Nikkor Ai 50/2 vs Ai/AiS 50/1.8 vs 60/2.8 vs 55/2.8 100% resolution test(Round2)

[bressong]

Nikkor Ai 50mm f2 vs Ai 50mm f1.8 longnose version at f2 at lower middle

6100 is Ai 50/2

[bressong]

Nikkor Ai 50mm f2 vs AiS 50mm f1.8 pancake version at f2 at lower right corner
6100 is Ai 50/2

[bressong]

Nikkor Ai 50mm f2 vs AiS 50mm f1.8 pancake version at f2 at lower middle
6100 is Ai 50/2

[bressong]

Nikkor Ai 50mm f2 vs AiS 50mm f1.8 longnose version at f2 at lower right

[bressong]

Nikkor Ai 50mm f2 vs AiS 50mm f1.8 longnose version at f2 at lower middle

[bressong]

for the Round-2 test, for the copy I had and the test conditions

what I observed are:

AI 50/2 is a little lower contrast compare with Ai/AIS 50/1.8 @f2, and it makes the Ai/AIS 50/1.8 longnose looks a little sharper
but 50/2 wins in the image quality of extrme corner

AIS 50/1.8  japanese pancake version(full metal) @f2 is worse compare with 50/2

Ai 50/1.8 longnose is almost identical with AiS 50/1.8 longnose at f2

Micro-nikkor 55/2.8 is better than AF-D micro-nikkor 60/2.8 when full open, surprised me!

final funny one


Micro-nikkor 55mm f2.8 vs Russian Industal 61 L/M MC at f2.8

Industal-61 is Tessar optic structure, I was love this small lens very much until I met the Micro-Nikkor 50/2.8 "eagle eyes", from today's test, we can see 55/2.8 is really sharp even fully open

[bressong]

Nikkor Ai 50mm f2 vs Micro 55mm f2.8 at f2.8 at lower right corner

[bressong]

Nikkor Ai 50mm f1.8 longnose vs Micro 55mm f2.8 at f2.8 at lower right corner

[Roland Vink]

Ai 50/1.8 longnose is almost identical with AiS 50/1.8 longnose at f2

That is not surprising - these lenses have the same optical design.

Your tests also confirm what I have long suspected - the longnose 50/1.8 is one of the best manual focus standard lenses that Nikon have made, definitely better than the more compact versions which followed.

I have never tried the AF-S 50/1.8, but I heard this is also a very good lens (it has an aspherical element, probably hybrid plastic molded onto glass), but it has higher distortion.

[bressong]

That is not surprising - these lenses have the same optical design.

Your tests also confirm what I have long suspected - the longnose 50/1.8 is one of the best manual focus standard lenses that Nikon have made, definitely better than the more compact versions which followed.

I have never tried the AF-S 50/1.8, but I heard this is also a very good lens (it has an aspherical element, probably hybrid plastic molded onto glass), but it has higher distortion.

af-s 50/1.8 is larger and plastical， so I don't have a copy and interest 

I also had a sigma 50/1.4 art ，this is not same level player.
I think for hobby. The full open aperture performance of these 50/1.8/2 is already good enough.

[Erik Lund]

The old Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 is hard to beat in a setup like the one you did. It's a very nice universal lens only drawbacks, in some situations, are relatively long focus throw and light gathering.

[bressong]

The old Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 is hard to beat in a setup like the one you did. It's a very nice universal lens only drawbacks, in some situations, are relatively long focus throw and light gathering.

as a universal lens , the drawback of this 55/2.8 is the very short focus throw from 2m-infinity,which easy to miss the target in focus.

what surprised me is that 55/2.8 actually is old but is also not a very old lens, Nikon stop the production at 2020 (1979-2020 according to http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#50slow)

[bressong]

some samples of Ai 50/2

[bressong]

I found the Ai 50/2 has better CA compare with nikkor 50/1.8s

[bressong]

to me, Ai50/2 is sharp enough when full open