What were the widest pre-AI lenses?

[chip j]

I'm thinking of going all the way w/pre-AI, they're SO built for MEN.

 

[f/16]

Do you mean widest angle as in focal length or widest aperture?

 

[jimjm]

6mm Fisheye, 220-degrees of coverage. Good luck finding one for sale. :alien:

Non-fisheye, the 13mm/5.6 with 118-degrees of coverage. They come up on the auction sites once in a great while for mucho dinero.

Outside of Fantasyland, realistic lenses are the 18mm/4 and the 20mm/2.8, 3.5 or 4.0.

Nikon used to be a company that wasn't afraid to push the boundaries, especally with wide angle lens designs.

 

[darkosaric]

I used 20mm f/3.5 Nikkor-UD - not very expensive and very good.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I'm all pre-AI. Who cares what the widest version of a particular focal length it is? As a general rule, the slowest lens of a any particular focal length is the sharpest. (not always). Nobody needs a 1.2/50 or a 1.4/85 or the like.

If Geoffrey Crawley's results (see his book The Nikon System) are correct, in the Nikon line of the early- to mid--70s the fastest Nikkor of a focal length is usually the sharpest.

 

[Lamar]

I do. Easier to see and focus with wider aperture lenses even if you never shoot them wide open. I do believe the OP was referencing wide as in angle of view though.......

I'm all pre-AI. Who cares what the widest version of a particular focal length it is? As a general rule, the slowest lens of a any particular focal length is the sharpest. (not always). Nobody needs a 1.2/50 or a 1.4/85 or the like.

 

[Xmas]

In 59 ad liturature all you got was a 21mm used with mirror locked up and a viewfinder to go on the flash shoe.

 

[Jim Jones]

If Geoffrey Crawley's results (see his book The Nikon System) are correct, in the Nikon line of the early- to mid--70s the fastest Nikkor of a focal length is usually the sharpest.

In their day, the 45mm GN-Nikkor, the 55mm Micro-Nikkor, and the 105mm f/2.5 were cited as very sharp. My experience with the first two agrees.

 

[chip j]

Sorry folks, I meant widest focal length.

 

[TheTrailTog]

Here's a great reference for all Nikon lenses...

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html

 

[removed-user-1]

The widest non-AI lens Nikon made (aside from the exotics and the fisheyes already mentioned), is the 18mm f/4. It's worth noting that most of the early AI lenses are built just as well as the pre-AI ones.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

I disagree.
Ai design from Nikon was a cost saving/volume increasing engineering task that had a few positives that lead to the Ai-S design. In some key internal sections the changes to Ai lead to a more 'fussy' assembly which was more or less held in place with very tight glued in screws. The previous version of NAi is a really well built lens, built to last and then be renewed by tuning up. The Ai and Ai-s version were made to be of less durable quality and have replaceable components.

 

[darkosaric]

Non Ai are more beautiful as well .

 

[MartinCrabtree]

If you use the AI/non AI on later cameras with a command wheel for aperture control the progression of the aperture is not linear and will lead to over/under exposure issues. Of course that only matters if you chip it and the camera won't allow traditional control via the ring on the lens. AiS fixed that. And exposure compensation is an easy fix after testing.

The ability to use legacy glass is the reason I switched to Nikon. There's a lot of great stuff available cheaply vs. having to upgrade every so often. I got a Series E 50mm f1.8 for $6 USD.

 

[removed-user-1]

It's worth noting that most of the early [emphasis added] AI lenses are built just as well as the pre-AI ones.

I chose my words carefully here. Take one example: the 50mm f/2. The last non-AI version of this lens (with a rubber focus ring) is virtually identical to the first AI iteration, same weight, same focus throw, same cosmetics. Late in the production of the AI version, Nikon reduced the number of screws on the mount from five to three. That sort of change, in my opinion, marks the beginning of the reduction in their build quality.

However, the earlier non-AI Nikkors, the ones with metal focus rings, are sublime.

 

[chip j]

Thanks for the info--good to know and along the lines of what I'm thinking!

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Yes I noted your caveats; I do like the K version of the 50mm f/2 BUT the PREVIOUS version the H.C is a whole other level of build; I've been inside CLA both versions many copies. Do you need the extra weight and durability of the Nai? not really, the Ai and Ais versions are quite hardy on their own.
Another example is the 135mm f/2.8 or (my sublime fav shhh) the 135mm f/3.5 (can you say Sonnar?). The Ai and Ais gained compactness weight reduction and a shorter throw (the Ai-S) but at the expense of an overly complex internals that make a simple CLA and focus relube a real chore. The NAi series parts are so well made; beautiful turned barrels and perfects turned screws.

 

[chip j]

What the heck is a K version?

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Its the Post Non Ai F series but Pre Ai series Nikon lenses that have the cosmetics of the Ai series but usually not the Ai coupling ridge. Many were converted by Nikon after to the Ai standard. I have a 24mm f/2.8 that is technically a K series but had the Ai ring factory changed in original box with papers showing its a K Non Ai.

 

[480sparky]

6mm Fisheye, 220-degrees of coverage. Good luck finding one for sale. :alien:........

Luck must be with me.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-6mm-F...203?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35eccba303

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-Fishe...43?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_77&hash=item2a533dd53b