What are the virtues of Pre-AI Nikkor glass?
-
A
- Thread starter chip j
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Awesome Agfa Ambi Silette 3 Lens Outfit
- Started by pdccamerqs
-
For Sale For Sale or Trade! Schneider 65mm f/8 Super Angulon
- Started by pdccamerqs
-
Sold 4X5, 5X7 film
- Started by nsurit
Forum statistics
I mainly like the older lenses for their cosmetics, chrome trim and all-metal construction. Perfect with a Nikon F, F2 or Nikkormat body. Plus they are generally cheaper. Some of the older lenses had different optical designs than the later AI & AIS versions, and may give a different look. I have an early Nikkor-P 105/2.5 which is a Sonnar design, and a later AIS 105/2.5 that is a Gauss design and is very sharp. The older lens is not as sharp, but I actually prefer it for portraits.Coatings on the old lenses were not as good, but I always use lens hoods and haven't had much problem with flare. Here's two sites that compare the old/new versions of Nikkors - from Bjorn Rorslett and David Ruether.
Here's one shot with a plain-prism F and the Nikkor-N 24/2.8 lens on Tri-X. The sun was just above and out of frame, but the lens handled the scene really well.
Here's one shot with a plain-prism F and the Nikkor-N 24/2.8 lens on Tri-X. The sun was just above and out of frame, but the lens handled the scene really well.
Ken Rockwell has quite a few reviews on his site of them. I find them to be great value for the money and often worth to pay for the AI conversion.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 6,816
- Format
- Multi Format
Chipper, as usual you haven't looked at all. Shut up and buy this book: https://www.abebooks.co.uk/book-search/title/nikon-system/author/geoffrey-crawley/
Aesthetics aside, older pre-AI lenses were designed before computer ray tracing, CAD/CAM, CNC and multicoatings.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 6,816
- Format
- Multi Format
Mike, are you sure about all that? I ask because computer ray tracing was first implemented in the late 1950s, CAD/CAM and 'CNC are manufacturing techniques that don't seem to help designers, and multicoating, whatever that means, has only one effect on lens design (it may allow more air-glass interfaces and acceptable levels of flare than are possible with coating as known before the mid-1970s_.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 6,816
- Format
- Multi Format
You asked for reviews. Crawley reviewed equipment. If you meant to ask for comparisons between older and newer Nikkors, you should have asked for that.
I sold Nikon back when Nikon was transitioning to the AI lens mount, I have never seen any pre-AI literature touting computer lens designing. Most early Nikon SLR lenses are based on their RF lenses, many of which are improved versions of even earlier designs, tessar, planar, etc. Use of digital computers in lens design a more recent development. Until someone that actually worked for Nikon (or EPOI) can pipe in I think I'll leave it there.
My only pre-AI ens is a first version 55mm 3.5 macro. I got it because its sharper at macro distances than most of the newer lenses, is cheaper, and has a flat field of view. It was designed as a copy lens and works superbly as a DSLR film scanning lens. Its weakness is infinity focus, which it does acceptable, but I have others that easily surpass it. Most of the newer Nikon macro lenses are better corrected for infinity, with the expense of being less well corrected for macro. They're more versatile overall, but I like this one as a one trick pony.
In general, most of the newer lenses will be better performers. So the main advantage is price and compatibility with pre-AI bodies. But there are a few examples that offer a specific look or function you won't see in the newer lenses. And if you're looking to have a pre-AI lens converted, you lose the price advantage.
In general, most of the newer lenses will be better performers. So the main advantage is price and compatibility with pre-AI bodies. But there are a few examples that offer a specific look or function you won't see in the newer lenses. And if you're looking to have a pre-AI lens converted, you lose the price advantage.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 6,816
- Format
- Multi Format
Don't forget the Sonnar. The original 105/2.5 was a Sonnar clone, later ones -- still not AI -- were Planars.
As for computers, Nikon may not have made much noise about using them. I have some old Nikon propaganda that, like the material you're familiar with, says nothing about them. That said, this story https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0048/index.htm says they were designing lenses with computers by 1960.
Lower prices for pre-AI are not a factor for me; my reasons are actually simple-minded.
I like the ruggedness and long term reliability and repairability of fully mechanical cameras such as the Nikon F, F2, and Nikkormats. Use of pre-AI lenses on them (which is their original configuration) incurs no liability. For example, you can meter wide open. Yes, a newer Nikkor lens works just as well and may be optically superior, but I prefer to have period-correct lenses on my cameras, which means the AI, AIS lenses get used on my F3/T's, F4s's, and other Nikon bodies that work best with them.
I like the ruggedness and long term reliability and repairability of fully mechanical cameras such as the Nikon F, F2, and Nikkormats. Use of pre-AI lenses on them (which is their original configuration) incurs no liability. For example, you can meter wide open. Yes, a newer Nikkor lens works just as well and may be optically superior, but I prefer to have period-correct lenses on my cameras, which means the AI, AIS lenses get used on my F3/T's, F4s's, and other Nikon bodies that work best with them.
Last edited:
-
- markjwyatt
- Deleted
- Reason: added nothing new
In other words, lenses with character! Not necessarily a bad thing.
MattKing
Moderator
If you own some, most likely they were paid for a long time ago!
What is good about old Nikor lenses? Well absolutely superb build quality. All top level optics will have improved since the demise of the non-Ai models, both in design and lens coating but to be honest unless you are a specialist using them on an optical test bench Mr Average would be very hard pushed to tell the difference. Even a non Ai lens can be improved by using the camera to which they are fitted being used on a tripod with a cable release.
The difference can be quite surprising. Even Mr Rockwell suggested the Nikon 20/35 AFd lens was lacking in the corners unless stopped down - not so if the camera is on a tripod. Whilst the sharpness cannot be actually physically changed it means the edge/corners are up to standard and the centre is just that bit better because the optics are completely static.
I have read so have no personal experience theat the VERY early lenses were deliberately sharper in the centre so they concentrated the eye to the most important part (their idea) of the image
The difference can be quite surprising. Even Mr Rockwell suggested the Nikon 20/35 AFd lens was lacking in the corners unless stopped down - not so if the camera is on a tripod. Whilst the sharpness cannot be actually physically changed it means the edge/corners are up to standard and the centre is just that bit better because the optics are completely static.
I have read so have no personal experience theat the VERY early lenses were deliberately sharper in the centre so they concentrated the eye to the most important part (their idea) of the image
I'm a big fan of old Nikon glass myself; in my opinion, the biggest bang for the buck
And sharp. Even wide open. That snap was made at f/4
A beautiful photograph - really love that lens. It does b/w too ...
Nikon F2 Photomic - Ilford XP2 super - Nikkor P - Auto 105mm f/2.5
XP-2 is an underrated film.
| 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:  |