Ok, so any vintage Nikon lens is a favorite and perfect, right? 
Favorite vintage Nikkor prime lens!
-
A
- Thread starter Nikon 2
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Sinar P2 8x10 Metering Back & Bellows
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Leica 90mm f2.5 Summarit-M
- Started by chriscrawfordphoto
-
Sold Minolta 7000 (Refurbished) w/ 50mm f/1.7
- Started by Acere
-
For Sale FS: RARE Nikkormat FS body for Parts or Repair
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
Sold GONE!...FREE for Shipping Cost: Polaroid 110 Pathfinder Camera Body for Parts or Repair
- Started by AnselMortensen
Forum statistics
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,862
- Format
- 8x10 Format
I don't want to nitpick what "sharpness" implies relative to an excellent, now bargain priced 55/2.8 micro versus some recent Zeiss or Leica branded lens costing anywhere between ten and fifty times as much. If I need more detail, any decent medium format equivalent will blow any of those out of the water, not to mention doing things in the 4X5 and 8x10 format league. I just enlarged an 8X10 example onto Fujiflex yesterday that no 35mm lens on earth can reasonably imitate, nor anything like inkjet printing. When it comes to a contest between Bambi and Godzilla, Godzilla wins every time, even if Bambi is on steroids.
I understand why people spending top dollar for the largest number of little rodent pixels running around inside their 35mm camera would also spend big bucks for the sharpest optics to go with that. But frankly, my bargain Fuji 6X9 film rangefinder, which weighs less than what I typically see them carrying, gives substantially more printable detail.
But even given the strict parameters of this thread, the difference between the Nikkor 55/2.8 and something way more expensive would probably be nullified by the limits of film resolution itself. You might choose a different lens for a different reason. For example, my 85/1.4 Ai is also close-range corrected, but with wider aperture, and far better out-of focus-rendering or "bokeh" than the
55/2.8 Micro, which has a rather annoying "double-lined" blur. But that 55 is so petite that it's easy to carry in the same pouch as the Nikon 85-equipped. And due to its excellent highly corrected contrasty optics, its easier to critically focus than most 50 primes of wider aperture. But ordinarily, I keep it with my copy stand setup. For roaming about snapshooting, I bought an old single-coated 50/2 H Ai'd for its vintage less clinical look on film. The 85/1.4 Ai is still my favorite 35mm shooting lens, however.
I understand why people spending top dollar for the largest number of little rodent pixels running around inside their 35mm camera would also spend big bucks for the sharpest optics to go with that. But frankly, my bargain Fuji 6X9 film rangefinder, which weighs less than what I typically see them carrying, gives substantially more printable detail.
But even given the strict parameters of this thread, the difference between the Nikkor 55/2.8 and something way more expensive would probably be nullified by the limits of film resolution itself. You might choose a different lens for a different reason. For example, my 85/1.4 Ai is also close-range corrected, but with wider aperture, and far better out-of focus-rendering or "bokeh" than the
55/2.8 Micro, which has a rather annoying "double-lined" blur. But that 55 is so petite that it's easy to carry in the same pouch as the Nikon 85-equipped. And due to its excellent highly corrected contrasty optics, its easier to critically focus than most 50 primes of wider aperture. But ordinarily, I keep it with my copy stand setup. For roaming about snapshooting, I bought an old single-coated 50/2 H Ai'd for its vintage less clinical look on film. The 85/1.4 Ai is still my favorite 35mm shooting lens, however.
Last edited:
105 DC lens is very nice for portraits, infrared work, slight tele use. All around well behaved bokeh, etc...
for ancient lenses, my 55/3.5 macro AI-converted always does well.
for ancient lenses, my 55/3.5 macro AI-converted always does well.
OP
OP
Attachments
OP
OP
Looks like the early Nikon Micro Nikkor 55mm f/2.8’s might have the problem with the oil seeping onto the blades…!
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,862
- Format
- 8x10 Format
I've never had any issues; but I own a somewhat later example of the 55/2.8; and there are plenty of up those for sale.
OP
OP
The earliest Nikkor Micro 55mm lenses with low serial numbers cost half the price of the latest ones with highest serial numbers…!
OP
OP
The later example is the one to get…!
OP
OP
I was about to purchase one with a very low serial number and canceled the transaction, $187.
Looked for the highest serial number Nikkor and were more than twice the price…!
OP
OP
The serial number of the one I canceled was 352xxx from 1979...!
Attachments
Last edited:
OP
OP
OP
OP
But in my research even the very earliest models take many years for the oil to seep onto the blades…!
OP
OP
Ok, so any vintage Nikon lens is a favorite and perfect, right?
Not at all. Some are much better than others for sharpness and lack of distortion…!
But those facts alone will not stop people from posting their favorite lenses.
OP
OP
If they have favorite lenses, good for them…!
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,862
- Format
- 8x10 Format
"Better" is relative to your own expectations. Sharper and lack of distortion makes the 55/2.8 Micro a prime candidate for copy work. But for pictorial use, those same characteristics might disappoint someone else. All depends.
I like the 45 GN because it’s the only Nikkor lens that has the same focus direction as Leica.
Also its funky cam focus that feels like nothing is happening.
Also its funky cam focus that feels like nothing is happening.
I bought my 55mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor in January 1980, the first shipment from Japan. I used it exclusively for the next three years as it was the only Nikon lens I owned. Later on I started to amass a plethora of Nikon lenses.
My lens has had a very hard life, I travelled exclusively on motorcycles everywhere, including trips to Europe, New Zealand and parts of Asia with this lens always in the thick of things. It lived in my tank bag so was subject to extreme heat and cold.
In the early 2000's I did quite a lot of portraiture with this lens, especially close portraiture work, which, due to the floating elements (CRC, Close Range Correction, in Nikon language) is about as good as it can be.
One extremely hot day in our backyard doing a water based theme of portraiture, my Micro Nikkor started playing up. At first I noticed that whenever I did a portrait frame, the camera sounds were not quite correct. Switching to landscape mode everything was hunky dory. The camera had at one stage been sitting in direct sunlight for about an hour in portrait mode while we worked on the backdrop, the ambient temperature was north of 40ºC, so things were really hot. I remember going back to the camera and found it too hot to touch, so I covered it for a short time then we started exposing film.
I ended up switching to my 85 f/1.4 Nikkor as the 55mm became stroppy. Eventually I realised there was something wrong with the aperture blades, some kind of goo. I took it to a camera repair shop and the first question he asked me was, "have you had this in direct sunlight in the recent really hot weather?" He had over the years had the odd 55 f/2.8 Micro Nikkor come in after super hot weather.
He pulled it apart, cleaned the melted blade lubricant away and re-lubricated the aperture blades with something that should be alright, according to him. He also re-collimated the optics. It is still as spectacular as ever.
So yes, this is an issue, but I would suggest it isn't an issue if you are able to ensure the lens works perfectly when you purchase it and don't subject it to extremes of heat.
When in use the camera slowed down somewhat. I was using an F3 with an MD4 drive attached. After taking an exposure, instead of quickly winding on, the whole lot paused a bit and after this small pause, the motor drive then wound on to the next frame. This is how I found the issue in the first place.
This is the 85mm f/1.4 version of what I was trying to do with the 55 Micro Nikkor. Extremely hot weather and after a few failed attempts with the 55 Micro Nikkor I switched to the 85mm lens to finish the job. And if the subject looks hot, it is because she was! We literally turned the garden hose onto ourselves a few minutes after I had this frame and if I remember correctly, we then had some ice cream.
Shawl
Taken in the backyard on an extremely hot day, it was the subjects idea to try a shawl. The warm tone of the image doesn't show on the screen, which is a pity.
www.photrio.com
OP
OP
I bought my 55mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor in January 1980, the first shipment from Japan. I used it exclusively for the next three years as it was the only Nikon lens I owned. Later on I started to amass a plethora of Nikon lenses.
My lens has had a very hard life, I travelled exclusively on motorcycles everywhere, including trips to Europe, New Zealand and parts of Asia with this lens always in the thick of things. It lived in my tank bag so was subject to extreme heat and cold.
In the early 2000's I did quite a lot of portraiture with this lens, especially close portraiture work, which, due to the floating elements (CRC, Close Range Correction, in Nikon language) is about as good as it can be.
One extremely hot day in our backyard doing a water based theme of portraiture, my Micro Nikkor started playing up. At first I noticed that whenever I did a portrait frame, the camera sounds were not quite correct. Switching to landscape mode everything was hunky dory. The camera had at one stage been sitting in direct sunlight for about an hour in portrait mode while we worked on the backdrop, the ambient temperature was north of 40ºC, so things were really hot. I remember going back to the camera and found it too hot to touch, so I covered it for a short time then we started exposing film.
I ended up switching to my 85 f/1.4 Nikkor as the 55mm became stroppy. Eventually I realised there was something wrong with the aperture blades, some kind of goo. I took it to a camera repair shop and the first question he asked me was, "have you had this in direct sunlight in the recent really hot weather?" He had over the years had the odd 55 f/2.8 Micro Nikkor come in after super hot weather.
He pulled it apart, cleaned the melted blade lubricant away and re-lubricated the aperture blades with something that should be alright, according to him. He also re-collimated the optics. It is still as spectacular as ever.
So yes, this is an issue, but I would suggest it isn't an issue if you are able to ensure the lens works perfectly when you purchase it and don't subject it to extremes of heat.
When in use the camera slowed down somewhat. I was using an F3 with an MD4 drive attached. After taking an exposure, instead of quickly winding on, the whole lot paused a bit and after this small pause, the motor drive then wound on to the next frame. This is how I found the issue in the first place.
This is the 85mm f/1.4 version of what I was trying to do with the 55 Micro Nikkor. Extremely hot weather and after a few failed attempts with the 55 Micro Nikkor I switched to the 85mm lens to finish the job. And if the subject looks hot, it is because she was! We literally turned the garden hose onto ourselves a few minutes after I had this frame and if I remember correctly, we then had some ice cream.
Shawl
Taken in the backyard on an extremely hot day, it was the subjects idea to try a shawl. The warm tone of the image doesn't show on the screen, which is a pity.
Yep, thanks for sharing…!
I just purchased the 55 2.8 macro from KEH in excellent + condition. The lens was beautiful except oil on 3 aperture blades. I promptly sent it back. I’ll have to keep an eye out for a newer version.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2006
- Messages
- 1,752
- Format
- 35mm
It's hard to narrow in down to one. I have two older 180s and an ED. I like these all very much. The 55/3.5s between the P and the AI are good all around shooters. Today I got my first 105/1.8 AIS. That might become my new favorite. I nearly tried to mount it on a Nikkormat FT2 but stopped myself in time. I pulled out one of my FE bodies, which needed new batteries and a strap. Lately, if I am using Nikkors, they are on one Nikkormat or another or on an N90S. I hope to shoot some film with the 105 this weekend.
OP
OP
The newer versions have better oil that doesn’t seep into the blades, “supposedly “…!
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,862
- Format
- 8x10 Format
There's no substitute for common sense. A black camera and lens housing, a magnifying glass of a lens laying around facing the sun, whatever. Might as well leave your dog in the car with all the windows rolled up on a hot day as your camera in an overheated car trunk. I've done plenty of hot weather hiking in the deserts and canyons in my younger years with a simple Pentax H1a camera, and never had such issues. Same with extreme cold. A little TLC (tender loving care) helps.
OP
OP
Common sense is a rarity these days…!
That's a sweet lens!!
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |