Rorslett's Rule and Short Telephotos for the Df

[Hugh_3170]

Andy - what is wrong with what you already have, viz: Voigtlander 20mm,  Nikkor AI-S 50mm f/1.4, and either a Nikon 100mm f/2.8 E series or the 135mm f/2.8 E series?

Just my Scottish heritage kicking in when money is to be saved.  The two E-Series lenses are nice and lighweight and balance perfecly on the Df.  I know - I have tried them!

Really the FM3A and the Df are twin brothers and soul mates - why change your lens lineups?

[Les Olson]

Thanks everyone.  That has been very helpful. 

[Hermann]

Interesting stuff. Reminds me of the good old times with the Leicas (3f, M2) where I used a 35mm and a 90mm when travelling, and sometimes also a 50mm. The 90mm was my most used lens. I never got round to getting a 75mm lens, that would have been even better for my style of photography than the 90mm.

But what would be a good combination on a DX body? I personally don't really like zooms that much. I prefer primes, at least when I don't need to cover an event for my employer. At the moment I use a 50/1.8 and a 35/2, both manual lenses. What would be a (cheap) manual wideangle that gives me something like 30-35mm on FX?

Hermann

[Tristin]

You could get a 24mm f/2.8, which would be a 36mm on DX.  You can find those in the low $100s on ebay in good condition and it has a good reputation.

[David H. Hartman]

What would be a (cheap) manual wideangle that gives me something like 30-35mm on FX?

I'll recommend a 20/3.5 AI or AIS. It's highly resistant to flare and ghost. A 20/2.8 AIS might be used if more speed is desired although flare and ghost aren't as strictly controlled. The angle of view on DX of a 20mm lens is similar to a 30mm lens on FX. The 24/2.8 AI or AIS comes to mind but those have significant flare and ghost. If the sun is included in the image I can count the ghost to know if I had a filter on the lens or not, 13 if I did and 12 if I didn't.

For a set of three manual focus lenses for DX I'll recommend a 20/3.5 AI or 20/2.8 AIS, 35/2.0 AI and an 85/2.0 AIS. This isn't a strict half and double set like a 24mm, 50mm and 105mm set for FX is.

Dave

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Opinions on the 85 mm f/2 AIS are divided. I have used several of these and don't like its performance in particular at the widest apertures.

A lens to try out before accepting it is my advice.

The 85/1.4 AIS is not small, but operates very well on the Df. Then there are the older 85/1.8 versions which also are nice if one can get them in AI or AI'd.

[David H. Hartman]

I ran off an 85/2.0 AIS and an 85/1.4 AIS and the f/1.4 beat the f/2.0 from f/2.0 to f/5.6 then by f/8.0 they were equal. My 85/1.4 AIS is lube contaminated. I find the 85/2.0 acceptable. [It's not in the same class as the 105/2.5 AI/AIS and 85/1.4 AIS.] The 85/2.0 is small and reasonably priced. That's why I recommended it. If size and price aren't important then I'll recommend the 85/1.4 AIS.

I've printed portraits for a friend from an 85/1.8 K that's AI-ed. A number of years back I tried to buy it from him but he wouldn't sell it. I'd still like to own one. I wonder if it's more prone to flare than the others based on an 85/1.8 Nikkor-H I owned. The Nikkor-H was one of the worst flaring lenses I've owned.

Dave

[pluton]

The H.C, K, and final Ai versions of the 85/1.8 have the same optics, but with multiple layer AR coating added.  The Multicoating not only cuts down on flare, but tweaks the color transmission of the lens away from the greenish yellow and more toward neutral.  The K and Ai versions also feature the rubber focusing grip and a slightly closer MFD.  Also, they look cool. 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I had the 85/1.8 HC and was stupid enough to sell it off as it didn't fit the new Nikon F3 I purchased to replace my F2. Turned out I was doubly stupid as the F3 had nowhere the nice smooth feel of the F2 in operation.

[Les Olson]

Andy - what is wrong with what you already have, viz: Voigtlander 20mm,  Nikkor AI-S 50mm f/1.4, and either a Nikon 100mm f/2.8 E series or the 135mm f/2.8 E series?

Just my Scottish heritage kicking in when money is to be saved.  The two E-Series lenses are nice and lighweight and balance perfecly on the Df.  I know - I have tried them!

Really the FM3A and the Df are twin brothers and soul mates - why change your lens lineups?

Thank you and I take your point.  Mind you, my heritage is Irish, so if there is money to be spent and pleasure to be had, I am your man   

And as your ancestors would also have said, "Why keep a dog and bark yourself?"  Or, why have a camera that will AF and use MF lenses?   OK, if the MF lenses are special, or there isn't an AF option, but if there is ... 

[David H. Hartman]

How about the classic rich man's amateur set, a 28/2.0, 50/1.4 or 50-55/1.2 and a 135/2.8. The very set I didn't want back in the early '70s. I didn't want a 28mm and 135mm lenses for no better reason than that was what most amateurs bought. The poor mans set was 28/3.5, 50/2.0 and 135/3.5 in those days.

My choice was a 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor-P, 105/2.5 Nikkor-P and a 24/2.8 Nikkor-N. Later I added a 35/2.0 Nikkor-O, 20/3.5 Nikkor-UD and finally when I could not afford anything longer than 135mm a 135/3.5 Nikkor-Q. The 135/3.5 cost me $135.00. Years later in the same situation while buying AI Nikkors I bought a 135/3.5 AI for $270.00. In the late '70s a friend joked that I bought so many lenses that I could not afford film, almost true but I always had one or two hundred feet of bulk Tri-X on hand.

Dave

To this day 20mm and 105mm just feel right.

[Tristin]

How lucky we are that all the Ai/Ai-s lenses are now the cheap lenses!   Well, minus the exotic telephotos.  I certainly wouldn't mind the old 200mm f/2 getting cheap hehe 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I have a 200/2 AIS staring at me and asking why don't I use it more ...

[Tristin]

Such are the benefits of being a professional photographer, being able to justify such expenses!  Consider me envious 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

My AFS 200/2 also bitterly complains about the same, so both act like petulant children and whom am I to listen to