Nippon Kogaku No 225392 Micro-Nikkor Auto 1:3.5 55mm

[Roland Vink]

It would be much simpler to buy an AI 55/3.5 instead - it's already "AI" and not compensating without having to do any work. They are pretty cheap...

[dslater]

It would be much simpler to buy an AI 55/3.5 instead - it's already "AI" and not compensating without having to do any work. They are pretty cheap...

Yes, but at what point did the optical formula change?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Nikon tweaked their designs several times over the years and usually not announcing what they did. So it is hard to say. There exist several views according to the remote-distance performance of these early 55/3.5 lenses. some claim they aren't very good, others say they are excellent. Could well be people have used slightly differently designed optics.

As this is way back in time and the Delorean with the Flux Capitor is thin on the ground, we probably never will know for sure. I recommend following Roland's advice and get an AI lens, or a "K" version if you want an earlier version in need of conversion yet not a compensating model.

[dslater]

Ok something I'll consider. In the meantime, for this lens, how do I remove the mount & f-stop ring? As you can see, there are no screws in the mount. Do I remove the small screw in the f-stop ring to remove the ring?

[richardHaw]

remove that screw you see on the aperture ring and screw the aperture ring off

i will take awhile

[richardHaw]

all of my metal nosed 3.5's are compensating
FYI...

[dslater]

Thank you Richard. Once the aperture ring is off, how do I remove the mount?

[dslater]

Oh, I think I see. There are screws embedded in the threads under the f-stop ring correct?

[richardHaw]

yes but be careful removing it. it's finely milled

[dslater]

Does it need to be removed to chip the lens, or can you just remove the baffle and work from there?

[dslater]

Nikon tweaked their designs several times over the years and usually not announcing what they did. So it is hard to say. There exist several views according to the remote-distance performance of these early 55/3.5 lenses. some claim they aren't very good, others say they are excellent. Could well be people have used slightly differently designed optics.

As this is way back in time and the Delorean with the Flux Capitor is thin on the ground, we probably never will know for sure. I recommend following Roland's advice and get an AI lens, or a "K" version if you want an earlier version in need of conversion yet not a compensating model.

On your old site, you describe the both the compensating version and the later PC version of this lens. From your description there, it appears you can see a (obvious?) difference in performance between these lenses when used close up. Can you suggest a way to tell if a lens has the old formula that is optimized for close up work photographically? That is, can you suggest a subject, f-stop setting & shooting distance where the difference between the older lens and the newer lens is visible and what to look for? As I have both the old and new versions, I'm curious to see the difference in images produced.

Thanks

[richardHaw]

not sure about chipping
haven't done any of it

https://richardhaw.com/2016/01/21/diy-ai-conversion/
if you want to convert this to Ai, this is my process on how I do it on my lens. so far, this has yielded a neat result for me. i will update this post with info on how to put that little tab for D80 and cheaper nikons as was pointed out by eric. i wasnt thinking about those cameras when i did this

[richardHaw]

by the way, i have all if not most of the versions with me. in what i do (bugs) i cannot find any meaningful differences. if there are any it is so small its not even worth losing sleep about.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I really wonder how many incarnations of the 55/3.5 exist? For example, I have never seen these versions without bayonet screws. All samples from all the generations have had 3 (AI) or 5 (pre-AI) screws just like any other Nikkor lens. Apparently as seen from the tear-down pictures there are massive differences inside the lens case as well. All my Micro 55 lenses are laid out in the "normal" manner. That includes the weird 5.5 cm model (1:1 directly)  for  the early '60s as well.

Thus there is a lot of data to pierce together to get an overview of which versions exist even before investigating any optical differences.

[richardHaw]

the internal differences are also many
like screws and the like.