Old School Nikon Primes

[Airy]

Congratulations on the new acquisition then
Do not discard the lens based on anything I write.

great pic with the diving 50/2.

Of course the 50/2 is by no means perfect, and of course I anticipate to be further using the 50/1.2 (to remain with Nikkors), or the 50/2 ZF2 rather than anything else. The former remains my reference standard lens at small apertures when "3D effect" matters, whatever that may mean, and the Zeiss remains my preferred high contrast, high resolution allrounder (except with backlit scenes). The older 50/1.4 C is also very interesting for soft effects wide open, e.g. for portraits.

My interest for the 50/2 can be traced back to the funny bokeh also documented by Fons. It may not be a lasting interest, but since I found a copy in an excellent condition for a reasonable price, I thought it worth testing. As you noted, (nearly) every lens has its chocolate side, and it is a nice pastime to find out which.

Before buying, I also took note of the opinion expressed by a certain Bjørn R. on the Naerfoto website, so I got reassured that the optical design of the 50/2 was not crappy. Another useful reference is the book "103 lenses tested for Nikon D700" by Jean-Marie Sépulchre, which is somewhat limited in scope (addressing only sharpness in a plane, vignetting, CA and distortion), but the testing is consistent and seriously done. This is a complement to the more in-depth, verbally expressed assessments provided by Bjørn, plus the many examples brought in NG.

So we'll see if the 50/2 is just a good lens bested by many other, more recent designs, or if I can find its "soul"

[FGAng]

The lens was completely disassembled, cleaned, left to dry for a week, lubricated and re-assembled. Everything worked great after that and all the internal dust and the slight amount of haze were gone after cleaning the lenses with acetic acid

Not quite sure if you are kidding or not, about the slight amount of haze.

I am finding the contrast of my 28mm f/3.5 Nikkor-H, 5cm f/2 Nikkor-S, 10.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor-P, 135mm f/3.5 Nikkor-Q (all non-C) to be low, or might it be "slight amount of haze"?  Thinking of opening them up to clean the lens elements, perhaps (not the diving treatment - although I do dive with my more modern Nikkors in a proper Ikelite housing).  Comments?

[the solitaire]

Not kidding at all. The lens had some haze all over the lens element directly in front of the aperture.

The easiest way to find out if there is haze is to light through the rear element with your cellphone LED and look through the front to see if an element looks like a focus screen rather then a clear glass element. That is what the glass surface in the 50mm looked like.

The "diving treatment" was just to get that photo and had nothing to do with the haze on the element, but since I took the lens apart to let it dry I cleaned it as well.

Today I disassembled my 55mm f1,2 Nikkor-S.C btw and cleaned and re-greased the focus helicoid. As it appears the grease I used is somewhat thick so the focus ring now has a little more resistance when turning. In itself I do not find that a bad thing. Might have to open it up again at a later stage when I find a thinner grease.

I had some excellent help from Richard Haw along the way because I was a bit puzzled to find a part of the lens glued in place (the DoF scale ring/sleeve) which I had not encountered in any of the other lenses I disassembled.

[Airy]

Some first shots from my 50/2 (AI, 6 blades). Sharpness near infinite may not be that good, or is it my manual focussing ? At intermediate distances, the lens is very sharp, well into the corners, at about f/5.6. Center sharpness is always good, at all apertures. LR has a profile and anyway, distortion is moderate. Flare is no big issue, but the coma is very noticeable wide open. Colors seem neutral ; contrast is good. A daytime lens.
I like the build, the recessed front lens (hood not really useful) too.
Bokeh : I noticed nothing peculiar so far, except the hexagons of course.

[Ace]

My contribution to the old school primes: Nikkor PC Auto 1:2.5 105mm, shot at 1:5.6 - 125th.
Really a pleasure to use!

[FGAng]

Some time back I acquired a few older mono-coated pre-Ai lenses, and used them sporadically.  Impressions were lower contrast and poorer colour saturation, to the point I told myself not to get non-C designated pre-Ai lenses.  But perusal of this forum and fm forum on old MF lenses was showing me otherwise.  Is there something I am missing?

Then I read in this forum that there are some who will use the lens hood religiously, while I had stopped using lens hoods unless there is sun shinning on my lens.  So I thought, OK, let me try this out.  So out came my Sonnar 10.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor-P and 135mm f/3.5 Nikkor-Q, with HS-4 hood full time regardless of shooting positions.

To my amazement there were significant differences subjectively as I did not shoot A-B with-without hood.


Nikon Df 135mm f/3.5 Nikkor-Q, 1/160 f/5.6, ISO 280

Comments most welcome.

[the solitaire]

Yes, especially with the single coated lenses but also with quite a few of the multicoated ones using a lens hood makes a huge difference. I even go as far as using an ugly rubber hood on my most used lens. The 55mm f1,2. In some cases practical use wins out over cosmetic appearance and the rubber hood was in my opinion a good and useful invention, even though it is one of the ugliest contraptions ever to find it's way to photography.

[FGAng]

Yes, especially with the single coated lenses but also with quite a few of the multicoated ones using a lens hood makes a huge difference. I even go as far as using an ugly rubber hood on my most used lens. The 55mm f1,2. In some cases practical use wins out over cosmetic appearance and the rubber hood was in my opinion a good and useful invention, even though it is one of the ugliest contraptions ever to find it's way to photography.

Thanks.  I haven't done the shine-a-light-through-the-lens to examine for veil in lens, but I suspect from yesterday's experience it is the mono-coating that needs to be protected by the use of lens hood that is the reason.  More experiments required...

 

[John Geerts]

Apart from the coating, the use of hoods on digital camera's are a benefit to prevent astray light on the sensor.

An old school prime, also the 135/3.5 Q but the C version with the HS-4 hood.

[Airy]

exquisite picture.

[John Geerts]

Thanks Airy.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Nice rendition of Trifolium incarnatum, the reddest of the red clovers. Colour contrast to the background adds to the impact as well.

[John Geerts]

Thanks Bjørn.  In the field you have to be a bit lucky with the background.

[John Geerts]

By the way. A nice surprise with the 135/3.5 Q C is the use of the Close Up lens 4T.

Here a Strawberry flower at @5.6

[John Koerner]

Gorgeous images, John.