43-86 f3.5 nikkor, I hope it's as bad as they say!

StepheKoontz said:

Did I miss something here? I didn't mean to make anyone mad by having some fun with my photography...

Click to expand...

it's all good.

You won't be disappointed. The curvature at 43mm has to be seen to be believed!

I had two of these, equally bad, in the 1980s. Yes, two. Both were given to me. I didn't understand why, until I went out and actually shot images with them. Then all was revealed.

Oddly, the most deightful results I had from them was with the long-discontinued Kodak Ektachrome Infrared film, which gave truly weird colors and edge fringing such as you can't get even today with the cheapest digital cameras.

I shot some film with a Cokin prism with splendidly strange results. Very unpredictable. Distorted, even astral effects which can't be explained but have to be seen. If one were to want to truly abandon all hope in photography, this is the lens to use.

Equally oddly, black-and-white films produced the best (= sharpest) results across the lens spectrum of settings. Color negative images were hopeless, but then color neg films in the '80s weren't crash-hot anyway. Remember Kodak Vericolor. The best images were from the then-available Kodak Ektar 25 with a Nikkormat, Nothing I took on the Ektar could be blown up to more than minilab print size but how many 16x20 enlargements does one need anyway?

Go forth, shoot away, and enjoy. And please post some of your favorite (I meant to say "best" but the term doesn't really apply to the 43-86) results for us to enjoy. Ciao!

PS1 +1 to Eric Rose (#6). Overloads of a certain equine byproduct also came to my mind...

The only lens I have that is consistently bad at apertures. Every year I drag it out, telling myself the lens can't be that bad; and every year I'm reminded how bad it truly is.
A real dog of a lens.

Jim B.

ozmoose said:

You won't be disappointed. The curvature at 43mm has to be seen to be believed!

Go forth, shoot away, and enjoy. And please post some of your favorite (I meant to say "best" but the term doesn't really apply to the 43-86) results for us to enjoy. Ciao!

Click to expand...

I hope no one flips out for posting this sample shot. I threw this lens on an adapter on my Sony A7 just to get an idea of how bad it is, I already like it. As soon as I get a non-corroded prism for the old Nikon F I have, I'll post more from shots on film. I can see this working well with IR and maybe cross processing?

Looks good to me.

Mackinaw said:

The only lens I have that is consistently bad at apertures. Every year I drag it out, telling myself the lens can't be that bad; and every year I'm reminded how bad it truly is.
A real dog of a lens.

Jim B.

Click to expand...

Now, I like to have one.

Good luck and have fun!

If I remember correctly, this is infamously *the* zoom lens that gave zoom lens designs a bad name... it is even mentioned in lens design courses.

If there is one lens to this day that the defines Sample Variation as well as Quality Control this is it. I own several of these lenses and I usually test every one I came across so over 20 at least probably more. There are huge differences between the worst of them and the best of them. The best of them I kept (never were worth much usually better to just sell as a 'body cap' lens and pass it on). My best 43-86 is the Post-Ai optical update with the full NIC coatings and was used to great results on a bikini fashion catalog; the 'variable distortion control' also called the Zoom Ring was exceptionally useful in depicting shall we say, the complex compound curves required for the assignment. I learned that one from Bob Guccione when his magazine used to include photographic data and I wondered why he would use such a known dog of a zoom. Taking it along at the shoot and seeing in real time on a digital camera I understood why he used it.

The best version is the most recent Ai although the in between .C version has its charms with the older more flawed optical design. The Ai lens was made in very high quantity and while quite robust they often took a beating and can have problems associated with impact even if it looks in good shape. Its mechanical design also made it very apt to have debris, dust and fungus in the inner elements which will mostly negatively effect the image quality; these can and often have been cleaned before and *may not have been properly repaired*. There is one element in one group that if it is reversed can give the distortions at the edges that so many have displayed and complained about. This element is really difficult to determine the correct orientation if one is not careful on the disassembly and I've had to reverse some of my own after reassembly.

Prices for these will always be cheap. If you spot a clean later Ai version for nothing give it a try. Portrait and 3/4 torso to full length fashion. Middle to sorta close distances 1/2 stop down somewhere in the middle of the zoom range. Use a HN-3 hood for backlight no hood if you want some glow. Small movements of the 'variable distortion control' ring can be used to subtle effect.

I've posted these before, but here's the level of distortion I get out of my AI copy at 43mm and 86mm respectively. To be fair, stopped down to f/8 it's more than sharp enough for most film, and the focal plane seems relatively flat.

WOW
Barrel/Pincushion distortion at the flip of the wrist.
Interesting optical creative tool.

I just dug out my 43-86 and will shot some B&W with it and post the results.