How will my old Nikon analog lenses compare to newer lenses?

[keithostertag]

I have three old Nikon AIS analog lenses in good condition that I used for years:

Micro-Nikkor-P 55mm f3.5 sn666068
Nikkor 35mm f2 sn884671
Nikkor 24mm f2.8 sn518226

They are not particularly valuable, but I'd like to keep them and use them in the future. And I am tight on funds, so I can't easily replace them with modern types at this time.

I am considering buying a modern digital FX camera, maybe something similar to a Nikon D750, to use these with.

Other than the auto focusing issue, how will my old lenses compare to newer lenses? My concern is with sharpness, contrast, and color rendition, but you may know of other considerations.


Thanks,
Keith

 

[PGillin]

My expectation is that they will be quite good. I have used the 35 and 24mm on digital (D700 and D750) and they were both fine. Contrast, colors, and overall rendering where nice, no weird fringing or artifacts. The 35mm was slightly soft wide open, more obvious on the higher res sensor, but not bad and very good stopped down to F4. This may also be a sample variation thing, as mine was a PJ lens and is heavily worn. One might also assume that Nikon's priorities with the fast 35mms weren't on peak sharpness.
The biggest change is likely to be the shooting experience. I've never found manual focus to be as good or as easy on the DSLRs. This is largely due to the focusing screens. It isn't terrible, especially with 2.8 lenses, but at 1.4 or even 1.2 it's lackluster.
I have heard that this is due to the screens being optimized for brightness with 2.8 zooms rather than showing accurate DoF with faster lenses.

 

[Wallendo]

Since these are lenses you currently own and have used for years, they will be just as sharp, with the same contrast and color rendition they have always had. You already know what these lenses look like.
Using them on a full frame digital camera may allow you to zoom in on individual pixels and detect problems that weren't apparent on film, but these differences aren't generally significant.
Using them with a crop sensor will give you a different look, however.

 

[Lee Rust]

I use these same three lenses with my D700. As noted, manual focus is easier with the film SLR's, but the "In Focus" indicator light in the digital Nikons works fine. For me, the biggest issue with that light is that it's at the bottom of the viewfinder and I have to shift my attention away from the composition, but it's not really that big a deal.

 

[138S]

I have three old Nikon AIS analog lenses in good condition that I used for years:

Possibly in real photography those lenses are not to limit your resuts, more likely it will be your technique.

You may try to DIY rate your lenses, this is intersting becasue we always have some sample to sample variations

Print this: http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/USAF.pdf

Take a DSLR and shot far enough until some bars in the well printed elements cannot be discriminated (counted or seen if vertical or not).

Then select a distance were the target fits exactly between a pair of marks in the DSLR viewfinder, with different lenses you always adjust the target distance until it fits in the same marks.

Now you can compare between different lenses or different apertures... also handheld vs tripod, etc.

In the captured image you may calculate the Line Pairs per mm the lens resolves on that sensor with an easy calculation, but if you only want to compare then you only have to use the same magnication in all tests, thus adjusting distance to the target to make the target have always the same size in the viewfinder, using focus (etc) marks in the viewfinder.

Also you may check how sharpness is lost when target is placed in the DOF but not in the perfect focus plane.

A DX DSLR is good for that tests but you won't see the lens work in the corners.


This is a test that's useful to do once in a lifetime, to understand what matters and what not.

 

[keithostertag]

Thanks very much! Very useful comments! I really appreciate it.

Keith

 

[macfred]

I used the 35/2 and the 24/2.8 on my -long-time gone- D2X (Crop sensor) - no problems and a good IQ.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

These are great lenses. New digital-designed lenses may have more or better "sharpness" or "contrast" or "bokeh" or some other useless statistics, but they won't take better pictures. Enjoy!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have three old Nikon AIS analog lenses in good condition that I used for years:

Micro-Nikkor-P 55mm f3.5 sn666068
Nikkor 35mm f2 sn884671
Nikkor 24mm f2.8 sn518226

They are not particularly valuable, but I'd like to keep them and use them in the future. And I am tight on funds, so I can't easily replace them with modern types at this time.

I am considering buying a modern digital FX camera, maybe something similar to a Nikon D750, to use these with.

Other than the auto focusing issue, how will my old lenses compare to newer lenses? My concern is with sharpness, contrast, and color rendition, but you may know of other considerations.


Thanks,
Keith

I was in the same boat. There is little difference in optical quality between old and new Nikons. I would be hard-pressed to tell images apart even if next to each other.

 

[Canuck]

I have the micro on a D700, and I find the images amazing. If anything, I find the non-ai nikkors exhibit a rendition I really appreciate.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have three old Nikon AIS analog lenses in good condition that I used for years:

Micro-Nikkor-P 55mm f3.5 sn666068
Nikkor 35mm f2 sn884671
Nikkor 24mm f2.8 sn518226

They are not particularly valuable, but I'd like to keep them and use them in the future. And I am tight on funds, so I can't easily replace them with modern types at this time.

I am considering buying a modern digital FX camera, maybe something similar to a Nikon D750, to use these with.

Other than the auto focusing issue, how will my old lenses compare to newer lenses? My concern is with sharpness, contrast, and color rendition, but you may know of other considerations.


Thanks,
Keith

I was checking some old Nikkor lenses on Nikon DF via Google search two days ago. It was OK.

Step one. In Google Search type lens name and Flickr.
Step two. In search return find Flickr group for this lens.
Step three. Open group page and type in the the group search the camera name.

Here is example:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Mic...rome..69i57.8663j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
https://www.flickr.com/groups/micro-nikkor55f35/pool/
https://www.flickr.com/search/?group_id=591875@N25&view_all=1&text=Nikon DF

 

[jim10219]

I have the Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5 (the first version with the knurled metal focusing ring) and it's probably one of, if not THE best copy lens Nikon made for their 35mm camera system, ever. I use it mostly for scanning film. It's a bit soft at infinity (the later versions are better at infinity, but aren't as sharp close up), but it's a one trick pony that has a very useful and valuable trick.

I also have an old Nikkor 50/2 that I prefer for portraits, as it's bokeh is absolutely gorgeous! It's also fairly sharp stopped down, but has a tendency to flare pretty hard, especially wide open. Then I have a modern 50/1.8 that's a lot better for everyday shooting (autofocus helps) and it's probably the sharpest and most contrasty of the bunch on a digital camera, so it's more likely to be used for landscape work. So that's three lenses of approximately the same focal length that would seem to overlap, but each one excels at something different and finds plenty of use because of it.

My point is, these old lenses, while some may not be as sharp as what's available now, have other features and qualities that some of the newer lenses can't match. And while they may not be as sharp or contrasty as the newest stuff, they're typically sharp enough for most stuff that doesn't require a specialized level of sharpness. Contrast, doesn't matter as much on digital. You can easily make up for that in post. And even sharpness can be added in post, to some degree. So I bet you'll find these lenses good enough for 98% of the stuff you do. And even if you decide to buy newer, sharper lenses for your new camera, I'd suggest holding on to these for a while, because you may find that what they lack in sharpness, autofocus, exposure indexing, and contrast, they make up for in other areas. And then after a year or so if you still find you have no use for them, it's probably safe to sell them. But I wouldn't count them out right away just due to lower scores on MTF charts. MTF charts don't tell the whole picture.

 

[reddesert]

Lenses aren't really analog or digital. I assume that was shorthand for analog-era. But the key issue here, for compatibility, is that they are manual focus lenses.

You can use older manual focus lenses on newer Nikon bodies, but keep in mind these restrictions:
- no autofocus, of course (focus confirmation will work, and focusing on a matte screen isn't too bad).
- crop factor if you get a DX, non-full frame, body.
- Only some Nikon digital bodies will meter with a manual focus lens. This is because on the low end to midrange digital bodies (and lower end late AF film bodies), Nikon left off the mechanical coupling to the aperture ring to cut costs, anticipating that most midrange users would use mostly AF lenses. The upper level to pro bodies, such as D200, D300, D700, D2, etc, do meter with manual focus lenses. You can check Ken Rockwell's page about Nikon lens compatibility for more detailed information.

The metering issue is the one part that hasn't been mentioned yet in this thread.

 

[benveniste]

I have three old Nikon AIS analog lenses in good condition that I used for years:

Micro-Nikkor-P 55mm f3.5 sn666068
Nikkor 35mm f2 sn884671
Nikkor 24mm f2.8 sn518226

The Micro-Nikkor is going to be very nice for close-up work, but it is not an AI-S lens. From that serial number, it's a pre-AI lens with single-coated elements. So unless it's been converted to AI, the only FX camera it can safely be used on is a Nikon Df. Outdoors, the lack of multicoated elements will decrease over all light transmission and increase the likelihood of flare, but because the front element is deeply recessed I wouldn't worry about either. For a D750 or other modern FX dSLR, there is little or no difference between a converted AI lens and an AI-s lens in terms of operation. You can use them in metered manual mode or aperture priority mode. If you set the non-CPU data in the camera, you can use matrix metering and spot metering. If not, I think you're limited to center weighted metering.

The other two are also a pre-AI lenses. The same caveats apply -- They may have been converted to AI in the past. They do have multicoated elements of a slightly lesser grade than today's lenses, so use of a lens hood is advised. As you might expect from lenses produced in the mid-1970's, both lenses have an "old school" design and perform accordingly. They are fairly soft wide open and quickly improve when stopped down, but the corners and edges never catch up with center resolution. The same would be true of the 55mm f/3.5 when used at landscape distances.

If they haven't been converted to AI, you can damage either your lenses or your camera by trying to mount them. This is a crap shoot based on tolerances -- sometimes such lenses will seem to mount OK but will put stress on the AI aperture indexing "lever."

 

[keithostertag]

Thanks so much for reminding me to check the serial numbers on my lenses... I've never been sure how to determine whether the lens is AIS or not, despite the various posts I've seen...

I've always loved these three lenses, but didn't really use them much in the past because I mostly shot 4x5. Now that I am shooting digital I am struggling with them. My eyes are not what they used to be, and all three of these lenses have a bit of "slop" in the focusing... I have been very disappointed in particular that the 24mm does not seem to be as sharp as I want, particularly in the edges, and I've been studying it carefully. The best I can seem to do is use a loupe on the LiveView to focus.

I was able to briefly compare my 24mm to a new 24mm AF-S f1.8G in a camera store recently, under not great conditions. Seems I still had the focus problem, but the color rendition may seem improved a bit (perhaps due to the newer coating?). The AF feature doesn't help me for shooting landscapes and macro.

 

[jim10219]

You can install a split prism viewfinder for your DSLR. I installed one on mine. It definitely makes focusing easier. It can, however, effect the metering a bit, especially in spot mode where you're using the center spot that goes through the split prism. But it won't effect autofocusing on your AF lenses. Usually, with matrix metering, it doesn't effect it, as there's enough information coming in from around the center to get an accurate reading. And if you need to, you can always shoot in manual. Manual mode can be a bit of a hassle on some digital cameras because they're not always set up to easily access all of the options like on a traditional film cameras where everything is located on a dial on the outside. But once you get used to it, and maybe even customize some of your button functions, it's not too bad. And the immediate histogram report makes metering a breeze. So while you may loose time fiddling with the camera trying to change it's settings, you save time with the actual metering, and overall, it's about the same.

I had a Nikon E series 24/2.8 that I really didn't like. It was soft and had low contrast. I got rid of it when I got a much cheaper 24mm Vivitar of the same vintage that vastly outperformed it in every way. I was really disappointed by that lens. If yours had the same optical formula as the E Series that I had, then you could easily do much better. Not all of the vintage lenses hold up well today.

 

[reddesert]

Thanks so much for reminding me to check the serial numbers on my lenses... I've never been sure how to determine whether the lens is AIS or not, despite the various posts I've seen...

You can't always rely on serial number because many lenses were "AI-converted" by replacing the aperture ring after the transition. Look at the rear of the aperture ring. Non-AI lenses have a smooth ring that goes all the way around. AI lenses have two stepped features at the back of the ring, a large one at about 10 o'clock and a small one at about 3 o'clock. These engage with sensing tabs on the body, for bodies that can mechanically sense aperture (too many to list individually, but FM, FE, ... and in the digital world, D200, D300, ...). There are some pictures with what to look for at https://www.nikonimgsupport.com/ni/NI_article?articleNo=000001497&configured=1&lang=en_US

The difference between AI and AI-s is less critical: it has to do with linearity of the aperture ring to allow S or P modes and only matters to a few cameras (FA, N2000) so is generally not that important. The Nikon link above also explains it.

A few other comments:
- you can sometimes put a non-AI lens on a DSLR that doesn't have the metering linkage without damaging anything, but then you have to expose by trial and error.
- Focus confirmation on AF film or DSLRs can help with MF lenses if your vision isn't what it used to be. Also, many later Nikon AF and DSLRs have built-in diopter adjustment, so make sure that's correct!
- there is no series E 24/2.8, jim10219 is probably thinking of the series E 28/2.8.

 

[keithostertag]

All three of my lenses have this same mount (in photo). Your link requires a login which I don't have (and did not want to create), sorry. I've never had a problem mounting them. Perhaps they were AI-converted?

But due to their age, the coatings are not as good as with the later models (of these lenses)? And as you say, the corners don't quite catch up to the center resolution. I typically try to shoot at f5.6 or f8.

All three lenses exhibit slop in the focusing- by that I mean if I focus by turning in one direction, then stop, then start to turn in the opposite direction I hear a tiny click and if looking critically through the viewfinder at that moment I can see that the focus shifts a bit as though it has been knocked loose, causing me to refocus again. Is that something that can easily be adjusted? Generally I have focused by moving past the point of focus (so that I can see where it is) then reversing, and this bit of slop in the lenses makes that difficult to do.

@Jim- I don't have an issue using the digital camera in manual mode- I find it easier than deciphering the various AF modes! And yes, the histograms are great to use. I don't find metering in manual mode to be any problem. From my point of view, AF is only really useful when shooting people or moving objects, neither which I do (generally).

 

[reddesert]

That is an AI or AI converted lens; you can tell by the projecting ridge around the edge of the aperture ring that is visible at the top of the photo. It will mount on basically any Nikon and meter on the ones with a mechanical coupling that matches to the ridge. (For identification, AI lenses also usually have holes in the rabbit ear prong, like this one, and tiny aperture numbers printed around the base of the aperture ring.)

I didn't comment about lens coatings or center and edge sharpness. There are a lot of opinions on the internet about these things, and many of them are poorly sourced, so my advice is to try it and see. Many differences that lens-rating websites obsess over would only be realized in the real world with use of a tripod and careful technique anyway, IMO.

The looseness or backlash in the focusing may indicate some slop in the fit of the inner lens tube to the focusing helicoid, and in general, it shouldn't be there. It's probably repairable but might require a lot of disassembly. I have one lens with a lot of looseness and haven't addressed it yet; most of mine have no backlash.

 

[blockend]

You'd find adapted lenses work better on mirrorless bodies, unless you use live view and the rear screen on the DSLR. I shot video that way for a number of years quite successfully, though it helps if you shoot at wider apertures. A rule of thumb is the later the iteration of Nikkor lens, the more it's likely to shoot like modern Nikon glass. Pre-AI lenses work okay but will tend to be softer wide open, and have less absolute sharpness if you print really big. However they may have more "character", which means different things to people.

Among my favourite manual lenses, are:
Canon FD 50mm f1.4. A standard among digital shooters, they were made by the million and are relatively inexpensive. The rendering can be fussy on detailed backgrounds like foliage, and they're slightly soft wide open, which is good for videography.
Nikon pre-AI 50mm f2. A lovely lens that's great for portraits on smaller digital formats. Solid built quality, too.
Yashica ML 50mm f2. A sleeper which renders quite like the Nikon equivalent.
Nikon AIS 28mm f3.5. A slow lens that's plenty sharp on digital. Can be hard to focus without peaking.