the lens assembly as a unit"?
1. Camera fixed and only the lens moves?
2. Camera and lens move together?
-
#2.
-
Another couple this morning with the venerable old timer at Down Hatherley in Gloucestershire - for those interested, taken on a Df, f/5.6 for the close-up and f/11 the others. I reckon this was a good buy!
John H
-
That also is the England i remember, local churches in the heart of the communities.
-
Fons: that is true for most parts of Germany too. Only the East has some historical blanks.
-
Nikon D7000 + BR2A + 36-72 - obviously reversed. Lens set to 36mm and focused at its closest range. Following two images at f11 and f3.5.
Only one question. I've found not easy to mount the BR2A on the camera: it looks like it forces a bit before the "click". Is there any compatibility issue or it is due just the small grip available?
-
On the next maintenance service for the camera, have the tech check the camera bayonet for warping or misalignment. That could cause the stiffness you reported.
Also, look closely at the BR-2A to see if the "ears" of the mount are bent or show signs of excessive wear.
-
Practically speaking, why would one choose the 36-72mm with extension tubes or reversed for macro work as opposed to using any of the dedicated micro nikkors?
Are there benefits over say a 105mm micro nikkor, or is this more a matter of experimenting with inexpensive alternatives?
-
You can get higher magnification.
-
The portion of the plant visible in my photos is about 10mm... Perhaps I'm not so wrong if I say 2:1 or 2,5:1...
Yet is having fun with what we have... sometime some serious work can be achieved too.
-
Only one question. I've found not easy to mount the BR2A on the camera: it looks like it forces a bit before the "click". Is there any compatibility issue or it is due just the small grip available?
I had the older BR2 for many years which I used with my FE2. Since getting my D600 I bought a new BR2A, which supposedly has a modification to make it compatible with AF cameras. I always assumed it had some material cut away to provide clearance for the contacts inside the camera. But I had exactly the same problem as you - the BR2A was extremely tight to put on, at first I thought it wouldn't fit at all. After checking that it was not jamming against anything and causing damage, I just pushed a little harder and it clicked in.
The side with the F-mount is just a simple mount, with nothing protruding that might hit the contact block of an AF camera. After my trouble fitting it to my D600, I compared it closely with my BR2 and can't find any difference. I tried my BR2 and it's the same - tight but it will go on with no issues. I'm really not sure why there are two versions of this adapter?? Maybe the bayonet flange is a shade big and need a bit of wearing in, although I never had any problems when I used it on my FE2.
-
I tried the BR-2A adapter on my old Nikon: the FE went smooth, FM2 and F90 less smooth.
So, I tried again on the D7000 and went less tight than the first time... so I tried also my D80 - no more cameras here :D - and found that it was as much as tight as the D7000 the first time.
My conclusion... There are actually three ways to mount the adapter: there are three flanges so rotate each time by 120°.
You might find that one of the three positions is a tad smoother than the others. Can you confirm this, Roland?
-
BR2A - Fits D600, FE2 and FM3A in all three positions. The fit is tight, tightest on the F600 (this is my newest camera so the mount may be less worn)
BR2 - One slot does not click in any of my D600, FE2 or FM3A. Looking at the mount from the side it appears the lens locking slot is in slightly the wrong place so can't engage with the lens locking pin. Another slot fits the D600 and FE2 but not the FM3A - it seems to slide over the lens locking pin but the pin never engages. Maybe the slot is a little too short or narrow for the pin to go in. The third position works for all three cameras. Again, the D600 is tightest.
The only difference I can see between the BR2 and BR2A is that the lens locking slots are very slightly longer and wider, so they have less trouble engaging with the lens locking pin on the camera.
-
I came upon this thread and suddenly realized that I had FM2 lying around somewhere. It actually had the 36-72 f3,5 lens mounted. I immediately put it on the Df and took it out for a spin, and boy was I surprised to see what that lens could deliver :) The horses was as usual, the models. Picture shot at ISO 140, 1/160 sec, f5,6, 36 mm. Minimal processing. Color was super, definition ok, easy to correct CA and sharpness ok. All in all a lens worth using a standard zoom on my Df.
-
Borge. The shot is wonderful. The monochrome setting plus the warm brown fur. Love it.
I bought the lens a while ago and use it from time to time.
-
Thanks Frank! The lens was a pleasant surprise. It was rescued from a lifetime in the closet.
-
I just dug mine out of the display cabinet; I'll give it a go tomorrow :)
on the shelf next to my 36-72/3.5 is my old 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AI-s; any thoughts on that lens?
Art
-
I dont know about the lens you mention, but it might just have its own thread in here. Try the search function. I also have a few other old lenses to test.
-
I just dug mine out of the display cabinet; I'll give it a go tomorrow :)
on the shelf next to my 36-72/3.5 is my old 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AI-s; any thoughts on that lens?
Art
Start a new thread for the 35-105, please.
-
I just saw one this afternoon during my junk hunting session. so tempted to get this lens because of this thread (or the sexy 70-210AF there) but i currently do not have the place for it now. :o :o :o
the range is more useful than the 43-86 8) which i found rather odd...
-
I just saw one this afternoon during my junk hunting session. so tempted to get this lens because of this thread (or the sexy 70-210AF there) but i currently do not have the place for it now. :o :o :o
the range is more useful than the 43-86 8) which i found rather odd...
On the contrary, the 43-86 mm range is very logical. Remember the diagonal of the 24x36 frame is 43 mm. Thus that 43-86 mm zoom range is "normal" to "half normal" in terms of angle of field.
-
36 would be better suited for me. :o :o :o
i just don't know how much plastic was used on the 36-72. i will probably get that lens one day when i am in the mood...currently have another 43-86(ai version) to restore. it's fungus killing time!
i do like the 40-45mm focal length to be honest (i love the GN)
-
The mount of the 36-72 is, by the way, really deserving the 'odd' designation. It is a layered pancake stack and a real pain to deal with for lens chipping. Apart from the materials feeling low quality there is nothing cheap or easy to assemble about this construction, so unfathomable that Nikon could save much money by the design.
-
sounds like a challenge :o :o :o
-
To me the 36-72E seems to be quite wenn built...
I got mine in a bundle with other lenses and a strange leather case for 150.
If I sell the other items included like a 70-210E and a 1.8/50E I can keep the lens for 20 Euros in like new condition.
plus I have some close up lenses and some extension rings and the strange leather case, not to forget A Nikon FG body.
-
for people experiencing a tight fit for the BR-2, do not worry it is normal. the BR-2 is a tight fit for many Nikon cameras :o :o :o
just ordered a junk and expecting it to arrive tonight or tomorrow. I am interested to see the internals...
-
The bayonet mount of the 36-72 is something very special even within a Nikon world. A strange sandwich-like construction. It's kind of hard to imagine this would save money in the production of this humble lens. Perhaps they could get away with much cheaper materials though.
-
Here it is :o :o :o
-
OK, now I know why and where Nikon cut corners :o :o :o
i also saw the laminated construction for the bayonet mount, strange as i do not see the benefit. maybe Nikon is going to use the same mount for another E lens ::)
overall, this felt like a simplified 43-86 that was mixed in with some engineering from the 80-200 f/4 Ai-s ::)
I counted 2 plastic parts so far on this lens. i was expecting more to be honest.
i really hated working with this lens, Nikon went all out with the glue and epoxy. and as usual with lenses of this class (cheap zooms) Nikon used annoying tricks that makes assembly and disassembly hard by using less materials while using clever tricks to make mesh together.
the screws also felt inferior when compared to regular Nikon lenses...
-
At least they didn't use sticky tape to hold stuff together ...
-
At least they didn't use sticky tape to hold stuff together ...
not on this one ::)
but the expensive 80-200 f/4 Ai-s did! :o :o :o
and to think that its almost as expensive as the cheapest toyota in my country when it came out ::)
the focus throw is also VERY short on this lens. a heavy grease is needed. I may need to get a thicker silicone oil for this.
-
OK, just overhauled this thing...
my sample looks really bad on 72mm at f/3.5 :o :o :o
at f/5.6 it looks a lot better (acceptable).
and f/8 looks good.
32mm and 50mm looks a lot better at f/3.5 compared to 72mm (ugly at f/3.5), f/5.6 looks acceptable and again f/8 looks nice
-
OK, just overhauled this thing...
my sample looks really bad on 72mm at f/3.5
What do you mean by bad, Richard?
-
What do you mean by bad, Richard?
Hello, John. Bad as in the images are not good at all. it is not sharp and the CA and other artefacts makes it look ugly. it does not look as bad on the other focal lengths. :o :o :o
I tested this lens on the park this afternoon on my wife and 72mm with all those imperfections make for a nice portrait lens ::)
one reason for this is because I got this lens for $8 with fungus damage and just overhauled it ::)
-
I have several samples of the 36-72 and they all deliver crisp and clear images over the entire focal range.
-
The most strange F- mount I have ever seen :o
I can't understand the intention to save on production and come up with something like that!
Yes chipping it was a nightmare. Also as I recall it came in a bag ;)
-
Bad as in the images are not good at all. it is not sharp and the CA and other artefacts makes it look ugly. it does not look as bad on the other focal lengths.
That's strange indeed. My sample gives sharp images as well. With vivid colours too. There is only some distortion going on, on the short end of the zoom.
-
Hello. if you have a look at the collage:
36mm looks pretty decent
50mm still looks decent
72mm looks really bad
72mm at f/4 looks a lot better but still trailing behind 36mm & 50mm at f/3.5
Now, if you look at the 72mm f/3.5 pic (3rd) it seems that my daughter's baby food looks decently sharp. I suspect some back focusing at 72mm in my sample. also note the ugly bokeh balls.
My wife was happy. yesterday I shot her at the park at 72mm wide open :o :o :o
not sure but the fungus damage might have done this. you cannot see any trace of the fungus damage now but if you shine a light at an angle you can see slight imperfections (front and rear elements). i believe that this will not affect the IQ in any lens but who knows?
-
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1485/25494411722_ee56e5b6fd.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/EQRwoN)HAW_8843 (https://flic.kr/p/EQRwoN) by mrBabaero (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31768064@N03/), on Flickr
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1697/25317433100_948c263fba.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/EzdsPf)HAW_8876 (https://flic.kr/p/EzdsPf) by mrBabaero (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31768064@N03/), on Flickr
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1453/25520364471_db02aa1dae.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/ET9xeZ)HAW_8877 (https://flic.kr/p/ET9xeZ) by mrBabaero (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31768064@N03/), on Flickr
OK :o :o :o
this lens was certainly useful for the streets. ::)
the handling was a different story. while the 43-86mm handled really well, this was a confusing lens to use for me because the zoom direction was in reverse. the focus throw was a little too short as well.
shooting in the streets at f/8-f/11 where the images look better was also a bonus but i would only use this lens on a sunny day.
-
I checked my 36-72, and the "sharpness" appears about the same, wide open, at 36, 50, and 72. At 72 the lens adds a small but noticeable halation or 'glow' around the edges of bright objects.
-
I checked my 36-72, and the "sharpness" appears about the same, wide open, at 36, 50, and 72. At 72 the lens adds a small but noticeable halation or 'glow' around the edges of bright objects.
Thanks, Pluton! it might be just "flare veil"...this lens also tends to make ugly bokeh balls. this week will be cloudy so i might shoot with this lens again next week. as soon as i get used to the reversed zoom direction, everything should be fine. :o :o :o
I got a request to tear down another series E lens so i got one from the junk box this morning for $17~ just some dirt inside the glass otherwise it's OK
-
Hi,
this would be great. Got a copy for 30€ yesterday. But... Zoom Creep... ;) Can You identify the part under the focus ring which needs to be replaced? It is a nice ans lightweight performer.
Harald
-
Hi,
this would be great. Got a copy for 30€ yesterday. But... Zoom Creep... ;) Can You identify the part under the focus ring which needs to be replaced? It is a nice ans lightweight performer.
Harald
Hello, Harald. which lens are you talking about? if it's the 75-150 tehn it's just a felt tape :o :o :o ill publish this last week of this month because i already started the 45mm GN article
-
some more shots with this lens today :o :o :o
-
Reviving this thread...
Just posted my disassembly guide https://diediemustdive.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/3672mm-f3-5-nikon-lens-series-e-disassembly-and-cleaning/ (https://diediemustdive.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/3672mm-f3-5-nikon-lens-series-e-disassembly-and-cleaning/)...
(https://diediemustdive.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/161001_199_36-72-e2.jpg?w=1140)
Corrections and critique most welcome.
-
I bought a 36-72/3.5 Series-E for my father for Christmas. I found it so wobbly that I returned it the next day. Did the construction improve from those first released?
Now I'm wondering about getting one for reversing? I guess I'll keep an eye out for one.
Dave
-
I bought a 36-72/3.5 Series-E for my father for Christmas. I found it so wobbly that I returned it the next day. Did the construction improve from those first released?
Now I'm wondering about getting one for reversing? I guess I'll keep an eye out for one.
Dave, if I remember correctly, the lens that works nicely when reversed was Ai zoom Nikkor 35-70mm/f3.3-4.5S.
-
Add a 3T or 4T close-up attachment then reverse-mount the 36-72 with additional extension. Does work very well. The zoom changes magnification.
(contact pins of a Xeon CPU, 3X)
-
Add a 3T or 4T close-up attachment then reverse-mount the 36-72 with additional extension. Does work very well. The zoom changes magnification.
(contact pins of a Xeon CPU, 3X)
Can I ask what is the purpose of adding extension to the reverse mount? Is it to increase working distance?
Then wouldn't it be camera-extension tube-reverse mount-lens-(additional attachments)?
-
Add a 3T or 4T close-up attachment then reverse-mount the 36-72 with additional extension. Does work very well. The zoom changes magnification.
(contact pins of a Xeon CPU, 3X)
3T or 4T attached to the front filter threads(facing the body when reversed), or attached to the mount side(facing the subject when reversed)?
-
On the road now, so cannot pull files from the archive to show the set up configuration. The idea of adding extension is simply to make less out-of-order conjugate relationships. Just reversing the lens is equivalent to shooting at an object distance much shorter than the designed near limit, thus image quality is guaranteed to decline.
As follows: K2 (for 'F' mount' + CPU), more K-rings (K4/K-5) as spacer(s), 4T (cannot remember whether its glass is flipped over inside the mount), reversed lens.
-
With the original HK-8 hood