Manual focus glasses - Nikon or Olympus?

[Kodachromeguy]

No it is not H, it is "AI" version, but since it is the very first and short lived AI, I think optical scheme is the same as in non-AI, a couple of years later they introduced 50 mm with f/1.8 aperture. Barrel distortion worries me, to be honest, but it was really cheap and felt like a bargain even for that lens.

AI meant automatic indexing. Ken Rockwell describes the lens I was referring to, with Nikkor-H written around the objective on the front of the lens:
https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f2.htm

I had one of these 50s many decades ago; it came with my 1968 Nikkormat. Here is an example from those old days, when I was young, healthy, and optimistic...Sigh... (Quincy Market, Boston, Massachusetts, 1969, Kodachrome II slide)

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

I have used the Canon FD system extensively, including some high end(but not particularly exotic) glass, and now am pretty much fully invested in the Nikon F system for 35mm and digital. One of the things that attracts me to it is the(mostly) seamless integration across manual focus, autofocus, and digital makes life easy. I use to love my T90(one of the few FD bodies I still have), and although the F4 is a polarizing camera in a lot of ways I think it best the T90. Although it IS an autofocus camera, it has often been called the best manual focus camera Nikon has ever made, and let's also just face it that the AF isn't anything to write home about. I'm still hunting for an "A" or "K" screen to put in my two F4 bodies to make MF easier.

On the whole, Nikon lenses are excellent, although like most brands there are some dogs out there. The old 43-86 zoom is one of them(I have two, including one that I AI converted myself, and one that's still non-AI). The older Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4s are nothing special, and are fairly soft and low contrast wide open, but the AI, AI-s, and AF(D) versions are significantly better. I nearly snapped up a 50mm f/1.4G out of the used case at the local camera store as it's a the first new optical design Nikon has introduced for this focal length/aperture in a while(barring the hideously expensive 58mm f/1.4G) but talked myself out of it since I don't need ANOTHER 50mm f/1.4. I'll also mention that the 5.8cm f/1.4, a somewhat uncommon lens that was only sold from ~1959-1962, has a very interesting rendering with "swirly" bokeh and it's worth playing with, but is also quite expensive for what it is(I'm also a hopeless collector and had to have one-I bought it on a 6.4 million F Flag Photomic). I've also used it on AI cameras, as aperture ring is cut in such a way that it will(barely) clear the tab on my D800 and D3s, but you're on your own if you want to try it yourself.

Nikon has really only made one 50mm f/1.8 that I like, the 50mm f/1.8 AI-s. I'll also add the caveat that I have not used the "G" version of this lens. In any case, I find the Series E 50mm to be a bit lacking in corner performance, esp. compared to the excellent 50mm f/2(as shown above) and unfortunately the AF and AF-D versions used the series E optical design rather than the much better AI-S design.

On the whole, though, I really like Nikkor manual focus glass. One of the things that I do appreciate about it-and any transparency shooter should-is that I find the color rendition to be both consistent across pretty much the entire range of lenses, and I find it pretty darn close to neutral. I tend to like my transparencies a bit warm in most situations, so tend to keep anything from a skylight to an 81C depending on the film stock and time of day on all lenses. Of course, I shoot films like Velvia/Velvia 50 at dusk and dawn without any filter, along with my dwindling stash of E100GX, but E100/E100G definitely needs a filter(with Nikkor lenses) to my eye and even Velvia can benefit from one in mid-day summer sun.

Someone earlier in the thread mentioned using an FM or FE with pre-AI lenses. It is true that those cameras have a flip-up AI tab and can safely mount pre-AI lenses provided that you do that, but they only work with stop-down metering. The EL2, Nikkormat FT3, F3 and F4 also have that same style tab, and Nikon can modify both the F5 and F6 with one. The F2 with DP-11(F2A) and DP-12(F2AS) also have a retractable AI feeler. Forgive me for mentioning it. but the Df also has a flip up tab, although annoyingly without a lock that can cause some weird errors if you inadvertently flip it up. AI film cameras require stop down metering to work with AI lenses, and you also lose matrix metering on the F4 and F5. I honestly don't know whether or not you do on the F6-I could see it working both ways, but I don't have the AI tab modification so can't say. The Df requires you to enter the aperture on both the body and the lens aperture ring.

A mention was made of not wanting to use lenses longer than 135mm. One of the nice things about the F mount system the beautiful little 200mm f/4, which is lightweight, compact, and excellent. Also, you can cover the entire focal length range from 20mm to 200mm with only a 52mm filter set provided that you don't want to use the 20mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2, or 180mm f/2.8(there may be a few other fast ones in there I'm missing, but all of the f/1.2 lenses are 52mm also). For me, that beats the heck out of carrying a 72 or 77mm set, as I often need to with more modern lenses, and then a set of step rings to use with the primes that inevitably also make their way into my bag.

In any case, I prefer non-AI lenses on a body purpose made for them. IMO, you can't go wrong with an F2SB, which uses the same silicon photocell of the F2AS and also the +/0/- LEDs seen on that and the FM series, but works with non-AI lenses. The Nikkormat EL gives you auto-exposure with non-AI lenses, and in manual exposure mode works a lot like the EL2/FE/FE2/FM3a. I don't like Nikkormat bodies as a general rule, though, and find having to set the aperture to f/5.6 before mounting a lens to be a bit annoying(on the F2 non-AI finders, along with the FTN for the F, you can mount with it set to any aperture and just have to be sure to spin it to minimum after mounting-I usually go max then min to make sure the follower "catches").

 

[M-88]

AI meant automatic indexing. Ken Rockwell describes the lens I was referring to, with Nikkor-H written around the objective on the front of the lens:
https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f2.htm

I had one of these 50s many decades ago; it came with my 1968 Nikkormat. Here is an example from those old days, when I was young, healthy, and optimistic...Sigh... (Quincy Market, Boston, Massachusetts, 1969, Kodachrome II slide)
View attachment 219119

Sometimes I think I was born in the wrong year. Do not worry, my optimism is long gone as well, even though I'm much younger than my FE itself. And yes, 50 mm f/2 Nikkor is unanimously agreed to have consistent corner to corner sharpness even at f/2 (something that f/1.8 apparently lacks), along with pretty neutral tone rendition.

I have used the Canon FD system extensively, including some high end(but not particularly exotic) glass, and now am pretty much fully invested in the Nikon F system for 35mm and digital. One of the things that attracts me to it is the(mostly) seamless integration across manual focus, autofocus, and digital makes life easy. I use to love my T90(one of the few FD bodies I still have), and although the F4 is a polarizing camera in a lot of ways I think it best the T90. Although it IS an autofocus camera, it has often been called the best manual focus camera Nikon has ever made, and let's also just face it that the AF isn't anything to write home about. I'm still hunting for an "A" or "K" screen to put in my two F4 bodies to make MF easier.

Of course Canon could have gone the same way as Nikon, modifying its (decidedly outdated) breech-lock FD mount for autofocus purpose, but then they'd struggle with it. So changing the mount was a wise decision. I can safely say that unification of Pentax K-mount is higher than that of Nikon. My digital K-x can give me focus confirmation and stop-down metering with any SMC-M lens, while Pentax-A lenses can also work in aperture priority. Can a regular AI lens do any of those when mounted on anything Nikon has to offer as equivalent of cheap as K-x? They can't. But although Pentax had some exceptional pieces of glass, they kinda never tried hard enough to produce a high class film camera. They all lack something. Except for LX, which lacks lower price tag!!!

On the whole, Nikon lenses are excellent, although like most brands there are some dogs out there. The old 43-86 zoom is one of them(I have two, including one that I AI converted myself, and one that's still non-AI). The older Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4s are nothing special, and are fairly soft and low contrast wide open, but the AI, AI-s, and AF(D) versions are significantly better. I nearly snapped up a 50mm f/1.4G out of the used case at the local camera store as it's a the first new optical design Nikon has introduced for this focal length/aperture in a while(barring the hideously expensive 58mm f/1.4G) but talked myself out of it since I don't need ANOTHER 50mm f/1.4. I'll also mention that the 5.8cm f/1.4, a somewhat uncommon lens that was only sold from ~1959-1962, has a very interesting rendering with "swirly" bokeh and it's worth playing with, but is also quite expensive for what it is(I'm also a hopeless collector and had to have one-I bought it on a 6.4 million F Flag Photomic). I've also used it on AI cameras, as aperture ring is cut in such a way that it will(barely) clear the tab on my D800 and D3s, but you're on your own if you want to try it yourself.
Nikon has really only made one 50mm f/1.8 that I like, the 50mm f/1.8 AI-s. I'll also add the caveat that I have not used the "G" version of this lens. In any case, I find the Series E 50mm to be a bit lacking in corner performance, esp. compared to the excellent 50mm f/2(as shown above) and unfortunately the AF and AF-D versions used the series E optical design rather than the much better AI-S design.

I've noticed that I have to be extra careful and do a thorough research before acquiring any Nikkor lens. I can convert a non-AI lens to AI with power tools and I will use them without stop-down metering subsequently, but if the optical scheme is poor, there is no fixing that. One more thing I've learned after owning two different f/1.4 lenses is that it's an unnecessary gimmick personally for me, considering exposure latitude of modern films and the fact that there's no dramatic difference in VF brightness between f/1.8 and f/1.4
Soviet Helios 81H has also got swirly bokeh. However, it is a wild card and one can never know if it's good or bad, all thanks to quality control in USSR.
E series 50 mm lenses are widely considered to be inferior due to various reasons and yet they are just as pricey, perhaps because of their compact dimensions.

A mention was made of not wanting to use lenses longer than 135mm. One of the nice things about the F mount system the beautiful little 200mm f/4, which is lightweight, compact, and excellent. Also, you can cover the entire focal length range from 20mm to 200mm with only a 52mm filter set provided that you don't want to use the 20mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2, or 180mm f/2.8(there may be a few other fast ones in there I'm missing, but all of the f/1.2 lenses are 52mm also). For me, that beats the heck out of carrying a 72 or 77mm set, as I often need to with more modern lenses, and then a set of step rings to use with the primes that inevitably also make their way into my bag.

I would simply have nothing to shoot with a lens longer than 135 mm. In fact, 105 mm would be a perfect long lens for me, for moderate telephoto use plus for portraiture. Alas, it costs significantly more than 135 mm (I guess others also discovered that it's handy). As for filters, I also have to switch from 49 mm to 52 now, since all my Olympus lenses previously had a 49 mm thread along with my current Pentax lenses.

In any case, I prefer non-AI lenses on a body purpose made for them. IMO, you can't go wrong with an F2SB, which uses the same silicon photocell of the F2AS and also the +/0/- LEDs seen on that and the FM series, but works with non-AI lenses. The Nikkormat EL gives you auto-exposure with non-AI lenses, and in manual exposure mode works a lot like the EL2/FE/FE2/FM3a. I don't like Nikkormat bodies as a general rule, though, and find having to set the aperture to f/5.6 before mounting a lens to be a bit annoying(on the F2 non-AI finders, along with the FTN for the F, you can mount with it set to any aperture and just have to be sure to spin it to minimum after mounting-I usually go max then min to make sure the follower "catches").

I don't think I'll ever go down to the roots (F/F2/Nikomat) since I value compact form factor and light weight. Although some people consider FE to be a direct successor of Nikomat EL. And of course, stop-down metering of every shot is a hindrance. So here comes a conversion to AI.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

Of course Canon could have gone the same way as Nikon, modifying its (decidedly outdated) breech-lock FD mount for autofocus purpose, but then they'd struggle with it. So changing the mount was a wise decision. I can safely say that unification of Pentax K-mount is higher than that of Nikon. My digital K-x can give me focus confirmation and stop-down metering with any SMC-M lens, while Pentax-A lenses can also work in aperture priority. Can a regular AI lens do any of those when mounted on anything Nikon has to offer as equivalent of cheap as K-x? They can't. But although Pentax had some exceptional pieces of glass, they kinda never tried hard enough to produce a high class film camera. They all lack something. Except for LX, which lacks lower price tag!!!

One of the things I've noticed about Canon is that when they design a lens mount, they really seem to think of everything. Every single FD lens is fully compatible with every FD body, and even FL lenses aren't THAT bad to use in stop-down mode at least on an original F-1 and FTb(I wouldn't want to use one on an A or T series body). There were features of the mount that were never actually even put into use, but from the beginning it had things like a maximum aperture lug and linear operation of the aperture lever(the latter mechanically distinguishes AI lenses from AI-s on Nikon, and is a big deal when you start adding shutter priority or full program). Even though it was more complicated, I also think Canon was smart to have two separate actuators-one to stop down the lens and the other than can be used either to communicate the set aperture to the camera or to control how much it stops down-depending on the camera.

With the EF mount, Canon may have upset a lot of people with completely ditching the FD mount, but they definitely got it right. As far as I know, aside from EF-S lenses, every genuine Canon EF lenses is fully compatible with everything from the EOS 620 up to the latest and greatest DSLR. There's no "this kind of works if you don't mind using this feature and only works in certain exposure modes" or "This works, but VR doesn't work." Everything just works. You could write a book on Nikon compatibility.

Then, there's the fact that the F mount has a really small throat, and they couldn't manage f/1.2 in anything other than 50mm-range lenses. The Z mount has fixed that, but of course that's useless to film shooters.

I've noticed that I have to be extra careful and do a thorough research before acquiring any Nikkor lens. I can convert a non-AI lens to AI with power tools and I will use them without stop-down metering subsequently, but if the optical scheme is poor, there is no fixing that. One more thing I've learned after owning two different f/1.4 lenses is that it's an unnecessary gimmick personally for me, considering exposure latitude of modern films and the fact that there's no dramatic difference in VF brightness between f/1.8 and f/1.4

Admittedly the "bad" Nikon lenses are few and far between. I too don't know why the Series E 50mm brings such high prices-it is small but it's not THAT small(you want a 45mm f/2.8, either design, if you want small). The other series E lenses are really quite good, and admittedly the 50mm isn't terrible. I just think that the AI-S version is a lot better, and thanks to the high prices the Series E the price difference isn't that great.

[/quote]
I don't think I'll ever go down to the roots (F/F2/Nikomat) since I value compact form factor and light weight. Although some people consider FE to be a direct successor of Nikomat EL. And of course, stop-down metering of every shot is a hindrance. So here comes a conversion to AI.[/QUOTE]

As much as I love my Fs and F2s(the F2 more so), they are not exactly small and light. The F3 actually-to me-seems a lot lighter although it could be my imagination(plus if you want to shoot in manual mode you have to deal with the awful little tiny LCD with a half hearted attempt at an illuminator).

The EL2 is the direct successor to the Nikkormat EL, and even though it's not branded Nikkormat it is in a Nikkormat-style body. The FM and FE can be considered successors to the Nikkormat series(the former the FT3, the latter the EL2) but are a fair bit smaller and lighter. That's not to say that they are compact cameras by any means-they still feel big and chunky next to an A-series Canon or any of the Nikon EM-derived bodies(EM, FG, FG-20). They're also big next to the Olympus OM series, although the latter feel much more solid than the Nikons.

As small Nikons go, I may be the only one around who will admit to this, but I'm actually rather fond of the FG. It reminds me a lot of an AE-1 Program, and I think that's what it was trying to compete with. It gives you A mode, but I find the match LED system a lot easier to see in low light than the EL/EL2/FE/FE2/FM3a, and it gives a whole lot more information than the +/o/- LEDs of the FM/FM2. It may well be my second favorite meter read-out on a mechanical camera, behind the match-needle system on the Canon New F-1. The FG even offers a program mode, although I've never used it and don't necessarily trust it(especially since, like the AE-1P, you have no way of know what aperture the camera has picked). I have an EM for the sake of completeness in my collection, but I've never run a roll of film through it-I'm bothered by it's almost total lack of any user input, and its lack of information as to what is going on in it(aside from the annoying beep to tell you that the shutter speed is below 1/60th). I need to get an FG-20-I honestly don't have any excuse since they're so cheap now.

You also have the FM-10, which was only discontinued recently. It's not a half bad camera, and Galen Rowell loved it for how tiny and lightweight it is. My chief complaints are the fact that meter is on the left side of the viewfinder(a small quibble, but one that I find uncomfortable) and the fact that it requires you to hold the shutter button to a half press to turn on the meter. It's not on any time the advance lever is "clicked" out like the FM, and doesn't stay on for several seconds after a press like the FM2(n) but those are small quibbles.