Nikkor 55 1.2 for Nikkormat FS

[madNbad]

Over the years I've had many Nikkormat's, FT's, FTn's and FT2's but a few years ago I found an early FS in excellent condition, had it cleaned up and consider it to be my one collector camera. For the first several years it was paired with a non Ai Nikkor 50 2.0 HC which is a great performer and possibly one of Nikons best. Today I had a hankering to shop and found a Nikkor 55 1.2 S Non Ai for a good price and looks like it's in good condition. It will most likely need to be cleaned and lubricated but I have a couple of shops in close distances that will do a good job. My question to the forum is, mostly I use my M4, the Nikkormat is only brought out occasionally for exercise. I don't like to keep a lot of lenses around that aren't being used and have considered tossing in the 50 2.0 to one of the shops as partial payment and just keeping the 55 1.2 as the only lens for the Nikkormat. I know this is a soft lens when wide open and it weighs a ton but it seems to be versatile enough to fill my needs for this particular camera. I'm open to any opinions and if anyone has experience with the early Nikkor 1.2 I would like some feedback.

 

[Paul Howell]

I considered a Nikon 1.2 when I bought my F, this was 1971, at the time I was in AF which also used Fs, was told by our tech folks at March AFB that the 1.2 was optimized for wide open, when shooting in good light a 1.4 was a better choice as it was sharper at F 8 than the 1.2. I had a Konica T with 1.2 which I traded in for the F, I had both the 1.2 and 1.7 for the same reason, so unless you shoot in low light I would think about 1.4.

 

[AZD]

I have the later K version of the 55mm f1.2, so maybe not a direct comparison, but certainly close. Right now I am looking at an 8x10 print from an image shot wide open on Ultrafine Extreme 100 during my first outing with the lens. Sharpness is perfectly acceptable, and actually much better than expected from what I had read. Just goes to show you what the internet knows. It is heavy (the internet was right about that part) but I don’t mind so much. It’s usually on my FT2 which is already a brick.

I also have the Nikkor-S Auto 50mm f1.4. Definitely a different rendering wide open with a lot more glow. By 2.8 this one is about perfect for people pictures, and by f8 it’s as sharp as I’ll ever need. Looking at some prints shot at 2.8 on Delta 100 and the tonality is just incredible. It’s possibly my favorite of the two but I could change my mind at any time.

Both are different, both are good. Both are better lenses than I am a photographer.

 

[madNbad]

Thanks for the feedback. I've had a bunch of different 50 1.4 Nikkor's and never really liked any of them. I have also owned a number of 2.0 H's and even a couple of the early 50 2.0 S lenses which I find to be quite good. Mostly, the 'mat sits in storage and comes out a few times a year for a couple of rolls. I've never owned a 1.2, don't really need the speed but when I was a teenager my brother let me use his Canon FTb with that big 1.2 Canon lens. It's more nostalgia than practicality but if I really wanted to be practical, I would use the Sony.

 

[Paul Howell]

I will say the Konica 57 1.2 wide open was a great lens, I still miss it, but not enough to by another.

 

[BradS]

Thanks for the feedback. I've had a bunch of different 50 1.4 Nikkor's and never really liked any of them. I have also owned a number of 2.0 H's and even a couple of the early 50 2.0 S lenses which I find to be quite good. Mostly, the 'mat sits in storage and comes out a few times a year for a couple of rolls. I've never owned a 1.2, don't really need the speed but when I was a teenager my brother let me use his Canon FTb with that big 1.2 Canon lens. It's more nostalgia than practicality but if I really wanted to be practical, I would use the Sony.

In this case, yeah, absolutely! Get that 55mm f/1.2 pre-AI Nikkor and enjoy.

I had a 55/1.2 Nikkor-S once. It was a fantastic performer but for me, when compared to the 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S, the fraction of a stop of extra speed did not justify the extra size and weight.

 

[abruzzi]

I spent 20 years with nothing but a Nikkormat FTn and a 50mm ƒ2 H lens and was very happy with that lens. Now I have a 50mm ƒ1.4 S, and a 55mm ƒ1.2 S, but I still don't use them as much as the ƒ2. I really don't need the extra speed, and the H creates great images. If say get the ƒ1.2, but don't sell the ƒ2 until you know that you like the ƒ1.2. You probably won't get that much fo the ƒ2 anyway since they're very common.

 

[AZD]

Well, sounds like the 55 would be a good choice then. Especially if it’s an occasional use thing. Imaging characteristics aside, it simply looks more impressive than any other Nikon 50/55mm.


Big lens, big camera.


Yosemite, HP5 at 800, probably f5.6. Crappy scan of a 3.5x5 proof print.

 

[Oldwino]

I have a 55/1.2 that is AI converted, and use it frequently on my FM3a. I find it sharp wide open, but full of spherical aberrations; stopping a half-click down to 1.4 helps immensely. Stopped down more, it is a very sharp lens. f2.8-4 is may favorite range for sharpness and still retain a lovely background.
It is also good on digital.

 

[madNbad]

I spent 20 years with nothing but a Nikkormat FTn and a 50mm ƒ2 H lens and was very happy with that lens. Now I have a 50mm ƒ1.4 S, and a 55mm ƒ1.2 S, but I still don't use them as much as the ƒ2. I really don't need the extra speed, and the H creates great images. If say get the ƒ1.2, but don't sell the ƒ2 until you know that you like the ƒ1.2. You probably won't get that much fo the ƒ2 anyway since they're very common.

Much like the FS, I have more invested in the 50 2.0 than I would ever benefit from selling it. It's a late run HC so it's coated, has the fluted aperture ring and really doesn't take up much space. The argument for keeping it has won me over. The 1.2 should be both fun and frustrating to use. The early Nikkormat's only had the prism screen with no split image, focusing may be a challenge. Thanks for the input and I post a few pictures in a couple of weeks.

 

[dourbalistar]

I also have an AI converted 55/1.2, a so-called Version 3 circa 1971-72. I agree with some who've described it as two lenses in one - slightly soft and dreamy wide open, sharpens up very nicely a stop or two from the maximum aperture. The obvious drawback is that it's almost the size and weight of two lenses in one. If the price is right, it's an excellent lens for occasional use and creative effect, so long as you don't mind the size/weight. Here are two samples, one wide open and another one stopped down slightly to show how it sharpens up. I have an album on my Flickr with more image samples if you're curious. FWIW, I now only use the lens occasionally when I need the speed. For everyday use, I'm using the much smaller and lighter AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S "pancake".

Wide open at f/1.2:

2019.04.06 Roll #201-03502-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

Slightly stopped down, shot handheld - pinecone in one hand, camera in the other:

2019.04.06 Roll #201-03494-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[madNbad]

It was $225 with both caps, a Nikon UV filter and shipping. It'll cost between nothing and a hundred dollars for a cleaning and lubrication, mostly because I have credits at two of the local shops. It wasn't a seven thousand dollar Noctilux or even a three thousand dollar Noct-Nikkor. Just something to use occasionally for a different look. The pancake 1.8 with the .45 minimum focus was also in the running but I have a Retina IIa for a compact 50.

 

[dourbalistar]

It was $225 with both caps, a Nikon UV filter and shipping. It'll cost between nothing and a hundred dollars for a cleaning and lubrication, mostly because I have credits at two of the local shops. It wasn't a seven thousand dollar Noctilux or even a three thousand dollar Noct-Nikkor. Just something to use occasionally for a different look. The pancake 1.8 with the .45 minimum focus was also in the running but I have a Retina IIa for a compact 50.

That seems like a very good price to me. I paid $200 for mine a few years ago, and felt like that was a bargain for a f/1.2 lens. Not sure that the (Japanese domestic market) AI-S 50mm f/1.8 with 0.45 minimum focus would work on a Nikkormat FS as the lens doesn't have a meter coupling prong, but seems like you're set for compact 50. Enjoy the 55/1.2, and share some images if you can!

 

[madNbad]

No meter in the FS, so no prong. The only lenses I can't use are the ones that require mirror lock up. The mirror lock up was the other cost saving measure in the FS.

 

[dourbalistar]

No meter in the FS, so no prong. The only lenses I can't use are the ones that require mirror lock up. The mirror lock up was the other cost saving measure in the FS.

Ah, you're correct! I totally blanked out that the FS is meterless. In that case, you should get both lenses, since the JDM 50/1.8 pancake is so cheap!

 

[beemermark]

The 55mm / 1.2 is an interesting lens but think about what you'll use it for. I have a number of Nikon (and other) high speed lenses and they gather dust on the shelf.

 

[Huss]

Nikkor-S 55 1.2 on Nikon F2 w HP5

@ 1.2



@1.2





@4




@8

 

[madNbad]

Thanks, Huss. Good way to show the versatility of the lens.

 

[Bazza D]

The Nikkor 55 1.2 S Non Ai is my only 50-55mm standard lens for my Nikon FM. I have read that it isn't the sharpest and often wondered should I get another 50mm lens. However, I would like another 50mm lens but I am not actively searching for one. I use it and do not think about whether it is sharp enough or not. The pictures turn out fine. It is a giant lens but on a Nikon FM it is fine. The FM may be compact size but not weight. I guess the point is that maybe it isn't the sharpest lens but it terms of normal use for me I do not notice it and am happy with it. I have Nikon 45mm f2.8 GN which is a lighter and more compact lens. With the FM I don't really notice a difference in handling compared to having the F1.2 lens on the camera. The camera weight adds more than the lens. In some regards I like the large lens. It is a convenient place for my hand.

 

[Huss]

Thanks, Huss. Good way to show the versatility of the lens.

You're welcome, it's a great lens and nice fit on the bigger body Nikons like the Fs, Nikkormats etc.