Was the Nikon Nikkor 55mm F2.8 Ai-s poorly designed?

[Certain Exposures]

Many, many listings on eBay note the exact same issue: "stiff [and/or] seized focusing ring."

It seems as pervasive as the haze issue for the Mamiya RB67 127 K/L. Did Nikon make a mistake with this lens' design somehow? Is the stiffness/seizure easy enough to fix on your own?

 

[Steven Lee]

I think this has something to do with it being a 1:2 macro. The helicoid is longer and the grease mass is greater, so its decreased viscosity has greater effect. A couple of film-era macros that I own all suffer from stiffer-than-average focus effort.

 

[ic-racer]

One can find some bargains with siezed lenses. I recently picked up this mint condition cine 75mm Yvar for my Bolex with siezed focus.
Of course your Nikkor will come apart differently, but the principle is the same. Clean out the old grease and re-grease with new grease.

Bolex Kern Yvar 75mm f2.8 Lens Repair

I wanted a long lens for my Non-Rex Bolex H8 for the last Eclipse. I did not find on in time, finding a 150mm Yvar for my H8-REX camera. Finally a 75mm Yvar that I liked did show up. This one is in mint condition with a frozen focus and appropriately low price tag. It came with the original...

www.photrio.com

 

[Certain Exposures]

I think this has something to do with it being a 1:2 macro. The helicoid is longer and the grease mass is greater, so its decreased viscosity has greater effect. A couple of film-era macros that I own all suffer from stiffer-than-average focus effort.

Thank you, that makes sense. Neat profile picture.

 

[Certain Exposures]

One can find some bargains with siezed lenses. I recently picked up this mint condition cine 75mm Yvar for my Bolex with siezed focus.
Of course your Nikkor will come apart differently, but the principle is the same. Clean out the old grease and re-grease with new grease.

Bolex Kern Yvar 75mm f2.8 Lens Repair

I wanted a long lens for my Non-Rex Bolex H8 for the last Eclipse. I did not find on in time, finding a 150mm Yvar for my H8-REX camera. Finally a 75mm Yvar that I liked did show up. This one is in mint condition with a frozen focus and appropriately low price tag. It came with the original...

www.photrio.com

Thanks - I will give this a read!

 

[MattKing]

+1
Typical use patterns are frequently the reason behind greater issues of wear in old lenses.
The 127mm RB67 lens probably suffers from being the smallest and lightest lens in the line - all those weddings!

 

[xkaes]

I think this has something to do with it being a 1:2 macro. The helicoid is longer and the grease mass is greater, so its decreased viscosity has greater effect. A couple of film-era macros that I own all suffer from stiffer-than-average focus effort.

Same here. That must be it -- especially with 1:1 macros where the focusing is twice around the barrel.

If anyone has a EZ solution, clue us in!!!

 

[AZD]

Probably similar to a 105mm f2.8 Micro Nikkor I got. Focusing was so stiff I was worried the locking pin on the lens mount might break. I don’t think there is any easy fix, lenses like this will need servicing.

Much like the 105, the 55 f2.8 has lots of helicoid surface area including an extra-long double helicoid and a separate close range correction helicoid. The effects of old grease will feel much more pronounced than with a standard lens.

Fortunately I paid only $10 for my beat up 105mm at a thrift shop, so cleaning it myself represented a small risk, and it was unusable otherwise. Focusing is now very smooth. I expect a CLA would fix most of them. If you are comfortable doing it yourself, a man named Richard Haw has a site with good instructions.

 

[4season]

I speculate that Nikon specified a lighter than normal helicoid grease on the 55/2.8 AI-S which didn't always age so well. It made sense, as the lens has multiple helicoids to accommodate it's floating lens elements, and focusing effort can be highish if you choose a more viscous lubricant. I replaced the original goop (and it really is a mess to clean) and just live with a more heavily damped feel.

 

[250swb]

Maybe stiffness can also be attributed to many of them leading a life on copy stands focused at one distance where the grease hasn't been spread around the helicoid as with pictorial photography.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Leave any lens sitting for a few decades and it'll seize up. Happens with the fast primes like the 85/1.4 too.

 

[beemermark]

I have both the 55 & 105 macros. I can't focus either one. I bought the 55 back in the '90's and it froze not long afterwards. I ended using my Nikon bellows. Used the 105 for decades, lovely lens, but it also froze a few years. Stiff focusing quickly led to complete lockup. I've though of repairing the 105 but I figure it will just freeze up again. I think the issue is extremely tight clearances coupled and the grease becoming hard. Use or age seems to have nothing to do with it. So yes, a poor design. I wouldn't recommend anyone buying either lens. I have the older 55/3.5 non-AI, a 60mm Nikkor AF, and a Tamron SP 90mm/2.5 AI lens.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Interesting. My 55/2.8 and 105/2.8 MicroNikkors, both bought in 1986, still focus easily. Good luck, I guess.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

I don't think it's specific to it being a 1:2 Micro, as the 55mm f/3.5 does not have this issue.

It COULD be the combination of being 1:2 with a floating element, as there is more going on in the lens than in a conventional unit focusing macro lens(even a 1:1 one).

I have two of these lenses, one of which I bought badly seized and will usually free up with some massaging. The other AFAIK has not been serviced but focuses as nicely as any other Nikon MF lens. I've heard people claim that later ones had grease much less prone to doing this, but my one that works perfectly is a lower SN than my seized one. Nikon cataloged this lens for a long time(I think it was still listed when they discontinued all manual focus in ~2020, although as I understand they were selling old stock of all MF at that point) and it may just be that if you get a relatively high SN you're getting a lens made ~15 years ago and not 40 years ago.

Really, though, if you want a 55mm Micro lens, get the f/3.5 version. The f/2.8 is better at infinity, but the f/3.5 is better once you get to 1:10 and beyond. I will die on that hill. Get any of the f/3.5s, although I personally have a soft spot for the compensating aperture version.

 

[MarkS]

I bought my 55/2.8 used in 1986 and it has always performed perfectly. I used another one on the job from 1985-2010 and it worked just as well.
Pro tip; complex mechanical objects will eventually need maintenance, and users should be prepared to have that maintenance done (or do it themselves).
Nippon Photo Clinic in NYC is the shop to send your ailing Nikkor lenses, if you want them to work right again.

 

[MattKing]

I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that no lens designed and made in the 1980s was designed with the intention that it would continue to work normally for ~40 years without some sort of reasonable maintenance.
This applies in particular to lenses that either have been heavily used for 40 years, or have been unused for long periods of time in that 40 year period.
The same applies to both older lenses, and more modern ones.

 

[benveniste]

I'm not a Nikon apologist by any means, but the Nikon 55mm f/2.8 AI-s was designed in an era when people would regularly bring their cameras and lenses in for a "CLA." As bad as the issue with the focus ring seizing is, on this model lubricants often found their way to the aperture ring, resulting in sticky blades as well. Whether the problem was a design flaw or a poor manufacturing choice I can't tell you.

The 55mm f/2.8 AI-s Micro stayed in production for over 40 years, so it would be interesting to compile a list of serial number ranges where the problems occur.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I have the 55/2.8 (40 years old) & 105/4.0 (50 years old) and neither have any problems with focusing. The 55 did need to have its aperture blades cleaned.

YMMV, and all that.

 

[Mick Fagan]

I bought my 55mm Micro Nikkor f/2.8 right at the end of 1979, so now coming up to 46 years, but in another 10 months.

I used it for everything as it was my only Nikon lens at the time, it travelled a real lot in the tank bag on my motorcycles where it endured extreme heat and when in Europe, extreme cold, including where once the tank bag was covered in snow, which melted a bit and then froze completely shut as I rode into the night.

Around 20 years ago I noticed some problems on an extremely hot day and after running a couple of rolls of film through the camera. It turned out to be lubrication oil getting onto the aperture blades. Subsequently I had the lens serviced where the person servicing it chided me for getting the lens serviced with the wrong lubricant. It hadn't been serviced at all, I just bought it and used it, and used it, and used it.

About two years ago I needed to do some 35mm work and pulled the 55 f/2.8 Micro Nikkor out, only to find it was as stiff as anything. I left it in the blazing sun for a while, where it loosened up, which was also helped by me rotating the lens completely through the focusing extremes quite a few times. To this day the lens is still stiff when dragged out, but with some rotation of the helices all is working again.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The 55/28 Ais micro was one of the last of Nikon's classic manual lenses to still be made; and that's for a reason. It's one of their best ever. I'm talking it along for a walk tomorrow because it's so damn well corrected EVEN WIDE OPEN that's it's easier to precisely focus than comparable focal length lenses which are two stops wider. I used it for a long time on the copy stand especially, which was a pretty darn warm location (hot lights are hot!). It has stood up superbly. I wonder if that would be the case with all those plasticky newer Nikon lenses. Forty years of use ain't nuthin'. Tell my lens it's too old, and it will laugh at you. It looks brand new, and has never had a facelift. No, it's not a lens I hauled into blizzards or stomped with my boot into beach sand or cow pies, or let a coyote chomp on. But it's still had plenty of use with zero problems whatsoever. Sorry if some of you had a less optimistic track record with your own.

Leaving any kind of lens or shutter completely neglected for a long period of time, or buying one in that state, is not a great idea.

Maybe the reason there is a quantity of stiff focusing ones listed on EBay is that there were just so many of these sold over they years, with some of them no doubt abused or neglected. Yet many more - the ones still working excellently - probably just aren't for sale. At least the sellers are honestly listing them.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

The 50mm f/1.4 AI-s(and its nearly identical AI predecessor) had an even longer run than the 55mm f/2.8 micro. In fact I’m pretty sure that it basically was more an evolution without a significant redesign from ~1962(when the 50mm f/1.4 Auto-Nikkor-S replaced the 5,8cm f/1.4) up until it was dropped from the catalog in 2020. I’ve had a pile of these lenses and while some focus smoother than others, none have been in “pipe wrench” territory the way the f/2.8 micro can sometimes get.

The 35mm f/1.4 was another one that hung on until the end(I was having trouble finding a clean copy in 2018 or so, and flirted with the idea of a buying a new one from B&H, but also didn’t want to spend north of $1K…). I’m sure it never sold in the numbers of any of the 55 Micros, but also had a long history. I believe it was Nikon’s first floating element lens(and maybe also first multi-coated). It had a slight optical redesign around the time either it lost the fluted focus ring and/or went AI(that may have been the same time) to account for the removal of thorium glass(and also lost the f/22 minimum aperture). The floating element mechanics stayed the same, though, and they actually are really similar to the 55mm f/2.8. That’s not a lens known for focus issues either.

The problem seems to pop up often enough in the 55mm f/2.8 specifically that I tend to think there has to be SOMETHING to that lens…

 

[jbprichard]

I've had the lens for 20+ years, and it looks and works perfect.

 

[Dave Lusby]

I have one of these, and the focus is frozen stiff. The only local repair shop quoted me over $300 to do a CLA. They advised me to chuck it but I still have it.

 

[skahde]

I own my copy of the Nikkor 2.8/55 Ais since about 1991 and had it overhauled twice by Nikon. The second time their subcontracted repairshop really messsd things up. The aperture was stuck and the focus out of adjustment. An independent repairer fixed this and applied a different grease which worked fine for the last twenty years and still does. I conclude for myself that it's rather a matter of the lube chosen by Nikon than the actual construction.

 

[skahde]

I have one of these, and the focus is frozen stiff. The only local repair shop quoted me over $300 to do a CLA. They advised me to chuck it but I still have it.

Look elsewhere! They simply didn't want to touch it, given the quote, but it's worth it.